Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to consider his review request about its homelessness decisions. He said he had no accommodation because of the Council’s actions. We have ended our investigation as the complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction. Mr X should complete the Council review and if he disagrees with the decision, it is reasonable for him to appeal to the County Court.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to consider his review request about its homelessness decisions. He said he had no accommodation because of the Council’s actions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read Mr X’s complaint and spoke to him about it on the phone.
6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background information

8. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
9. If a council is satisfied an applicant is threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, it must take steps to help the applicant keep their home or find somewhere new to live. In deciding what steps to take, a council must have regard to its assessment of the applicant’s case. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
10. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
11. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to make accommodation available (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
12. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:

• the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.

13. The review must be carried out by someone who was not involved in the original decision and who is more senior to the original decision maker. The reviewing officer needs to consider any information relevant to the period before the decision was made (even if only obtained afterwards) as well as any new relevant information the council has obtained since the decision. (The Homelessness (Review Procedure etc.) Regulations 2018, Homelessness Code of Guidance Chapter 19)
14. Councils must complete reviews of the following decisions within eight weeks of the date of the review request:

• eligibility for assistance;
• not in priority need;
• intentionally homeless;
• suitability of accommodation;
• notice being given of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to cooperate and the effect of the notice is to bring the relief duty to an end.

15. These periods can be extended if the applicant agrees in writing.
16. The council must advise applicants of their right to appeal to the county court on a point of law, and of the period in which to appeal. Applicants can also appeal if the council takes more than the prescribed time to complete the review. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202, 203 and 204)
17. Applicants may ask a council to provide accommodation pending the outcome of a review. Councils have a power, but not a duty, to accommodate certain applicants and members of their household. (Housing Act 1996, sections 188(3), 199A(6), 200(5))

What happened

18. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
19. The Council accepted a relief duty to Mr X in February 2025. Mr X moved into accommodation the same day.
20. Mr X moved into different temporary accommodation in March 2025. The Council offered Mr X other accommodation, but Mr X did not accept.
21. In April 2025, the Council offered Mr X accommodation roughly 25 miles from his home. The Council confirmed this was its final offer and set out a review right. Mr X did not sign the tenancy agreement.
22. The Council evicted Mr X in April 2025.
23. Mr X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Mr X would like the Council to stop enforcement action until he could review the suitability of the offer.
24. Mr X confirmed the Council accommodated him a week after it evicted him. Mr X confirmed he has asked the Council to review this decision.

My findings

25. The Ombudsman’s role is to review how councils have made decisions. However, we do not provide a right of appeal against council decisions, and we cannot make operational or policy decisions on councils’ behalf. We cannot rule on points of law.
26. Mr X has a review right regarding the suitability of the accommodation the Council offered. Mr X has confirmed he has now used this review right.
27. If the Council’s decision remains the same, he can appeal to the County Court if he believes the decision is legally flawed. The Ombudsman usually expects someone to use their appeal rights. I have seen no reason it is not reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the County Court on a point of law if he disagrees with the Council decision.
28. I have ended this investigation as the review process is ongoing. It is reasonable for Mr X to continue with this review. If he is not satisfied with the result, he can appeal it to the County Court.
29. The Council must also be given the opportunity to fully consider a complaint, before the Ombudsman can consider a matter. The Council has not had this opportunity.

Back to top

Decision

30. I have ended my investigation because Mr X has a right of appeal to the County Court if he disagrees with the Council review decision.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman