Summary: We have found no fault with how the Council reached its decision not to move Miss X into emergency accommodation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained that the Council did not provide emergency accommodation for her when she felt harassed and threatened by her neighbours. She said this affected her mental health, and she is scared in her home. She wants the Council to provide her with emergency housing or rehousing elsewhere.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)

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 s34H(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

5. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
6. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:
• their eligibility for assistance.
7. A council must secure interim accommodation for an applicant and their household if it has reason to believe the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
8. After completing inquiries, the council must give the applicant a decision in writing. If it is an adverse decision, the letter must fully explain the reasons. All letters must include information about the right to request a review and the timescale for doing so. (Housing Act 1996, section 184, Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.30)

What happened

9. In June 2025, Miss X made a homeless application stating that her council-rented property had damp and mould problems. The Council visited Miss X’s property and found no evidence to support her claims. It issued a decision on her homeless application stating it did not consider her to be homeless. Miss X could have requested a review of this decision.
10. Later that month, Miss X contacted the Council requesting emergency accommodation as she said she was being harassed by her neighbours. The Council met with Miss X and visited her property but found no evidence to support Miss X’s claims. It provided her with a camera doorbell to record any future problems. The Council agreed to reassess her housing banding upon receiving information from her mental health advocate.
11. Miss X complained to the Council in August 2025 to request emergency “safe accommodation” due to the living conditions she was experiencing in her home. She said her neighbours were harassing her and had caused criminal damage to her home. She provided a letter from police which showed there is an active criminal investigation
12. Miss X was unhappy with the Stage 1 response that she received from the Council. It said that there was a lack of evidence to support her claim for an urgent move. The Council said it was prepared to reassess her banding [increase banding] following any medical reports submitted on her behalf by her mental health team.
13. The Council’s Stage 2 response provided an acknowledgement for Miss X installing the door camera provided by the Council. It also reiterated that the Council was prepared to reassess her housing banding.

My findings

14. The Council considered the information Miss X provided about her current living circumstances. It issued a decision which Miss X could have requested a review of. It said it was prepared to reassess her banding when she could provide medical reports from her mental health advocate.
15. We are not an appeal body. It is not our role to say whether the Council’s decision was correct. Unless there is fault in the Council’s decision-making process, we cannot comment on the decision reached.
16. I have found no fault with how the Council handled Miss X’s homelessness application or her subsequent request for emergency accommodation.

Back to top

Decision

17. I have found no fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman