Summary: Miss X complains about the Councils handling of her homelessness application. Miss X says the Council failed to re-assess her application following her return to the country. Miss X says this caused her a great deal of distress. We have found fault in the actions of the Council for failing to consider information provided to it regarding Miss X’s circumstances and failing to progress her case. The Council has agreed to issue Miss X with an apology, pay her a financial payment and complete a service improvement.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Councils handling of her homelessness application. Miss X says the Council failed to re-assess her application following her return to the country.
2. Miss X says this caused her a great deal of distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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)
5. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
6. 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

7. I have investigated Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application.
8. I have not investigated Miss X’s complaint about the Council failing to re-assess her application following her return to the country. This is because Miss X had a right of review of this decision which she exercised and also took legal action.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Miss X and the Council were invited to comment on my draft decision. I have considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

11. 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.
12. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the Council on or after 3 April 2018:

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

13. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. The threshold for taking an application is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular council department. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
14. The council will make enquiries to find out whether the person is:

• eligible for assistance;
• homeless or threatened with homelessness;
• in priority need; and
• not intentionally homeless.

15. After completing inquiries, the council must give the applicant a decision in writing.
16. The Prevention Duty- 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)
17. The Relief Duty – councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188). When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B).
18. Personalised housing plan (PHP) – sets out the steps both the council and the applicant will take to try to resolve the applicant’s homelessness. During the relief duty stage, councils must carry out an assessment, work with the person to develop the PHP and the plan must be kept under review.
19. The Main Housing Duty - if a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to make accommodation available (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer, or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
20. Examples of applicants in priority need are:

• people with dependent children.
• pregnant women.
• people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability or old age.
• care leavers and
• victims of domestic abuse.

What happened

21. Miss X contacted the Council in early December 2024 and told it she was in rent arrears and also was having difficulty accessing her property due to mobility issues.
22. The Council completed an assessment in mid-December 2024 and accepted the prevention duty. The Council issued a personalised housing plan in late January 2025.
23. The Council contacted Miss X’s landlord in early February and confirmed the level of arrears. The Council also spoke to Miss X and confirmed she was having difficulty accessing the property due to her medical needs. The Council made a referral for a ground floor property and requested a medical opinion.
24. The Council emailed Miss X in mid-April to say the officer dealing with her case had changed and advised it was waiting for the outcome of a medical assessment. Miss X again clarified that she needed accessible housing.
25. Miss X complained to the Council in mid-April about the lack of contact from her case worker. The Council responded to the complaint in early May 2025 and said it did not uphold her complaint and that the Housing officer had been in contact throughout the case.
26. Miss X made a stage two complaint in late May 2025 and said she needed surgery and would be in a wheelchair during her recovery. Miss X said her flat would be inaccessible after the surgery and she had no alternative accommodation. Miss X asked for the Council to provide emergency accommodation.
27. The Council contacted Miss X to offer possible accommodation in mid-June 2025. Miss X told the Council she was out of the country awaiting surgery and could not view the accommodation potentially offered. The Council asked Miss X to confirm when she was going to be back in the UK.
28. The Council issued a stage two complaint response in mid-June 2025. The Council said it was strange that there was little contact between April and June in relation to Miss X’s case given the complexity and apologised for this.
29. The Council issued a decision in late June 2025 which said it had decided Miss X was not homeless as it was satisfied she had accommodation out of the UK and did not have a return date to the UK. Miss X did not receive this decision originally so the Council resent it to her in mid-July 2025.
30. Miss X asked for the decision to be reviewed in mid-July 2025 and also took legal action.
31. I understand the Council accepted the main housing duty in November 2025 and Miss X moved into new accommodation in early February 2025.

Analysis

32. Miss X has told the Council from December 2024 that her accommodation was not suitable due to her medical needs. I have not been able to see that the Council reviewed this information to assess if it would consider her homeless on the grounds of it not being reasonable to occupy the accommodation when it completed its initial assessment. The Council did not request a medical opinion until February 2025. This is fault and would have caused Miss X distress. Miss X will also have been left with the feeling that had information been assessed originally the outcome may have been different.
33. I have not been able to see what action the Council took between February 2025 and June 2025. While I can see the file was transferred in April 2025, I cannot see any action was taken until June. This is fault and would have caused Miss X distress and inconvenience.
34. The Council issued a decision saying it did not believe Miss X was homeless in June 2025 as it was satisfied she had accommodation outside the UK. I have not found fault in the Council’s decision and understand that Miss X was not in the country from May 2025 until July 2025.
35. I, therefore, must consider the impact of this on the injustice Miss X suffered.

Back to top

Action

36. Within four weeks of a final decision, the Council should:

• Write to Miss X to apologise for the distress caused by 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 £400 to recognise the distress and uncertainty caused by the faults identified between December and May 2025.
• Review Miss X’s matter to investigate why there are gaps in action being taken on the case and provide evidence of what measures the Council plan to take to reduce the risk of this happening again.

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

Back to top

Decision

38. I find fault causing injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman