Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to end its homelessness duty in 2020 because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to consider it now. We will not investigate the complaint about the suitability of her temporary accommodation because the Council has already carried out a suitability review. Ms X had the right to appeal to the court if she disagreed with the outcome and it was reasonable for her to do so. We will not investigate the complaint about the priority awarded on the housing register because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained:
• she was forced to leave her temporary accommodation due to a serious gang-related incident, but the Council wrongly said she had voluntarily left;
• her current temporary accommodation is unsuitable; and
• the Council had unfairly downgraded her housing register priority.
2. Ms X said the Council’s failings had affected her physical and mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. 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)
6. 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Leaving temporary accommodation

9. Ms X said she was forced to leave her temporary accommodation (TA) due to a serious gang-related incident, but the Council wrongly said she had voluntarily left. In its complaint response, the Council said her then solicitors had asked for a review of its decision dated 23 July 2020, but the decision was upheld. Ms X had the right to appeal to the county court, but she did not do so.
10. We usually expect people to complain to us within 12 months of the events complained about. Ms X complained to us in July 2025 about a decision in July 2020. There is no evidence she could not have complained earlier and no good reasons to decide to investigate now. In any case, Ms X had court appeal rights, and it was reasonable for her to exercise these as only the court could quash the Council’s decision to end its homelessness duty. Ms X had solicitors supporting her at the time, to advise her and/or assist her with an appeal.

Suitability of current temporary accommodation

11. Ms X made a fresh homelessness application. The Council accepted a duty and provided temporary accommodation (TA). In its complaint response, it said another firm of solicitors had asked it to carry out a suitability review. It had done so and concluded the TA was suitable. It sent the review decision to the solicitors in November 2024. Ms X had the right to appeal the decision to the county court and it was reasonable for her to do so as only the court could determine whether the TA was legally suitable. Ms X had solicitors supporting her who could have given her advice and/or supported her with an appeal.
12. If circumstances have changed since Ms X asked for the suitability review, she can make a fresh request and provide relevant supporting evidence for the Council to consider.

Housing register band

13. Ms X complained the Council had unfairly downgraded her from band A to band 9. In its complaint response, the Council explained a revised allocations scheme was implemented in March 2025. Under the new scheme, Ms X was awarded band 9, which was the equivalent of band A under the previous scheme.
14. I have considered the current allocations scheme and the previous scheme, effective from May 2021, which confirms the Council’s position. There is, therefore, insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to justify further investigation of this complaint.
15. For all the reasons set out above, we will not consider the complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. Part of the complaint was late, and Ms X has court appeal rights in relation to parts of the complaint that were reasonable for her to exercise. There is insufficient evidence of fault in relation to the priority band on the housing register to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman