Summary: Miss X complained about how the Council handled her homelessness case. In particular about how the Council ended the relief duty, how it communicated its decision to her and how it refused to accept her review request of its decision. There were some faults by the Council which caused injustice to Miss X. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about how the Council handled her homelessness case. In particular that the Council:
1. wrongly ended its relief duty
2. failed to consider her Section 202 statutory review request of the Council’s decision to end the relief duty
3. did not properly investigate and respond to her complaint.
2. Miss X said as a result, the Council denied her of her statutory right to review its decision to end the relief duty. Miss X said the matter also caused her significant distress, uncertainty, financial loss and hardship during her search for stable accommodation when she was homeless.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.
6. 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)
7. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. I have investigated matters from June 2024 to May 2025. This covers the period from when Miss X made a homelessness application to the Council to when she made a complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Homelessness

11. 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.
12. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the Council on or after 3 April 2018:

• he or she is likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• he or she has been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5))

13. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. The threshold for taking an application is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular council department. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
14. The council will make enquiries to find out whether the person is:

• eligible for assistance;
• homeless or threatened with homelessness;
• in priority need; and
• not intentionally homeless.

15. After completing inquiries, the council must give the applicant a decision in writing.
16. The Relief Duty – councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188). When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B).
17. Personalised housing plan (PHP) – sets out the steps both the council and the applicant will take to try to resolve the applicant’s homelessness. During the relief duty stage, councils must carry out an assessment, work with the person to develop the PHP and the plan must be kept under review.
18. The Main Housing Duty - 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)
19. Examples of applicants in priority need are:

• people with dependent children.
• pregnant women.
• people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability or old age.
• care leavers and
• victims of domestic abuse.

Notification to end the relief duty

20. Section 189B (7) of the Housing Act 1996 provides the circumstances in which councils can give notice to the applicant bringing the relief duty under section 189B (2) to an end.
21. The relief duty can be ended where council consider an applicant has deliberately and unreasonably refused to co-operate for instance, refusal to take one or more steps in their PHP (section 193B(2). If the relief duty ends, then the main housing duty will not apply.
22. Councils should make reasonable efforts to obtain the co-operation of the applicant, including seeking to understand the reasons for their lack of co-operation, before invoking and during the use of section 193B.
23. Before councils bring the relief duty to an end by issuing a section 193B(2) notice, they must first issue a warning letting the applicant know that if they deliberately and unreasonably refuse to take any of the steps in their PHP after receiving the warning the council intends to issue a notice bringing the relief duty to an end. The warning must explain the consequences of a notice being given and councils must allow a reasonable period after the warning is given before issuing a notice (section 193B(4) and (5)). There is no set reasonable period, but councils should ensure sufficient time is given to allow the applicant to rectify the non-co-operation and prevent a notice being issued to end the relief duty. This will vary according to the particular needs and circumstances of the applicant.
24. Councils must put all its key decisions and notices in writing and send to the applicant. If it is an adverse decision, the letter must fully explain the reasons. All letters must include information about the right to ask for a review and the timescale for doing so. (Housing Act 1996, section 184, from 3 April 2018 Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.32 and 18.33)
25. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the Council’s decision to bring the relief duty to an end.
26. A notice to end the duty must be given in writing and, if not received by the applicant, is to be treated as having been given to the applicant if it is made available at the council's office for a reasonable period for collection by or on behalf of the applicant.

Housing Register

27. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
28. Pre-action protocols explain the conduct and set out the steps the court would normally expect parties to take before commencing court proceedings.

Council’s Complaint Procedure

29. The Council has a two-stage complaints procedure. An investigating manager deals with and responds at stage 1 while a senior manager reviews the complaint at stage 2.

Key events

2024

30. On 11 June, Miss X submitted a homelessness application to the Council because she was issued with a section 21 notice by her landlord to vacate her home.
31. On 24 June, Miss X moved out of her previous property.
32. Miss X arranged and paid for accommodation from 24 June to 28 June.
33. The Council assessed Miss X’s homelessness application, and it accepted it owed Miss X the relief duty on 25 June. The Council also awarded Miss X with priority Band B1 under its housing register. Miss X said during her assessment she verbally informed the Council about her prebooked health vacation from 3 July to 10 August and that she was told she could go ahead with her holiday plans.
34. On 27 June, Miss X sent a letter to the Council by post to inform it about her prebooked health vacation and that she would not be able to attend the meeting for her personalised housing plan (PHP). Miss X said the timing was unfortunate, but she could not cancel her prebooked holiday as her health was a priority. Miss X asked if the Council could accommodate her before 3 July.
35. On 28 June, the Council offered interim accommodation to Miss X which it arranged for her to move into on 1 July.
36. On 3 July, the Council replied to Miss X’s correspondence dated 27 June. The Council confirmed it had offered Miss X interim accommodation.
37. Miss X went on a prebooked health vacation from 3 July to 10 August. Miss X did not accept or move to the interim accommodation before she travelled out of the country.
38. On 25 July, the Council sent an email to Miss X with an attached letter about its end of relief duty decision. The letter stated the Council ended the relief duty because it had offered Miss X accommodation which she refused as she was on holiday. The Council said Miss X had therefore deliberately and unreasonably refused to co-operate and undertake one or more of the actions in her PHP. The Council advised Miss X of her right of review of its decision to end the relief duty which should be submitted within 21 days of the receipt of the decision letter. Miss X said she did not receive the Council’s email and/or the letter.
39. Miss X said when she returned from her holiday and had not had any update about her housing situation, she visited the Council’s office on 23 August. Miss X said this was when the Council handed her a copy of the end of relief duty letter which was dated 25 July.
40. On 23 August and 11 September, Miss X submitted review requests of the Council’s decision to end the relief duty. The Council refused to accept/consider Miss X’s review requests because it said the requests were submitted late and after the statutory deadline. The Council advised Miss X to submit a new homelessness application if she continued to be concerned about her housing situation.
41. Miss X disagreed; she said her review request was submitted within 21 days from the date she received the Council’s decision letter at its office on 23 August.
42. On 11 September, Miss X made a formal complaint to the Council about how the Council wrongly ended the relief duty, closed her homelessness case and refused to consider her review request of its decision. Miss X asked the Council to refund her with the legal cost she had incurred and the money she had spent on accommodation during the period she had been homeless due to Council’s failings.
43. Miss X’s stage 1 and stage 2 complaints were investigated by a manager and a senior manager respectively. In its responses, the Council:

• apologised for its delays with responding to Miss X’s complaint.
• said it was unclear why Miss X did not inform the Council about her prebooked holiday either by email or during her homelessness assessment, instead she had sent a letter to the Council dated 27 June which it received on 1 July.
• reiterated the reasons it ended the relief duty on 25 July and maintained it sent Miss X its decision letter on the same day to the email address she provided.
• maintained Miss X’s request for a review about its end of relief duty decision was submitted late which was the reason it rejected her request.
• did not uphold Miss X’s complaint. The Council said her homelessness case remained closed but advised her to re-approach the service if she still required its support.
• said it was satisfied, it followed the correct process and so it was not responsible for refunding any legal costs or accommodation arrangements costs Miss X had incurred since she initially approached the service.

44. Miss X arranged several accommodation between 10 August and 31 December and she incurred some costs as a result.
45. Miss X also engaged the services of a solicitor for a £400 charge.

2025

46. Miss X continued to arrange and pay for some of the accommodation she stayed in from 1 January.
47. Miss X complained to the Council about the alleged 25 July 2024 end of relief letter the Council said it emailed to her, its refusal to consider her review request and that senior staff failed to have an oversight of issues she raised with the Council. She later escalated her complaint.
48. The Council told Miss X it would not consider her complaint because it had already investigated and responded to the points she raised under its stage 1 and stage 2 complaint procedure in 2024.
49. Miss X chased the Council for updates on her complaint but said she received no response. Miss X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s responses and how it dealt with her homelessness case. Miss X made a complaint to the Ombudsman.
50. Subsequently, the Council said that in response to a pre-action protocol letter from Miss X’s solicitor, it sought legal advice about Miss X’s case. The Council confirmed it accepted that it did not properly end the relief duty in line with housing legislation as it failed to issue Miss X with ‘a warning’ before it issued her with the end of relief duty notice. As a result, the Council agreed and completed the following actions to remedy the injustice caused to Miss X:
1. withdraw the Council’s end of relief duty decision which it unlawfully issued in July 2024.
2. re-open Miss X’s homelessness application and continue with enquiries.
3. reinstate Miss X’s priority Band B1 housing register status from the original date of award (June 2024).
4. contact Miss X and offer her interim accommodation.
51. Miss X confirmed the Council offered her interim accommodation in September which she has since moved into.

Analysis

52. Miss X said she verbally informed the Council about her prebooked health holiday when her homelessness application was assessed but the Council disagreed. These are two different accounts of what happened and as there is no evidence to show what actually took place, I am therefore unable to make a finding on this point.
53. But Miss X posted a letter to the Council on 27 June 2024 where she informed it about her prebooked holiday and the Council replied to her correspondence on 3 July 2024. This was after the Council had offered Miss X interim accommodation and it explained that in its reply to Miss X. This was not fault.
54. I am unsure what happened or why Miss X did not receive the Council’s correspondence dated 25 July 2024. Evidence shows the Council sent an email and its decision letter to end the relief duty to Miss X’s email address on 25 July. Therefore, I find the Council properly issued the notice to Miss X via her email address on 25 July 2024. This was not fault. This meant Miss X had a right to have requested a review of the Council’s decision by 15 August 2024 (within 21 days from 25 July). The Council refused to accept and consider the review requests Miss X submitted on 23 August and 11 September 2024. This was because Miss X’s requests were not within the 21 days of the Council notifying her of its end of relief duty decision. This was not fault.
55. Where councils decide to end the relief duty, the applicant has a statutory right of review and appeal if they disagree with the decision. We would normally not investigate complaints about these decisions and would expect the applicant to exercise their right of review and then appeal to the county court on a point of law. However, in this case I have exercised discretion to consider how the Council ended the relief duty it owed Miss X. This is because I consider it would be unreasonable to expect Miss X to use or have used her appeal rights as the Council already accepted it failed to send Miss X a warning in the first instance and then wrongly ended the relief duty. This was fault and it was not in line with the provisions of the Housing Act 1996. It caused Miss X distress, worry, inconvenience, financial loss and uncertainty as to whether the Council properly dealt with her homelessness case.
56. After 56 days of a council accepting the relief duty, it must decide whether it owes the person the main housing duty. I cannot say whether the Council would have proceeded to owing Miss X the main housing duty. But I find if the Council had not wrongly ended the relief duty, it would either have provided Miss X with accommodation under the relief duty and then under the main duty. Or the Council would have had to decide if it owed her the main duty and if not, Miss X would have had review rights.
57. For this reason, I find the Council would have provided Miss X with accommodation under the relief duty for 56 days (25 June 2024 to 20 August 2024) at its usual rate. However, I cannot say Miss X incurred additional costs from 21 August 2024 (from day 57) given the Council might not have accepted it owed her the main housing duty.
58. I note Miss X said she suffered financial loss because she had to arrange several accommodation from June 2024 due to the Councill’s failings. I find had Miss X accepted the interim accommodation the Council offered her on 28 June 2024, she would have been expected to have paid for the accommodation.
59. So, I must consider whether Miss X incurred additional costs for the 56 days the Council owed her the relief duty. Although Miss X arranged several accommodation from 24 June 2024, she might have incurred additional accommodation cost between 25 June and 28 June 2024. This falls within the 56-day relief duty period and it was fault. It caused financial loss to Miss X.
60. Also, Miss X said she incurred £400 legal fees because of the Council’s failings and how it dealt with her homelessness case. On balance, I find had it not been for how the Council wrongly ended the relief duty, Miss X would not have engaged the services of a solicitor. The Council missed the opportunity to identify the fault in ending the duty in response to her complaint. And it was not until Miss X’s solicitor issued a pre-action protocol letter to the Council that it accepted it had wrongly ended the duty and remedied the injustice caused to Miss X as a result. This was fault. It caused avoidable distress and financial loss to Miss X.
61. I find no fault by the Council with its complaints handling. A manager and a senior manager dealt with stage 1 and stage 2 respectively in line with its complaint procedure. The Council also decided it would not consider the complaint Miss X submitted in 2025 because it explained it had previously dealt with and responded to the complaint points raised in the responses it issued in 2024. This is a decision the Council is entitled to make, and it was not fault.
62. I acknowledge the Council already accepted it failed to deal with Miss X’s homelessness case in line with housing legislation before it decided to end the relief duty. I also note the Council has completed the actions set out in paragraph 50 to remedy the injustice caused to Miss X as a result of its faults. These are welcome but I find they are not sufficient and proportionate in line with our guidance on remedies which I will address under the ‘action’ section below.

Back to top

Action

63. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, the Council has agreed to complete the following within one month of the final decision:

• apologise in writing to Miss X to acknowledge the injustice caused to her by the Council’s faults as identified above. The apology should be in accordance with our guidance, Making an effective apology
• make Miss X a symbolic payment of £300 in recognition of the avoidable distress, worry and inconvenience caused to her by the Council’s faults as identified above
• contact Miss X and ask her to provide the Council with receipts of the costs she incurred in arranging accommodation from 25 June 2024 to 28 June 2024 (within the 56-day relief duty period). The Council should then calculate and refund Miss X with any additional accommodation costs (above the Council’s rate) she incurred during this period
• reimburse Miss X with the £400 legal cost she incurred
• train relevant staff on the legal steps the Council should take before it decides to end the relief duty in line with the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance.

64. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

65. I find some faults by the Council causing injustice to Miss X. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman