Summary: The Council was at fault for giving Mr X incorrect information about whether it could offer him financial assistance with securing private rented accommodation. As a result Mr X signed a tenancy agreement he otherwise would not have accepted and has gotten into debt. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and make a payment to him for the distress caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council:
• Did not consider his application for social housing.
• Gave him incorrect information by telling him it could offer financial assistance to find accommodation in the private rented sector, then decided against this once he found a property.
2. Mr X says he has suffered significant financial hardship as he had to borrow money and use credit to fund a deposit and first month’s rent and believed the Council was going to refund him.

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 the 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 how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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

How I considered this complaint

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 before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

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. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for the [and anyone who lives with them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
10. An applicant has a statutory right to request a review if a council issues a decision that they are not homeless. The timescale for carrying out the review is eight weeks. (housing Act 1996, Section 202)
11. 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))
12. An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories:
• homeless people;
• people in insanitary, overcrowded or unsatisfactory housing;
• people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds;
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others; (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3))
13. The Council operates a scheme where it provides financial assistance to people to help them find accommodation in the private rented sector. To qualify for the scheme applicants must have a homeless duty accepted towards them by the Council.

What happened

14. In June 2024, Mr X approached the Council for housing assistance. Mr X was living in private rented accommodation. Mr X told the Council this accommodation was unsuitable due to the condition of it as there was lots of mould and dampness. Mr X also said his landlord wanted to increase his rent.
15. The Council took a homeless application from Mr X in November 2024, it inspected his property and decided there were no category one hazards. In December 2024, the Council gave Mr X a decision which told him the Council did not consider he was homeless.
16. In January 2025, Mr X was in communication with his housing needs officer at the Council about finding accommodation in the private sector. Mr X said his housing needs officer told him he could qualify for financial assistance where the Council would pay towards the deposit and first month’s rent on a private rented property.
17. On 20 January 2025, the housing needs officer emailed Mr X a list of documents he needed to provide so the Council could assist him with its financial incentive. The Council also sent Mr X a leaflet about the scheme. The housing needs officer said this showed him how much the Council could assist him with.
18. On 11 February 2025, Mr X emailed his housing needs officer and told them he had found a property and was going to sign the tenancy agreement the following day and pay the deposit and first month’s rent. Mr X said he would provide the remaining documents the Council had asked for on the financial assistance scheme so it could refund him this money.
19. On 17 February 2025, Mr X sent his housing needs officer copies of the documents they had asked for. Shortly after the housing needs officer emailed Mr X and told him he was not eligible for the financial assistance as he was given a not homeless decision by the Council. The housing needs officer said they were not aware of this process but had now been told.
20. In early April 2025, Mr X complained to the Council. Mr X complained the Council had not assisted with his housing needs when he asked for help in June 2024. He also complained that it did not provide financial assistance to him for a deposit and first month’s rent despite saying it would do.
21. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint in May 2025. The Council said:
• It partially upheld Mr X’s complaint and apologised for the miscommunication about the financial assistance. The Council said the housing needs officer provided him with incorrect information. The Council explained Mr X did not qualify for the scheme as the Council had not accepted a homeless duty towards him. The Council offered Mr X £50.
• It sent him a leaflet which said the scheme was for people the Council had “accepted a duty towards”.
• Mr X found accommodation in the private sector that was not affordable for him so would not have qualified. The Council said it believed the property was not affordable as the rent was higher than his last property and Mr X argued this property was not affordable in June 2024.
22. Mr X remained dissatisfied and complained to the Ombudsman. Mr X moved into the property he signed for in February 2025.

Analysis

23. Initially when Mr X approached the Council for help in June 2024, it took a homelessness application from him. The Council decided Mr X was not homeless and issued him with a decision. Mr X had the option to ask the Council to review this decision if he disagreed with it. I am satisfied Mr X could have done this, therefore I have not investigated how the Council came to this decision.
24. When Mr X approached the Council in June 2024, it did not consider whether he could join its housing register. As Mr X wanted to move and was arguing the condition of his property was not suitable it is not clear why the Council did not take a housing register application for Mr X. This was fault.
25. Had the Council taken a housing register application from Mr X there is a chance he would have been successful in joining the housing register. Normally we would recommend the Council consider whether Mr X can join the housing register and if so backdate his application, however Mr X has moved into new accommodation so his circumstances are not the same. If Mr X wants to join the housing register he should apply.
26. Once the Council issued Mr X with a not homeless decision, Mr X had further communication from his housing needs officer. I am satisfied Mr X was given incorrect advice that the Council would provide financial assistance if he could find a property to rent in the private sector. This was fault.
27. After Mr X found a property he contacted the Council again to tell it he was about to sign the tenancy agreement. This was a further opportunity for the Council to tell him he would not qualify for financial assistance.
28. While I recognise the Council sent Mr X a leaflet about the financial assistance, I do not consider this meant Mr X should have known he did not qualify for the financial assistance. This is because his housing needs officer told him he did qualify.
29. I am satisfied on balance that had the Council not given Mr X incorrect advice about whether he qualified for financial assistance, he would not have signed the tenancy agreement for the private rented property he found and paid the deposit and first month’s rent. As a result Mr X had to borrow money and use credit to pay these upfront costs and this has put him in a difficult financial situation.
30. In coming to a suitable remedy, I have looked at the Council’s scheme and the property Mr X found. Mr X has rented a property which is one bedroom bigger than what was suitable for him on his housing application. In addition the maximum Mr X could have received under the scheme would not have covered his deposit and first month’s rent. Mr X should get his deposit back at the end of his tenancy as it is protected in a scheme. If we take off the deposit payment, the maximum Mr X could get under the Council’s scheme is just over £800 towards his first month’s rent. As Mr X has obtained a bigger property, I do not consider it appropriate for the Council to consider this matter through its financial assistance scheme. However the Council’s actions have caused Mr X a considerable amount of distress.

Back to top

Recommended Action

31. Within one month of my final decision the Council should carry out the following:
• Apologise to Mr X for the injustice cased by the above faults. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Pay Mr X £400 to recognise the distress, frustration and inconvenience he suffered as a result of being given incorrect information about qualifying for financial assistance from the Council for renting in the private sector.
• Ensure that it reminds staff of the requirements to be considered for financial assistance of the private rental scheme so other are not misadvised.
32. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

I find fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman