Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to properly support her homelessness application after she received a Section 21 notice from her landlord. The Council failed to properly assess if it was reasonable for Miss X to remain in the property and delayed progressing the prevention duty to the relief duty. This is fault and caused undue distress, uncertainty and time and trouble to Miss X. She also incurred court costs as a result of the Council’s delays. The Council agreed actions to remedy the injustice.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council failed to properly support her homelessness application after she received a Section 21 notice from her landlord. She said the Council placed her in a housing zone far from her child’s school, her caring responsibilities, and medical support, and failed to properly consider evidence she provided. She also complained of poor communication and complaint handling. Miss X said this caused her and her child significant distress and unnecessary court costs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
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. The matters complained about happened from September 2024 onwards. Miss X complained to the Ombudsman in early July 2025. Our investigation is limited from September 2024 to July 2025.
6. We will not investigate events occurring after July 2025, including accommodation offers made in November 2025 and the handling of a suitability review in January 2026 because they were not part of the original complaint. The Council should have an opportunity to investigate any concerns Miss X may have about new events through the formal procedure before coming to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I have considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant legislation and guidance

9. 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.
10. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them and anyone who lives with them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
11. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council on or after 3 April 2018:

• they are likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• they have been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)

Prevention duty

12. 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)

Relief duty

13. 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)

Gatekeeping/homelessness prevention

14. Councils can suggest alternative solutions in cases of potential homelessness where these would be suitable and acceptable to the applicant. However councils must not do this to avoid their legal duties, especially the duty to make inquiries into the applicant’s homelessness.

Tenant given notice of intention to recover possession

15. The Secretary of State considers that where an applicant is:
• an assured shorthold tenant who has received a valid notice in accordance with section 21 of the Housing Act 1988;
• the housing authority is satisfied that the landlord intends to seek possession and further efforts from the housing authority to resolve the situation and persuade the landlord to allow the tenant to remain in the property are unlikely to be successful; and,
• there would be no defence to an application for a possession order;
16. then it is unlikely to be reasonable for the applicant to continue to occupy beyond the expiry of a valid section 21 notice, unless the housing authority is taking steps to persuade the landlord to allow the tenant to continue to occupy the accommodation for a reasonable period to provide an opportunity for alternative accommodation to be found.
17. Housing authorities should not consider it reasonable for an applicant to remain in occupation up until the point at which a court issues a warrant or writ to enforce an order for possession.

Suitability of accommodation

18. 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 accommodation and accommodation provided under the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
19. Councils must consider the location of accommodation when they consider if it is suitable for the applicant and members of their household. If a council places an applicant outside its district, it must consider, among other matters:

• the distance of the accommodation from the “home” district;
• the significance of any disruption to the education of members of the applicant’s household; and
• the proximity and accessibility to local services, amenities and transport. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2012)

Background

20. Miss X is a single parent with a dependent child. She is an informal carer to a relative and has her own medical needs. Miss X was served with a section 21 notice in mid-September 2024 requiring her to leave the property by mid-November 2024. She approached the Council for assistance in early October 2024. The Council carried out an assessment and accepted the prevention duty under section 195 of the Housing Act 1996.
21. The section 21 notice expired in mid-November 2024. Miss X stayed in the property. Between November 2024 and July 2025, Miss X remained under the prevention duty. The Council advised Miss X that she could remain in the property while the landlord pursued possession proceedings. The Council contacted the landlord in February 2025 and told the landlord it must follow the correct eviction process. It advised the landlord to pursue a possession order so it could offer emergency accommodation under the relief duty to Miss X.
22. The Council invited Miss X to a property viewing in early May 2025 and gave a few hours’ notice to attend. Miss X made a formal complaint to the Council about the inadequate notice, pressure to accept the offer and lack of consideration of her circumstances. The Council upheld Miss X’s complaint at stage one. It accepted that it did not properly consider suitability of the property or the medical or social factors when the property was offered. It also accepted that it poorly communicated to Miss X that declining the property may result in following offers being further away.
23. The court granted a possession order under the accelerated procedure on 9 July 2025, requiring Miss X to give up possession by 21 July 2025. On 18 July 2025 the Council ended the prevention duty and accepted the relief duty under section 189B of the Housing Act 1996.

Analysis and findings

24. The Council contacted the landlord and was informed he intended to proceed with possession. The Council advised the landlord to pursue a possession order so that emergency accommodation could be requested. Further attempts to resolve the situation were unlikely to be successful in these circumstances.
25. The Homelessness Code of Guidance says that where an assured shorthold tenant has received a valid section 21 notice, and the landlord intends to seek possession, the housing authority must consider whether it is reasonable for the applicant to continue to occupy the accommodation. Where there would be no defence to possession proceedings, it is generally unlikely to be reasonable for the applicant to remain in the property beyond the expiry of the notice. This may be different only where the authority is actively taking steps to secure a short extension of the tenancy to allow alternative accommodation to be found. The evidence shows the Council telling the landlord to follow the correct eviction process, rather than it persuading the landlord to allow Miss X to stay in the property.
26. The Council advised Miss X that she could lawfully remain in the property until the landlord obtained a possession order and, if necessary, a warrant for eviction. While this advice was legally correct, the Council was also required to consider whether it was reasonable for Miss X to remain, given her personal circumstances.
27. The evidence does not show the Council carried out or recorded an individual assessment of whether it was reasonable for Miss X to continue to occupy the accommodation after the section 21 notice expired. In particular, there is no evidence the Council considered her health vulnerabilities, her status as a single parent with a dependent child, informal care responsibilities or the increasing stress and uncertainty caused by the ongoing possession proceedings.
28. The Council appears to have relied on the fact that Miss X could lawfully remain in the property. This did not meet the Council’s duty to assess reasonableness under sections 175 and 189B of the Housing Act 1996. This was fault.
29. I also find fault in the Council’s delay in progressing Miss X’s case from the prevention duty to the relief duty. The absence of any recorded consideration of homelessness status or reasonableness following expiry of the section 21 notice indicates the Council did not actively review whether the prevention duty remained appropriate as the risk of homelessness increased. This was fault.
30. The Council also failed to properly consider Miss X’s circumstances when offering the property viewing in May 2025. It gave inadequate notice to attend the viewing and put unnecessary pressure on Miss X to accept the property. This is fault and added to the distress caused to Miss X.

Injustice

31. Miss X experienced uncertainty about her housing situation after the section 21 notice expired because of the faults identified. This caused her avoidable distress and anxiety. She also experienced time and trouble in seeking clarification and pursuing the matter with the Council. Miss X also had to pay for court costs when the possession order was made on the advice of the Council that she could legally remain in the property. This could have been avoided if the Council properly assessed her situation at the time and progressed the prevention duty to the relief duty, which it eventually did.
32. Miss X did not become street homeless during this period, so the injustice is limited to financial loss due to court costs, distress, uncertainty and time and trouble rather than loss of accommodation at this stage.

Back to top

Action

33. Within one month of the Ombudsman’s final decision, the Council will :
• Issue a formal apology to Miss X acknowledging the faults identified. 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 Miss X financial remedy of £400 to recognise the distress and time and trouble caused.
• Reimburse Miss X for the court costs she incurred as a result of the Council’s actions.
34. Within three months of the Ombudsman’s final decision, the Council agreed to:
• Remind staff to assess whether it is reasonable to continue to occupy accommodation through staff communications.

35. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

36. I find fault causing injustice. The Council agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman