Summary: Ms X complains the Council mishandled and delayed dealing with her homelessness application putting her at risk from an abusive ex-partner causing distress. We found service failure by the Council as it was unable to move Ms X to more suitable accommodation immediately due to a lack of available accommodation but it was working proactively with Ms X to secure accommodation. But this fault did not cause an injustice to Ms X. So, we have completed our investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council mishandled and delayed dealing with her homelessness application making her street homeless for a while and at risk from an ex-partner. Ms X says the Council delayed adding her current partner to her application and moving her from unsuitable temporary accommodation. Ms X says this caused her distress, inconvenience and fear while pregnant as she was receiving threats from her ex-partner who knew her location.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), as amended)
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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

5. I have considered Ms X’s complaints from June 2024 being 12 months before Ms X complained to us in June 2025. I have not considered Ms X’s complaints about matters before June 2024 as any complaints Ms X has about this period are late. There is no good reason for us to exercise discretion to investigate Ms X’s concerns as it was open to Ms X to have complained to us before now.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Ms 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

Legislation and statutory 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.

The prevention duty

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)

The relief duty

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)

The main housing duty

11. If a council is satisfied an applicant is unintentionally homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation. This is called the main housing duty. The accommodation a council provides until it can end this duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
12. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household. This duty applies to interim and temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2
13. Interim and temporary accommodation can be the same physical property. What changes is the legal duty under which a council provides it. This is important because there is a statutory right to review the suitability of temporary accommodation. This then carries a right of appeal to county court on a point of law. There is no statutory right to review the suitability of interim accommodation.

Homelessness and domestic abuse

14. Section 177 of the Housing Act, 1996, says it is not reasonable for a person to continue to occupy accommodation if it is probable that this will lead to violence or domestic abuse against them, or against a person who would normally or reasonably be expected to live with them. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, Chapter 21)
15. If a council has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless as a result of domestic abuse, it should make interim accommodation available to the applicant immediately whilst it undertakes its investigations. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 21.25)

What happened in this case

16. What follows is a brief chronology of key events. It does not include everything I considered as part of my investigation. I have referred to events from 2023 to provide background to Ms X’s complaint.
17. Ms X approached the Council as homeless in 2023. The Council accepted a relief duty towards Ms X in September 2023 and offered her accommodation. Ms X declined the accommodation as it had a shared kitchen. Ms X was expecting a child, so the Council housed Ms X in a mother and child unit from January to June 2024 and ended its relief duty.
18. In August 2024 the Council was notified Ms X no longer had custody of her child and it reopened her homelessness case as an applicant fleeing domestic abuse. The Council offered Ms X temporary and women-only accommodation as Ms X said she was street homeless. The Council urged Ms X to accept it being all that was available and it would continue to look for something more suitable for her. If Ms X refused the offer she may not be offered anything else. Ms X refused the accommodation saying living in shared accommodation would impact her mental health. The Council advised the accommodation remained open to her.
19. The Council accepted a main housing duty to Ms X in August 2024. It received medical advice in September 2024 that Ms X could live in shared accommodation. The Council offered her the temporary shared accommodation again as it was considered suitable for her needs. Ms X declined due to it being shared accommodation and submitted a suitability review about the offer. Ms X said she could stay with family until the Council provided her more suitable accommodation.
20. Ms X asked the Council to add her partner to her homelessness application in October 2024. The Council refused the request due to insufficient evidence about her partner. Ms X’s solicitors withdrew the suitability request in November 2024.
21. At the end of December 2024 Ms X told the Council she was living in a city outside the London area. Ms X said she moved there in October 2024 so had left the temporary accommodation arranged by the Council. Ms X said she was a risk of violence from her ex-partner who lived in the city and knew where she was living. Ms X said she needed to move back to the London area. The Council offered Ms X temporary accommodation in the London area in January 2025 which she accepted.
22. Ms X viewed some properties in March 2025 but was unsuccessful in being offered them due to issues with her financial situation.
23. In April 2025 Ms X told the Council the accommodation was no longer suitable for her and her partner due to their health needs and she was pregnant. Ms X said her ex-partner had also located her, so she was at risk. Ms X asked the Council to add her current partner to her application which it agreed to do as Ms X provided sufficient information to enable it to do so. The Council sought medical advice about the partner’s health needs. But the medical adviser was unable to recommend suitable accommodation due to lack of medical issues.
24. In June 2025 Ms X requested a formal suitability review of the temporary accommodation saying it was unsuitable and she felt unsafe due to alleged threats from her ex-partner. Ms X formally complained to the Council. The Council responded it understood the urgency of issues outlined and was taking the concerns seriously. It was considering Ms X’s formal review of suitability so could not make further comments or take additional action at that stage as it could affect the outcome of the ongoing review process. But if Ms X’s circumstances changed or she felt in immediate danger she should contact emergency services or the local housing duty team without delay.
25. Ms X complained the Council was unreasonably restricting her to offers of accommodation in London as Children’s Services had placed her unborn child under child protection measures.
26. The Council made the offer of a placement outside of London in July 2025. It says this was a voluntary offer, not an enforced placement and Ms X chose to accept it despite the distance from her support network. The Council helped Ms X to move her belongings to the new property. The Council closed the suitability review of the temporary accommodation due to Ms X’s relocation. And ended the main housing duty owed to Ms X as she accepted the offer of accommodation.

My assessment

27. The documents I have seen show the Council progressed Ms X’s homelessness application within statutory timescales and accepted a main housing duty towards her in August 2024. The Council documents show it made offers of temporary accommodation including women only accommodation to Ms X in August 2024. The Council confirms it assessed the suitability of the accommodation at the time based on medical and other available information. But progress was limited by Ms X’s refusal of suitable offers, inconsistent engagement and delays in providing medical and household composition information. The Council says Ms X gave inconsistent information about whether she was street homeless as there were periods when she was already accommodated or declined accommodation it offered. Ms X also said she was staying with her mother which gave the Council reasons to believe she was not always street homeless.
28. This is supported by the evidence submitted by the Council which shows the Council made Ms X offers of accommodation to prevent her becoming street homeless. It is unfortunate Ms X declined the offers of accommodation but there is no evidence of fault by the Council in making the offers.
29. The Council did not add Ms X’s partner to her application until April 2025 according to its temporary accommodation policy. This was due to lack of evidence to demonstrate household composition, dependency and any housing or medical need. I appreciate this was disappointing for Ms X but there is no evidence of fault by Council as it was not provided with sufficient information to add the partner any sooner.
30. The Council confirms it offered the temporary accommodation in January 2025 to Ms X as a single applicant, reflecting the household details confirmed at that time. When offering the accommodation, the Council confirms it took account of her assessed housing needs, available medical information, and the fact that no medical evidence precluded shared accommodation. Due to a severe supply constraint and Ms X’s previous refusals of shared and women‑only provision, the accommodation offered was considered suitable on a temporary basis, meeting the Council’s statutory duties. Ms X accepted the accommodation, and so it was therefore considered as suitable under the circumstances at the time.
31. The Council says it did not unreasonably restrict temporary accommodation offers to Ms X to Enfield. In line with its policy, it seeks to place households locally were reasonably practicable. But is not required to do so where suitable accommodation is unavailable. In this case, options across London were limited by acute supply shortages and Ms X’s refusal of shared accommodation. The Council continued to consider alternative options, but no suitable London accommodation was available at the relevant times.
32. However, the documents show there was a claimed risk to Ms X from her ex-partner which she raised in April 2025. This was acknowledged by an officer in May 2025 who requested alternative temporary accommodation for Ms X which suggests the Council was aware there was an issue then. Ms X continued to advise of her ex-partner’s abuse and that threats were escalating. As the Council was looking for other alternative accommodation it had an immediate duty to find other accommodation for her. The Council was unable to do so due to lack of suitable accommodation which is service failure by the Council.
33. However, it is clear from the evidence provided the Council was proactively trying to support Ms X to find alternative accommodation, but personal choices made by Ms X meant it was difficult for the Council to proceed. Ms X did not submit a suitability review until June 2025. As Ms X moved in July 2025 causing the suitability review to be closed, I cannot say what injustice was caused to Ms X by remaining at the accommodation allocated in January 2025 as she is now in suitable accommodation.

Back to top

Decision

34. I find fault causing service failure not causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman