Summary: We found fault on Mr Y’s complaint about the Council’s delay deciding a homeless referral from another local authority, deciding it owed an interim duty to provide accommodation, and failing to address his formal complaint properly. The Council agreed to send an apology, make a symbolic payment, review why delays happened, provide officer training, improve communication, and ensure rights of reviews are set out in relevant decisions, and complaint responses fully address complaints made.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains that as a homeless applicant, the Council delayed:
1. deciding a referral from another local authority which considered he had a local connection elsewhere;
2. deciding it owed him an interim duty to provide emergency accommodation; and
3. properly dealing with his formal complaint.
2. As a result, he and his family suffered uncertainty, stress, anxiety, and he remained in accommodation which did not meet his needs. It impacted on his children’s education and welfare.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr Y, the Council’s response to our enquiries, as well as relevant law, policy, and guidance. I sent a copy of my draft decision to Mr Y and the Council. I considered their responses.

Back to top

What I found

Homelessness: law and guidance

7. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code) set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
8. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or, if they have accommodation, it is not reasonable for them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
9. When a council has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless, eligible, and have a priority need, it must provide interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188 (1))
10. 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).
11. Councils may conduct and complete their inquiries into the duties that will be owed to an applicant under section 193 (2). The relief duty will end, for example, when 56 days have passed and the council is satisfied the applicant has a priority need and is unintentionally homeless.
12. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan (PHP). (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and the Code paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
13. Local authority bodies agreed guidelines for procedures for referrals between them, and for resolving disputes between them when they cannot agree whether conditions for a referral from one council to another are met. (paragraph 10.2, the Code)
14. A council can refer an applicant to another council where any of the following conditions are met:

• the applicant has no local connection but has one elsewhere;
• up to five years after an out of borough placement; or
• in the two years after a private rented sector offer. (section 198, Housing Act 1996)

15. A council has the discretion to make a referral where one of these conditions is met. An applicant can apply to any council they choose, and it is unlawful for it to refuse to accept an application on the grounds there is no local connection with it.
16. A referral can be made on the basis of local connection where an applicant: has no local connection with the council to which the application was made; has a local connection with another council; will not be at risk of violence in the other area.
17. The notified council should respond to a referral within 10 working days (paragraph 10.31, the Code). Under the Local Authorities Agreement (Procedures for referrals of homeless applicants to another local authority: guidelines for local authorities on procedures for referral), where the notified council considers the conditions for referral are not met, it should write to the notifying one giving its reasons in full within 10 days (Local Authorities Agreement, paragraph 6.5 and 10.1). The letter should contain all the reasons for its opinion to avoid delay and minimise inconvenience for the applicant.
18. Under this Agreement, the notified council is bound by any decision made by the notifying authority about whether the applicant is eligible, homeless, unintentionally homeless, and in priority need. (Local Authorities Agreement, paragraph 5.4)
19. The local authority associations’ dispute procedure should be used where there is disagreement over the question of whether the conditions for referral are met. (Local Authorities Agreement, paragraph 5.6)
20. The notifying authority, at the section 193 main duty stage, should ensure suitable accommodation is available for the applicant’s occupation until told whether the conditions for referral are met. (Local Authorities Agreement, paragraph 7.1)

What happened

21. In March 2025, Mr Y approached another council (the local authority) asking for housing help as he and his family had to move in 28 days. He explained he was currently living in the London Borough of Bexley’s area (the Council) in asylum supported accommodation but wanted to move to the local authority’s area. This was because of better community ties and for the welfare of their four children. The local authority advised him to contact the Council for housing help.
22. In April, Mr Y approached the Council as homeless because the landlord served him with notice to leave the property he was in. He completed a housing assistance application and explained: he had been given notice as the landlord wanted him to leave; he had lived in its area for six months during the last year; he lived in privately rented accommodation while his asylum claim was processed; when he was granted refugee status, he was told he had to leave the accommodation within seven days; his family consisted of him, his wife and four dependent children.
23. The Council asked him for supporting documents to make a preliminary assessment. Mr Y explained he had emailed the local authority, whose details he had searched on the internet, to ask for housing support, but had not made a formal application.
24. The Council then decided not to take an application from him. It told him it was unaware he had been in touch with the local authority first. It explained the local authority would need to complete initial enquiries on his application. This was because he had contacted it first and this was known as ‘First Approach’. He would need a First Approach letter to take to the other local authority.
25. The Council also explained this letter was issued to help clarify responsibility between it and the local authority. This was because Mr Y had said he would prefer to live in the local authority’s area. It claimed this was consistent with statutory guidance where local connection is unclear. The Council wanted to know if the local authority accepted responsibility under section 198. It needed clarification about local connection.
26. When he received the local authority’s response, he sent it to the Council. The Council disagreed with the local authority’s view about responsibility and said it did not have initial responsibility for carrying out enquiries to decide whether a duty is owed under his application. It sent him another First Approach letter to give to the local authority which he did.
27. After doing so, he contacted the Council again which said the advice he received from the local authority was wrong. The local authority needed to consider whether there was a local connection before making a referral to the Council. It would not make a referral to the local authority as the local authority was already responsible for making enquiries into his housing circumstances to decide what housing duty is owed.
28. In May, the local authority made a formal section 198 referral to the Council. This is a procedure where a council can refer a homeless applicant to another council because they have no local connection to their area, for example, but does have a connection elsewhere.
29. The referral said Mr Y had no local connection in the local authority’s area and had moved to the Council’s area. It sent the Council proof of local connection and status. The local authority stated it accepted the relief duty to Mr Y but there was no local connection to its own area. The relief duty meant it was satisfied Mr Y was homeless, eligible, and had a priority need. Mr Y now told the Council he had to leave his accommodation the same day.
30. The Council accepts it failed to issue its response to the referral within ten working days but said it could not reach a decision on the substantive duty until responsibility between the Council and the local authority was decided.
31. Towards the end of the month, the Council told Mr Y to contact the local authority as it had to provide him with temporary accommodation until the Council confirmed its decision on the referral. This was because he was an automatic priority need under homeless law. Mr Y replied saying he had to leave his accommodation that day and needed urgent rehousing.
32. In June, Mr Y told the Council he and his family were placed in temporary accommodation by the local authority but far from where they were staying and the children’s school. He asked the Council to urgently rehouse them.
33. The local authority contacted the Council as it had not received confirmation from it that it would either accept the referral or challenge it. It asked for a formal response and pointed out the Council had a clear duty to accept the referral. It explained Mr Y was granted his immigration status while living in the Council’s area and was accommodated there under asylum support provisions. It considered this was a local connection as set out in the Code. (paragraph 10.9) Failure to act could mean it would take legal advice about the Council’s delay.
34. Towards the end of the month, the Council accepted it owed Mr Y the relief duty.
35. In July, the Council told the local authority it would accept the referral. The local authority told Mr Y he had to leave the temporary accommodation it was providing him soon and so needed to contact the Council for housing, which he did.
36. Towards the end of the month, the Council sent him its Relief Acceptance letter and PHP with information to help his search for housing. This was after the local authority sent him a letter saying he had to leave the accommodation that day. The Council offered him emergency accommodation the same day.
37. Mr Y also made a formal complaint to the Council in July. His complaint included: missed deadlines; communication problems; delays with decision making; general delay; the Equality Act; action he wanted the Council to take.
38. In August, the Council sent its stage 1 response which did not fully address the issues Mr Y had raised. It merely said it had now accepted a housing duty to him so the referral to the local authority no longer applied. It had sent him a PHP and arranged emergency accommodation.
39. An internal email asked to keep Mr Y in mind if any three bedroomed properties became available. The Council emailed Mr Y about his weekly searches for accommodation and asked whether he had registered with Homefinder UK and an employment hub
40. In October, the Council again asked Mr Y how his accommodation search was going and asked to see copy bank statements.
41. In December, the Council accepted it owed him the full housing duty on the application made in July. It explained that between these two dates, it remained in contact with Mr Y, progressed relief, explored private sector rented options, and assessed accommodation suitability and the circumstances of the household.
42. This letter did not explain he had the right to ask for a review of any decision about the suitability of accommodation offered him. The Council has since accepted it needed to set out review rights more clearly in its letters accepting the main housing duty.
43. In March 2026, Mr Y moved to a private rented tenancy and the Council discharged the full housing duty the same date.
44. The Council has accepted:

• his complaint about discrimination was not directly addressed in its stage 1 response;
• clearer communication with Mr Y about the timing of the main housing duty decision would have helped him. The decision letter failed to explain suitability review rights to him; and
• correspondence during June and July was not responded to promptly. This was because of officer changes.

My findings

Complaint a): delay with referral

45. I found fault on this complaint and in reaching this view, took the following into account:
1. While Mr Y had been in contact with the local authority before the Council, I am not satisfied it was appropriate for it to refer him back to that authority. This is because the Council had information Mr Y had a local connection with its area. It was also aware the accommodation being provided to him was ending within 28 days so there was some urgency dealing with his application.
2. The Council failed to act promptly on the section 198 referral. This was received at the end of May and was not decided until July, about eight weeks later. This was more than the recommended 10 working days.
3. I am satisfied the delay caused avoidable injustice to Mr Y. This was because he suffered distress: uncertainty as to what was happening and the outcome as well as not knowing whether the main housing duty decision would have been made sooner; the lost opportunity to have a prompt decision from the Council.

Complaint b): delay deciding it owed him interim duty to accommodate

46. I found fault on this complaint and in reaching this view, took the following into account:
1. The Council carried out a homelessness assessment in early April 2025. It had a duty to make enquiries if it had reason to believe Mr Y was homeless and eligible for housing help. This is a low threshold. Mr Y provided the Council with the information it requested about a week later. On balance, at this point, I consider this threshold was met given the information it now had and already had. As he has four children, he would also have had a priority need.
2. The section 188 duty to provide interim accommodation would have been triggered as soon as the Council had reason to believe he may be eligible, homeless, and in priority need.
3. The Council accepted the relief duty on 23 July, which usually lasts 56 days. This would have expired on 17 September. The Council had no discretion to extend the relief duty beyond 56 days in these circumstances.
4. On 18 September, the Council should have issued a letter with a decision confirming it accepted the main housing duty. It did not do so. Instead, it made the decision on 1 December. This was just over ten weeks late.
5. There is no evidence the Council made enquiries after 23 July which means it had no valid reason for delaying the making of the decision about the main housing duty.
6. The letter sent to Mr Y explaining the Council accepted it owed him the main housing duty failed to set out his right to ask for a review of the suitability of temporary accommodation.
7. The Council accepted communication was poor with Mr Y between June and July because of officer shortages.
8. I am satisfied these failures caused Mr Y avoidable injustice. This caused him distress: the lost opportunity for the Council to make enquiries about eligibility in April 2024; the lost opportunity for the Council to provide interim accommodation sooner than it did; the uncertainty about what was happening after the relief duty ended; the lost opportunity to have the main housing duty decision made sooner; the lost opportunity to be told his review rights; frustration; frustration with the poor communication.

Complaint c): complaint procedure failings

47. I am satisfied the Stage 1 response to his complaint failed to address all the heads of complaint Mr Y had raised. This was fault. It also caused Mr Y avoidable injustice as he experienced frustration with the response.

Back to top

Action

48. I considered our guidance on remedies. In doing so, I considered all the circumstances of the case including the length of time involved and the number in Mr Y’s family affected, for example. I also took account the local authority was providing him with emergency accommodation.
49. The Council agreed to carry out the following action within four weeks of the final decision:
1. Send a written apology to Mr Y for the failure to: act promptly on the section 198 referral; make enquiries in April when it had reason to believe he was homeless, eligible, and in priority need; consider interim accommodation in April; reach a decision about owing the main housing duty after the relief period; inform him about the right to review suitability of accommodation when it accepted this duty; communicate with him properly; properly respond to his stage 1 complaint.
2. Pay £350 to Mr Y for the injustice caused by the fault found.
3. Review why it took so long to accept the section 198 referral and provide training/guidance to relevant officers about the process to ensure the delay is not repeated in future cases.
4. Review why it took so long to process his homeless application properly and provide training/guidance to relevant officers to ensure the process is followed correctly in future cases.
5. Act to ensure communication delays are not repeated in future cases because of officer absences/shortages.
6. Provide evidence that decisions, where the main housing duty is accepted, contain information about the right to ask for a review of suitability.
7. Remind relevant complaint handling staff of the need to fully address all heads of complaints raised.
50. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

51. I found the following on Mr Y’s complaint against the Council:

• Complaint a): fault causing injustice;
• Complaint b): fault causing injustice; and
• Complaint c): fault causing injustice.

52. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman