Summary: Mr D complains the Council mishandled review requests about temporary accommodation and a discharge of duty decision. I have decided to end the investigation because the complaint has not yet been fully considered by the Council. I have advised Mr D he can pursue the complaint with the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Mr D) says the Council mishandled his review request regarding an offer of temporary accommodation in 2024. He also says the Council delayed and mishandled his second review request in 2025 about its decision to end the main housing duty. Mr D also says the Council has not acted in line with the Equality Act.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered evidence provided by Mr D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
4. I shared my draft decision with both parties and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

5. In November 2024 the Council offered Mr D alternative temporary accommodation. Mr D says he challenged the suitability of the offer with the Council, and he submitted a formal complaint about this in December. In January 2025 the Council told Mr D to submit a suitability review request, which he did. The Council subsequently decided the review request was late and would not be accepted. In February the Council decided to discharge its main duty towards Mr D because he had refused a suitable offer of temporary accommodation. Mr D took forward a second review request with the Council about this decision. In June the Council issued a ‘minded to’ letter to Mr D about the main duty decision. It said the offer of accommodation in 2024 had been suitable. Mr D responded to the Council and challenged its overcrowding standards, said it had failed to consider disability matters and failed to assess the size of the property it had offered. He also referred to a failure to comply with the Equality Act.
6. Mr D also pursued the formal complaint process and contested the suitability of the accommodation offer; the Council issued its final stage response on 1 July reiterating that Mr D was out of time to request a suitability review into the accommodation. On 8 October the Council emailed Mr D that it had withdrawn its discharge of duty decision, a main duty was now accepted, and his bidding status had been reactivated.

The reason for my decision

7. I have considered whether there are parts of this case we could and should investigate. Mr D has formally complained to the Council, using the complaints process, about the offer of accommodation in November 2024 and the decision to not allow a suitability review. However he has not had a formal complaint consideration into the handling of the second review request (about the main duty decision). That means I could potentially investigate how the Council considered Mr D’s request for a suitability review at the end of 2024 through to early 2025. I would not be able to look at subsequent actions because they have not been formally complained about to the Council. I do not see we can usefully investigate the events in 2024 and early 2025 without recourse to what happened up to October 2025. That is because the matters are connected and cannot be looked at in isolation. Mr D clearly feels there has been substantial errors by the Council causing him an injustice. The Council has not had an opportunity to consider those points under its complaints process and, if it accepts there has been fault and injustice, to offer a resolution. My decision is the complaint is premature for the Ombudsman and Mr D has the right to take forward his concerns with the Council using its complaints process. Once he has exhausted that process, if he remains dissatisfied, he can bring his case to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Decision

8. I have decided to end the investigation because the complaint is premature and should be pursued with the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman