Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to consider a late review request. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision, Mrs Y has a court appeal right that it was reasonable for her to use, and we cannot achieve the outcome that she seeks.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complained the Council refused to consider her review request about its decision to end its homelessness duties to her.
2. Mrs Y said the Council did not consider her language needs when notifying her that it was ending its homelessness duties to her.
3. Mrs Y also said the Council’s decision has impacted on her ability to attend medical appointments and reach out to her support network.
4. Mrs Y wants the Council to urgently review her request and immediately provide her with accommodation in the area where she would like to live.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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 or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mrs Y and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mrs Y was receiving homelessness duties from the Council.
10. The Council offered Mrs Y a tenancy and said by doing so it had satisfied its homelessness duties to her. Mrs Y accepted the tenancy.
11. The Council then ended its homelessness duties to Mrs Y and told her of her right to request a review of its decision within 21 days. Mrs Y asked the Council to review its decision outside the 21 days the law allows for review requests to be made.
12. The Council decided not to consider Mrs Y’s review request because it was late. The Council said that it considered Mrs Y’s reasons for the lateness but decided not to exercise its discretion to consider it.
13. Mrs Y said that she was not aware of the 21-day period due to the letter not being translated.
14. The Council had previously translated a document for Mrs Y and used her supporter to verbally translate during an appointment.
15. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes a Council followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether Mrs Y disagreed with the decision the Council made.
16. Having reviewed the Council’s decision, it is unlikely that we would find fault. The Council considered all the relevant information when exercising its duties and making its decision. The onus was on Miss X to ask for assistance if she did not understand a document sent to her by the Council.
17. Mrs Y has an appeal right to the court to challenge the Council’s decision not to consider her out of time review request, and it is reasonable for her to use it.
18. We cannot achieve the outcome that Mrs Y seeks. We cannot instruct the Council to conduct a review that it regards as out of time, and we cannot instruct the Council to immediately provide Mrs Y with accommodation in the area where she wishes to live.

Back to top

Final decision

19. We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision, there is a court appeal right that it is reasonable for Mrs Y to use and we cannot achieve that outcome that she seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman