Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her homelessness and housing register applications. In relation to some aspects further investigation would not lead to a different outcome; in relation to one aspect there is insufficient injustice to justify investigating. In addition there is currently a review ongoing in connection to the homelessness application, which it appropriate for the Council to complete, and which will affect the housing register application.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application and said the interim accommodation provided was unsuitable. She said the Council’s failings caused significant distress, adding to the domestic abuse she had experienced and that her children were affected by the poor living conditions.

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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal; or

(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 Ms X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

What happened

5. Ms X approached the Council for assistance in February 2025. At that point she had fled domestic abuse and was living with relatives. Ms X complained the officer she spoke to initially was hostile and insensitive. She said they asked inappropriate questions about her financial means and about why she had approached that Borough, as housing there was oversubscribed and expensive.
6. She made a complaint about the housing officer the following day. In its complaint response the Council said it would investigate the officer’s conduct. In a further response, it said the issues raised by the officer are discussed with all applicants, although it appreciated the information had been delivered at a stressful time.
7. Later in February, the Council carried out a homelessness assessment. It accepted a relief duty and issued a personalised housing plan. It made referrals for support with the impact of domestic abuse, finding new schools for her children and finding private rented sector accommodation. On the same day, it arranged interim accommodation, but Ms X could not move there immediately because the property needed a deep clean. It arranged hotel accommodation in the meantime.
8. Ms X complained about the interim accommodation two days after moving in. She said it had not been clean when she first arrived, was infested with cockroaches and rats, and the windows did not have safety locks. In its complaint response, the Council apologised for the initial state of the interim accommodation, but it had arranged hotel accommodation whilst this was addressed. It had responded to her reports of infestation by arranging pest control visits and that, following visits by pest control in late February and early March, there were no further sightings in the building.
9. The Council accepted its complaint responses at both stages of its complaints process were late for which it apologised and offered to pay her £50 in total (£25 for each stage) to remedy the injustice caused.
10. In June 2025, the Council accepted a main homelessness duty.
11. Ms X told us that, after the complaints process was completed, there was a further contact with the officer she had complained about, who Ms X said was rude. She also told us the Council had not properly considered her housing register application, and she was unhappy with the priority band awarded.
12. Since we received the complaint, the Council offered Ms X alternative temporary accommodation, which she refused, following which the Council ended the main duty. Ms X has asked for a review of the suitability of the accommodation offered and decision to end its duty, with support from solicitors. The Council reviewed the housing register application and said she was not eligible to join its housing register because it no longer owed her a homelessness duty.

My assessment

13. It appears from Ms X’s account that the Council was asking standard questions we would expect it to ask when an applicant approaches as homeless. It needs to know an applicant’s financial resources so it can consider whether any housing offered is affordable. It was also not fault to point out that housing costs in its area were high and there is limited housing available. Ms X said it was inappropriate to ask why she had not applied to the council area she had fled from, but it would not necessarily be the case that she was not safe in all parts of that council’s area, so it was not wrong to explore this with her. However, I acknowledge Ms X was unhappy with the officer’s tone and attitude. In its complaint response, the Council said it had spoken to the officer and any disciplinary issues are out of our scope. However, I made enquiries about the training the Council provides its staff in relation to domestic abuse. It told me it provides annual refresher training for all staff, and I have seen the content of the last training, which was appropriate. I have also considered the information we hold about previous complaints about this Council and note there was no other complaint of this nature in the last year. Based on the above, I do not consider further investigation into this part of the complaint, will lead to a different outcome, so we will not consider it further.
14. Ms X also complained the interim accommodation was unsuitable. The Council took appropriate action initially arranging for it to be cleaned and providing hotel accommodation in the meantime and apologised to Ms X. It also arranged pest control visits to address the reported infestations. Overall, therefore it took appropriate action without delay to address the issues Ms X reported. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
15. Although not part of the complaint to us, I note there was a delay in making the main duty decision, which should have been made in April but was not made until June. Interim accommodation becomes temporary accommodation when the main duty is accepted. This can be the same property, but the key difference is the right to a statutory review of temporary accommodation. Ms X missed the chance to ask for a suitability review between April and June, when the Council told Ms X about her suitability review right. However, the accommodation was unlikely to be legally unsuitable due to infestation as that is something it is expected a landlord will address and the Council had done so by early March. Therefore, the delay in getting review rights did not cause Ms X sufficient injustice to justify further investigation.
16. The Council accepts it is currently taking too long to make main duty decisions and has provided information about the steps it has taken and is taking to address this. In light of this, I am satisfied that service improvement recommendations are not needed. Therefore, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
17. There is currently a review ongoing in relation to the offer of alternative temporary accommodation in August and it is appropriate for the Council to complete that review. If Ms X is unhappy with the outcome, she has court appeal rights, and we would usually expect applicants to exercise those rights. Whether or not the Council owes a homelessness duty will determine whether Ms X is eligible to join its housing register. We will not, therefore investigate any ongoing concerns about the homelessness or housing register applications at this stage because we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. It it is appropriate for the Council to complete its review in relation to the homelessness application, which will affect its position in relation to the housing register application.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman