Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Ms X’s homelessness application. It is reasonable to expect Ms X to have appealed to the county court against the Council’s decision that she was intentionally homeless. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council considered Ms X’s new homelessness applications to justify an investigation into her complaint.

The complaint

1. Ms Y complained on behalf of Ms X. She complained that the Council:

• Wrongly considered Ms X was intentionally homeless as she refused an offer of temporary accommodation which was unsuitable as it suffered from damp and mould.
• Wrongly refused to accept a further homelessness application for Ms X.

2. Ms Y says that as result Ms X and her family are living in insecure housing which is having a significant impact on their 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. 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. 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)
6. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
7. 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

8. I considered information provided by Ms Y on behalf of Ms X and the Council.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. In 2024, the Council notified Ms X of its decision that she was intentionally homeless so it did not have a duty to accommodate her and her family. It made this decision as Ms X refused an offer of temporary accommodation in 2022. Ms X requested a review of this decision. She said she refused the offer of temporary accommodation as the property was damp and suffered from mould. In May 2024, the Council considered Ms X’s review request but did not change its decision. It told Ms X that she could appeal to the county court on a point of law against this decision. Ms X did not appeal.
11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision that she was intentionally homeless. Ms X had the right to appeal to the county court on a point of law against the Council’s decision. Ms X considered the Council did not take account of all the relevant facts when reaching its decision. So, Ms X could have appealed to the county court on a point of law. We are mindful of Ms X’s circumstances at the time. But the Council told Ms X about her right of appeal when it issued the review decision. It was also open to Ms X to seek help from advice agencies on how to appeal. We therefore consider it is reasonable to expect Ms X’s to have appealed to the county court.
12. Furthermore, the complaint is late. Ms X made a complaint to the Ombudsman in August 2025. But she was aware of the Council’s review decision more than 12 months before she made a complaint to us. Even if there were good reasons why Ms X could not make the complaint sooner, it is unlikely we could reach a sound decision on the suitability of the offer of temporary accommodation. This is because the temporary accommodation was offered to Ms X over four years ago.
13. Ms X made a new homelessness application in September 2024. Councils are not required to accept a new homelessness application if the application does not raise any new and relevant facts which makes it different from the previous applications. The Council wrote to Ms X to advise it would not consider a new application from her. The letter shows the Council considered if Ms X had raised any new, relevant facts and explained its reasons for its decision. So, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation.
14. Ms X made a new homelessness application in November 2024. The application did not raise any new, relevant facts. In response to Ms X’s complaint, the Council explained it did not accept the application as there had been no material change of circumstances. There is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation. The Council considered whether the application raised any new, relevant facts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman