Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to issue a warning letter before moving Mrs X to different temporary accommodation. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council issued a warning letter before moving her to different temporary accommodation without giving her an opportunity to respond or see the evidence.

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 not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council placed Mrs X and her husband in a hotel as temporary accommodation. The Council issued them with a warning letter regarding anti-social behaviour then shortly afterwards placed them into a different accommodation.
6. Mrs X complained the Council failed to explain its reasons for issuing the letter and did not give them a chance to respond.
7. In the Council’s final complaint response, it said the hotel provided evidence of Mrs X’s husband behaving inappropriately. The Council attempted to liaise with the hotel, but the hotel manager told the Council it no longer wanted to house the couple. The Council acknowledged it should have discussed the situation with the couple and been more transparent in its complaint responses but maintained it sent the warning letter in line with the correct processes.
8. Mrs X remains unhappy with the Council’s actions and wants us to find the Council at fault. The evidence shows the Council issued the warning letter and ultimately rehomed Mrs X and her husband due to the evidence provided by the hotel. The Council intervened on the couple’s behalf but ultimately this was not successful, and the couple were rehomed. It would have been best practice for the Council to explain its actions in a more transparent way however, an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s management of this issue.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman