Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to move Miss X to a new property when it was no longer reasonable for her to occupy her current property. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to remedy the distress, frustration and uncertainty this caused. There was no evidence of fault in the way the Council calculated her housing benefit or how it handled the reimbursement for repairs she carried out on the property. There was also no evidence of fault in the way it considered her debt relief order when deciding she was intentionally homeless.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness case. She complained the Council failed to:

• Issue a discharge of duty letter with review rights in a timely manner;
• Offer temporary accommodation after she was evicted;
• Reimburse her the £200 she paid to repair the property;
• Consider the concerns she raised about housing benefit being miscalculated and inflated rent arrear figures; and
• Recognise her debt relief order.

2. Miss X said this caused her distress, frustration and uncertainty.

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 the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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

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. Some of Miss X’s complaint is late. Miss X said almost half of her rent arrears were due to the Council miscalculating housing benefit whilst she was a student between 2020-2023. However, Miss X did not complain to us until September 2025. Miss X could have complained to us earlier about events before September 2024 and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to go back further than 12 months. Therefore, I have investigated from September 2024.
7. Miss X reapproached the Ombudsman in March 2026 after she was evicted from her accommodation and the Council issued its decision to discharge its main housing duty. I have exercised discretion to investigate to this point as the Council had already communicated this decision to Miss X in July 2025. However, it did not send her the letter with her review rights until March 2026.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and guidance

10. 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.
11. 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)
12. The Homelessness Code of Guidance (section 6.35) says:
• where an applicant has received a valid section 21 notice; and
• the council is satisfied that the landlord intends to seek possession and efforts to persuade the landlord to allow the tenant to remain are unlikely to be successful; and
• there would be no defence to an application for a possession order;

then it is unlikely to be reasonable for the applicant to continue to occupy beyond the expiry of a valid section 21 notice (notice to quit).

13. The Code notes In determining whether it would be reasonable for an applicant to continue to occupy accommodation following expiry of a valid section 21 notice the authority will need to consider all the factors relevant to the case and decide the weight that each should attract.
14. The Secretary of State considers that it is highly unlikely to be reasonable for the applicant to continue to occupy beyond the date on which the court has ordered them to leave the property and give possession to the landlord.
15. Housing authorities should not consider it reasonable for an applicant to remain in occupation up until the point at which a court issues a warrant or writ to enforce an order for possession of the property.

The main housing duty

16. If a council is satisfied an applicant is unintentionally homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure accommodation that is available for their occupation. This is called the main housing duty. The accommodation a council provides until it can end this duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)

Review rights

17. Councils must complete reviews of the following decisions within eight weeks of the date of the review request:

• eligibility for assistance;
• not in priority need;
• intentionally homeless;
• suitability of accommodation;
• notice being given of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to cooperate and the effect of the notice is to bring the relief duty to an end.

18. These periods can be extended if the applicant agrees in writing.
19. The council must advise applicants of their right to appeal to the county court on a point of law, and of the period in which to appeal. Applicants can also appeal if the council takes more than the prescribed time to complete the review. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202, 203 and 204)

What happened

20. Miss X and her child Y became homeless in 2012. The Council accepted the main housing duty. They have been in temporary accommodation A from 2020. Miss X owed almost £30,000 in rent arrears by the time she was evicted in March 2026.
21. From November 2024, Miss X had a debt relief order (DRO) in place. A DRO is a way of writing off debts. If a person’s financial circumstances do not improve within 12 months of the DRO, the debts will be written off. Miss X’s DRO included £18,000 owed to the Council in rent arrears.
22. In December 2024, the Council issued Miss X with a notice to quit. The landlord wanted the property back due to substantial rent arrears.
23. At the start of July 2025, Miss X’s tap broke one evening, out of office hours. Miss X said the water would not turn off and it was a flood risk. Miss X contacted the Council and the landlord about getting it repaired the same evening. Miss X said the Council advised her no-one could fix it at the moment and to arrange a plumber herself. Miss X sent the Council the invoice at the end of July for reimbursement which it passed onto the landlord for consideration but this has not been paid back.
24. In July 2025, the court granted a possession order giving the landlord the right to take back the property. The same month the Council wrote to Miss X to tell her it was unlikely it would rehouse her following the eviction due to her high rent arrears. It said if she cleared the arrears prior to eviction it would re-house her.
25. In August 2025, Miss X submitted an application to the court to suspend the possession order.
26. In September 2025, Miss X raised a stage one complaint saying she had been told verbally the Council may not re-house her due to her rent arrears but she had not received any formal discharge of duty letter.
27. In October 2025, the Council issued a stage one complaint saying once Miss X was evicted her case would be referred to the aftercare team to decide if she was intentionally homeless. The Council said it could not determine this yet as Miss X was not currently homeless. The Council said Miss X could avoid being found intentionally homeless if she paid her rent arrears.
28. Miss X escalated her complaint to stage two the same month for the following reasons:
• She had still not received any formal written decision regarding the Council’s duty towards her;
• The Council has failed to consider the repeated housing benefit miscalculations and lack of recognition of her debt relief order;
• Miss X said the rent arrears were largely caused due to this and affordability issues; and
• In October 2025, Miss X lost her job due to the extreme stress her housing situation caused.
29. In December 2025, Miss X wrote to the Council about her housing benefit entitlement and said:
• Her income had not been assessed correctly. Miss X said she received irregular earnings through casual work, but the Council failed to properly average these across the relevant period;
• Due to repeated suspensions and incorrect assessments, Miss X’s housing benefit payments had been significantly reduced or stopped. This had directly led to the accumulation of rent arrears, which would not have occurred if Miss X’s claim had been handled correctly; and
• She was only entitled to £489.92 per month, despite being a single parent working full-time, earning below threshold. She said this outcome did not appear to be fair, reasonable, or consistent with the legislation and guidance governing financial assessments.
30. The Council responded about her housing benefit entitlement as follows:
• It said it averaged Miss X’s household income from the outset of her claim, as required by law. The Council provided the income figures used in calculating her claim;
• Miss X’s household income between the periods 1 March 2025 to 12 October 2025, was above the threshold set by the central government for her to qualify for Housing Benefit from 3 March 2025 which ended the claim initially; and
• Having received Miss X’s payslip in December 2025 confirming her earned income had significantly reduced from November 2025, it had revised the claim.
31. Miss X remained unhappy and the Council responded at stage two of its complaints procedure in January 2026 saying:
• The Council still owed Miss X the main housing duty at present;
• The housing benefit team was separate so it could not comment on how her housing benefit had been assessed; and
• Miss X currently had rent arrears of almost £30,000. Whilst it appreciated that there has been a change in Miss X’s income, most of the arrears had been accrued almost from the very onset of moving into the temporary accommodation.
32. In February 2026, the court issued a warrant for possession of temporary accommodation A. It told Miss X the eviction date was 10 March 2026 and advised her to leave before this date.
33. On 10 March 2026, Miss X was evicted from temporary accommodation A. The Council did not re-house Miss X until a few days later despite still owing Miss X and her child the main housing duty. The Council said it re-housed Miss X on 12 March 2026. However, Miss X said it was not until 16 March. She said a homeless charity placed her in emergency accommodation until that point.
34. On 14 March 2026, the Council issued a letter discharging the main housing duty as it considered her accommodation affordable, Miss X was aware she had to pay rent and Miss X had significant rent arrears. The Council said taking into account the DRO, there was still approximately £11,500 of rent arrears outstanding.
35. Miss X requested a review of the decision. In July 2026, the Council issued its review decision and maintained Miss X was intentionally homeless. This is past the end point of my investigation so I cannot investigate this. Miss X has a right of appeal to the county court on a point of law about this decision.

Council’s response to our enquiries

36. In response to our enquiries about the DRO, the Council said it had considered this and said it has approved a write-off of £18,000. The Council said this left Miss X with approximately £11,500 left to pay.
37. In response to our enquiries about arranging further temporary accommodation, the Council said Miss X was evicted on 10 March from temporary accommodation A and approached the Council as homeless on 12 March. The Council said it provided a hotel room for Miss X and her child from 12 March until 12 April.
38. In response to our enquires about Miss X’s broken tap, the Council said it does not advise tenants to fix repair issues in their temporary accommodation. This should be completed by the landlord or managing agent. The Council said there is no evidence to support that Miss X was advised to get a plumber by a council officer.
39. In response to our enquiries about the gaps in housing benefit during 2025, the Council said housing benefit ended in March 2025 due to an increase in Miss X’s income which meant she no longer qualified for it. The Council said as the award was nil, Miss X would need to reapply for housing benefit to start a new claim. Miss X did not do this until November 2025.

My findings

Debt Relief Order

40. Miss X complained the Council failed to recognise her DRO which incorrectly inflated her arrears and affected decisions about her housing. However, at the point Miss X complained it had not been 12 months since the DRO was in place so the debts had not yet been cleared. At this point, it had also not decided whether to discharge its housing duty.
41. The Council has since confirmed it has written off £18,000 of rent arrears as part of the DRO, leaving a remaining £11,500 Miss X owes. The Council has considered the DRO when deciding to discharge its main housing duty and therefore was not at fault.

Housing Benefit

42. Miss X complained the Council miscalculated and wrongly suspended her housing benefit which led to her accumulating rent arrears. Miss X’s housing benefit ended in March 2025 due to high earnings. Miss X did not make a new claim until November 2025 at which point the Council revised her housing benefit due to her wages significantly reducing. For the period I have investigated there is no fault in how the Council calculated Miss X’s housing benefit.

Delay in issuing decision letter

43. In July 2025, the Council wrote to Miss X to tell her it was unlikely it would rehouse her following the eviction unless she paid her rent arrears. Miss X complained the Council should have issued a discharge of duty letter at this point so she could request a review of the decision. The Council said it could not issue this as Miss X was not currently homeless.
44. However, at this point the court had granted a possession order so the Council should have considered whether it was reasonable for Miss X to continue to occupy to the property and therefore homeless. Had it done this and decided she was homeless, it would have issued the decision letter sooner. There is no evidence it considered whether it was reasonable for Miss X to continue to occupy the property and therefore, was at fault.
45. However, the delay did not cause Miss X a significant injustice as the outcome would have likely been the same and Miss X would have been left without a property sooner.

Temporary accommodation following the eviction

46. In mid-February 2026, the Court issued a warrant for possession of the property. The homelessness code of guidance states that the Council should not consider it reasonable for the applicant to remain in occupation up until the point at which a court issues a warrant or writ to enforce an order for possession. However, the Council failed to re-house Miss X at this point.
47. The Council did not re-house Miss X until a few days after her eviction date when she approached the Council as homeless. Given the court had issued a warrant, the Council was aware of the eviction date and it still owed Miss X the main housing duty, it should have arranged alternative temporary accommodation significantly earlier than it did. This was fault which caused Miss X distress, frustration and uncertainty.

Reimbursement of repairs

48. Miss X’s tap broke out of hours one evening in July 2025 meaning the water would not turn off and it was a flood risk. Miss X called the Council that evening to ask someone to fix it but she said it advised it could not get someone out immediately and to pay for a plumber herself. There is no evidence in the case notes to support that Miss X was advised to get a plumber by a council officer, and the Council said it does not advice tenants to pay for repairs.
49. Landlords have 24 hours to complete emergency work to make housing safe. Had Miss X called the Council or the Landlord the next day in office hours, it is likely it would have sent a plumber to fix it within this timeframe. As Miss X did not give the Council 24 hours to resolve the problem and there is no evidence she was advised to get her own plumber, I cannot find fault.

Back to top

Action

50. Within one month of the final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Miss X for the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by its failure to move Miss X to a new property when it was no longer reasonable to occupy her current property. 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.
2. Pay Miss X £300 for the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused by its failure to move Miss X to a new property when it was no longer reasonable to occupy her current property.
51. Within three months of the final decision, the Council has agreed to create an action plan demonstrating how it will:
1. improve its processes for identifying when it is no longer reasonable for a person to occupy a property during the eviction process; and
2. ensure it offers suitable alternative accommodation at that point.
52. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

53. I find fault causing injustice. I have recommended actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman