Summary: The Council delayed providing Mr X with interim accommodation. That meant Mr X had to stay with Mr Z and both experienced distress and uncertainty. An apology, payment to Mr X and Mr Z and guidance for officers is satisfactory remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X is represented by Mr Z. Mr X complained the Council delayed providing him with interim accommodation.
2. Mr Z says the Council’s actions impacted on his mental health as well as Mr X’s mental health.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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.
5. 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(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have investigated what happened when the Council received a referral for Mr X in April 2025 and after he was released from hospital in June 2025. I have not investigated what happened with Mr X’s interim accommodation later in 2025 as that postdates the complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and Mr Z's comments;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
8. Mr Z and the organisation 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

Homelessness

9. 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.
10. If someone contacts a council seeking accommodation or help to obtain accommodation and gives 'reason to believe' they 'may be' homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, the council has a duty to make inquiries into what, if any, further duty it owes them. The threshold for triggering the duty to make inquiries is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular department of the council. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
11. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help them to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. This is called the prevention duty. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants' cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
12. If councils are satisfied applicants are homeless and eligible for assistance, they must take reasonable steps to secure accommodation. This is called the relief duty. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing. The relief duty lasts 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
13. 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)
14. The threshold for triggering the section 188(1) duty is low as the housing authority only has to have a reason to believe (rather than being satisfied) that the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.5)
15. If homelessness is not successfully relieved, the applicant is in priority need and they are not homeless intentionally, the council will owe the applicant a main housing duty (s193(2) of the Act). This means the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation. This may be social housing or private rented accommodation with a lease of at least 12 months. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

What happened

16. Mr X has mental health and drug abuse issues. Mr X’s care coordinator referred Mr X to the Council on 17 April 2025 as he had been made homeless. The care coordinator and Mr Z chased the Council on 29 April. On 29 April Mr Z told the Council Mr X was homeless and staying with him but needed to move out due to his psychosis. The Council booked an appointment for 20 May. That was subsequently changed to 13 May.
17. Mr X attended the homeless appointment on 13 May. However, the appointment did not go ahead as Mr X was behaving erratically. The Council rescheduled the appointment. However, by then Mr X had been sectioned.
18. On 8 July the Council was notified Mr X would soon be released from hospital. The Council later arranged an appointment for 14 July. At that point Mr X was in step down accommodation which ended on 23 July. The Council provided interim accommodation from 23 July.

Analysis

19. Mr X says the Council failed to provide him with interim accommodation except for one night when he was evicted in April 2025. As I said in paragraphs 12 and 13, the bar for the Council to provide interim accommodation is low. The duty to arrange interim accommodation is triggered as soon as the Council has reason to believe an applicant may be eligible, homeless and in priority need.
20. I am satisfied on 29 April 2025 the Council knew Mr X was homeless and in priority need as it had details to suggest he had suffered from psychosis and had been hospitalised. I therefore consider, on the balance of probability, the Council had enough information on 29 April to satisfy itself Mr X qualified for interim accommodation. Failure to provide interim accommodation on 29 April is fault. The Council also delayed arranging an appointment with Mr X. That likely further delayed the Council properly considering its section 188 duty. I am satisfied that meant Mr X had to stay with Mr Z until he went into hospital in May 2025.
21. Mr X also says the Council failed to provide him with interim accommodation when he was released from hospital in July 2025. The evidence I have seen satisfies me when Mr X was released from hospital in July 2025 he was placed in step down accommodation which ended on 23 July. I am satisfied the Council placed Mr X in interim accommodation on 23 July. I therefore have no grounds to criticise the Council in relation to this period. I recognise issues arose with that interim accommodation later which resulted in the Council ending the section 188 duty. However, those matters fall outside the scope of my investigation.
22. I am concerned the Council has not issued Mr X with decision notices relating to the prevention and relief duties or the main housing duty. The Council says that is because of officer capacity. That delay is fault. I am satisfied this delay did not impact on Mr X in terms of his accommodation as I am satisfied the Council had provided Mr X with interim accommodation from July 2025. Although I appreciate the Council later discharged its section 188 duty that falls outside the scope of my investigation.
23. I am satisfied because of fault by the Council in failing to provide interim accommodation in April 2025 Mr X missed out on interim accommodation between 29 April and when he went into hospital. I am satisfied that caused Mr X and Mr Z distress and leaves them with some uncertainty about whether issues that arose in May 2025 could have been avoided. I consider a satisfactory remedy would be for the Council to apologise to Mr X and Mr Z and pay them £150 each. I also recommended the Council provide guidance to officers dealing with homeless applications about the low bar for triggering the section 188 duty. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.

Back to top

Action

24. Within one month of my decision the Council should:
• apologise to Mr X and Mr Z for the distress and uncertainty they experienced due to the faults identified in this decision. The Council may want to refer to the Ombudsman’s updated guidance on remedies, which sets out the standards we expect apologies to meet;
• pay Mr X £150;
• pay Mr Z £150;
• provide guidance to officers about the low bar when considering whether to provide section 188 accommodation.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

26. I find fault causing injustice. The Council will take action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman