Summary: The Council failed to meet and delayed in its homelessness duties towards Mrs X. These faults caused her to remain in unsuitable accommodation and be awarded an incorrect housing band. Further injustice has been caused by poor complaint handling. The Council has agreed to apologise, provide services to and make a payment to Mrs X for the injustice caused. It has also agreed to service improvements to prevent recurrence of the faults identified.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide housing support and left her in unsuitable overcrowded accommodation for over 18 months.
2. She said the Council handled her complaints about the matter poorly causing her distress, uncertainty and frustration.

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. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the relevant available 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

6. 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)
7. I have used my discretion to investigate matters from May 2024, when Mrs X first asked the Council for homelessness assistance. These matters are relevant to the substantive matter and the subsequent responses and decisions made by the Council. Mrs X would reasonably have allowed some time for the Council to act before complaining and did not allow the matter to rest for any extended period of time.
8. I have not investigated matters after March 2026 when the Council provided its final complaint response. These matters would be a new complaint to the Council in the first instance.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I considered evidence provided by Mrs X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
10. Mrs 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 legislation and guidance

Homelessness law and guidance

11. 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.
12. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council:

• they are likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• they have been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)

13. 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)
14. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing. This is known as the relief duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
15. The relief duty requires an authority to “take reasonable steps” to help the applicant to secure suitable accommodation which is available for occupation for at least six months.
16. 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). An example of an applicant in priority need is people with dependent children.
17. If the council decides the person is in priority need and not intentionally homeless, the relief duty ends automatically after 56 days, even if the applicant has not found accommodation. Where inquiries are not completed before the end of the relief duty, the Code advises the decision should be made within 15 working days from when the relief duty ends. (Housing Act 1996, section189B(7)(c))

The main housing duty

18. 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. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)

Assessments and Personal Housing Plans

19. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. 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 must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan (PHP). (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)

The Council’s housing allocation scheme

20. Once accepted for the housing register, the Council places applicants in one of five bands based on their needs. Band one being awarded to applicants with ‘exceptional housing need’ down to band five for those with ‘low or no housing need’.
21. The policy states applicants will be awarded Band 3 where the Council owes them a main housing duty.

The Council’s complaint policy

22. The Council’s policy says it will acknowledge stage one complaints within 5 working days and provide a response within 10 working days. It says it will communicate any reasons for delays in providing a response with the complainant.
23. It says stage two escalations will be acknowledged within 5 working days and should be not exceed 20 working days without good reason.

Principles of Good Administrative Practice

24. We publish guidance for councils which sets out the standards we expect when we investigate complaints about councils. (Principles of Good Administrative Practice). These include but are not limited to:
• Following the law and taking the rights of those concerned into account;
• Taking reasonable, timely decisions, based on all relevant considerations;
• Keeping to commitments, including any published service standards; and
• Operating an effective complaints procedure, which includes offering a fair and appropriate remedy when a complaint is upheld.

What happened

25. In early May 2024, Mrs X and her teenage child, Y were living with family after they became homeless. Mrs X asked the Council for homelessness support.
26. At the beginning of June 2024, a Council officer assessed Mrs X and Y to be living in unsuitable accommodation due to overcrowding with increasing pressure to leave the property.
27. At the beginning of November 2024, Mrs X applied to join the housing register. She reiterated that her current housing arrangement was untenable, and they were being asked to leave. She said she had made the Council aware several months prior and she had not received any update. She provided the requested evidence with her application.
28. At the end of November 2024, Mrs X contacted the officer. She said she had not received any update about her homelessness or housing situation.
29. In their response the Council officer apologised for not being in touch, arranged to call Mrs X about her case and said she would be prioritised. Mrs X did not receive a call and again chased for an update.
30. In mid-December Mrs X told the Council officer she and Y had been asked to move out of the accommodation by the following week.
31. At the end of December 2024, Mrs X complained to the Council, she said:
• she and Y, who was a dependant child, had been living in unsuitable accommodation for seven months and they had been asked to leave;
• her housing support requests had not been taken seriously. The Council said it would contact her with updates, but this had not happened; and
• she had uploaded all the evidence as requested.
32. In January 2025 the Council requested further evidence to support Mrs X’s housing register application.
33. The Council upheld Mrs X’s complaint in mid-January 2025. It said:
• Mrs X had provided the evidence required for her housing application, but this had not been uploaded by the officer;
• It was aware Mrs X and Y were living in unsuitable accommodation;
• It had communicated poorly with Mrs X. Communications from the housing officer had stopped and she had also not received support after contacting the Council triage team in September and October;
• It had failed to make a legal decision on a homelessness duty in June 24; and
• The housing team leader would contact Mrs X and work to resolve her housing concerns.
34. At the beginning of March 2025, the Council completed its assessment of Mrs X’s housing application, awarding her Band 4 (homeless/no fixed abode) from the beginning of December 2024. It sent Mrs X its decision at the beginning of April 2025.
35. The Council did not complete the actions from Mrs X’s stage one response. Mrs X escalated her complaint.
36. In its stage 2 response the Council apologised for not completing the remedy as agreed. It said her housing officer would ensure her housing application was completed.
37. At the beginning of May 2025, the Council accepted a relief duty towards Mrs X. It said she was homeless and currently living in overcrowded and unsuitable accommodation with Y (lacking two bedrooms). It also provided Mrs X her right to review and a personal housing plan (PHP), with actions for the Council including referrals to services and ensuring Mrs X was in the correct housing allocation banding.
38. In mid-September 2025, Mrs X complained again to the Council. She said the Council had failed to provide support with her homelessness and asked for an update.
39. At the beginning of December 2025, the Council ended its relief duty towards Mrs X following her request for homelessness assistance in June 2024. It told her 56 days had elapsed and it had complied with the relief duty.
40. In its complaint response in mid-December 2025 the Council said:
• It had mismanaged Mrs X’s case with poor communication, causing Mrs X to continually chase the Council and raise her previous complaint;
• It had not provided updates about Mrs X’s homelessness application and it had not completed actions from her previous complaint; and
• It had not received further evidence from Mrs X in September 2025, therefore it had closed her case and ended the relief duty toward her.
41. The Council upheld her complaint because of the time Mrs X had been waiting to receive a decision regarding her homelessness application and it provided details on how she could appeal its decision to end the relief duty towards her.
42. Mrs X remained unhappy with the Council’s actions and asked us to investigate. We asked the Council to respond to Mrs X’s complaint at stage two of its complaint process.
43. In March 2026 the Council said it had incorrectly ended Mrs X’s relief duty. It re-awarded the duty based on the assessment of needs it carried out in June 2024. It said she was eligible and homeless with a now adult child. It provided her with a PHP which said Mrs X would tell the Council if she required interim accommodation.
44. The Council provided a stage two response at the end of March 2026, it said:
• It did not register Mrs X as homeless until May 2025, when it granted the relief duty and completed a PHP;
• There was no evidence of Council actions in relation to the PHP;
• It did not investigate Mrs X’s complaint of September 2025 or respond within its policy timescales; and
• It incorrectly ended Mrs X’s relief duty in December 2025.
45. It said the matter had caused Mrs X avoidable worry, inconvenience and frustration. It offered Mrs X a £400 symbolic payment which she accepted.

Back to top

Analysis

46. The Council accepted fault in its handling of Mrs X’s homelessness and offered a remedy. However, there was further fault causing injustice from the Council’s actions which it has not remedied.

Homelessness and duties

47. The evidence shows Mrs X approached the Council for homelessness support in May 2024. The Council completed an assessment at the beginning of June 2024. It found her eligible and in accommodation unsuitable due to overcrowding. There is no evidence that it formally accepted any housing duty at the time. This was fault. On balance, had it properly considered the information it had and made a decision in line with the law and guidance, the Council would have written to Mrs X setting out that it owed her the relief duty because it was satisfied, she was eligible and homeless. This is because her accommodation was not reasonable for her to continue to occupy. This is the same decision it made in May 2025, based on the same circumstances.
48. Instead, it did not accept the relief duty until May 2025. The significant delay in accepting a duty towards Mrs X was fault. Had the Council acted without fault, it would also have offered interim accommodation, since Mrs X was in priority need, given Y was a dependant child. Instead, Mrs X remained in overcrowded accommodation. This is an injustice to Mrs X and Y.
49. The relief duty lasts for 56 days. But for its failure to accept the relief duty in June 2024, on balance, the Council would have accepted a main housing duty to Mrs X by the beginning of September 2024. This is because Mrs X was eligible, homeless and in priority need. There is no evidence she was homeless intentionally. It would have therefore provided Mrs X and Y with temporary accommodation. The Council’s fault caused Mrs X to remain in unsuitable overcrowded accommodation. By the time it made a decision about whether it owed her the main housing duty, Y was no longer a child and so the Council decided Mrs X was not in priority need. The failure to make decisions at the right time therefore caused Mrs X a significant injustice.
50. The Council’s records of Mrs X’s homelessness application are poor. While it produced PHP’s when it accepted the relief duty in May 2025 and March 2026, there is no evidence to show what steps, if any, the Council took to complete the agreed actions. In the absence of records, it is likely the Council did not take the steps it set out in Mrs X’s PHPs. Failure to do so was fault. This denied Mrs X meaningful support to address her homelessness, which is an injustice.

Housing register application

51. Council records show Mrs X applied to its housing register in November 2024 with the Council completing its assessment in March 2025. However, it then delayed providing its decision of Band 4 (no fixed abode) to Mrs X until the beginning of April 2025.
52. There is no statutory timescale for processing housing applications, however we consider in line with our principles of good administrative practice that councils should assess applications within eight weeks. The Council should have provided Mrs X with its decision by the end of December 2025. The Council took a further 13 weeks to complete an assessment and issue Mrs X with its decision in April 2025. This was fault causing frustration and uncertainty.
53. Had the Council accepted the main housing, as it would have but for its faults in the homelessness process, the Council would have assessed Mrs X’s housing register application differently. If it had accepted the main housing duty, then in line with its policy, it would have awarded Mrs X Band 3. Instead, it awarded Band 4. This meant Mrs X was much less likely to be successful in securing a property. This is a further significant injustice to Mrs X.

Complaint handling

54. The Council failed to respond to Mrs X’s complaint in line with the timescales set out in its published policy. This was fault which added to Mrs X’s frustration. Mrs X escalated her initial complaint in February 2025, but the Council did not respond until the end of April 2025, a delay of 30 days outside of its published policy.
55. Mrs X raised her complaint about the same matter again in September 2025 as the Council had not completed the actions it identified in its previous response. The Council did not respond until mid-December 2025, a delay of 51 days over the published policy. Mrs X escalated her complaint at the end of September 2025, before receiving her stage one response, this was reasonable given the delay. The Council did not respond at stage two until the end of March 2026, after prompting by the Ombudsman. This was a delay of 102 days over its published policy after escalation.

Injustice and remedies

56. Where the council’s actions deprive a complainant of suitable accommodation, our guidance states we would normally recommend a symbolic payment of between £150 and £300 a month, with higher payments recommended if we decide the situation was particularly severe, prolonged and if those affected were vulnerable.
57. Mrs X lived in unsuitable accommodation from June 2024 when the initial assessment was completed until March 2026 when she was offered interim accommodation, a period of 21 months. I have taken into consideration Mrs X was living in overcrowded accommodation and the age of the members of the household at the time of the initial assessment.
58. I recommend a total payment of £3,300 as an appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by the Council’s faults. This includes payment in line with our guidance to recognise time and trouble caused to Mrs X by the delays in responding to her complaints.
59. The Council has already paid Mrs X £400. I have considered this and deducted it from the remedy below.
60. Our remedies look to place a complainant back in the position they would have been in, if not for the fault. Given the significant faults found relating to the awarding of legal housing duties, it is appropriate to recommend personal remedies and service improvements in this decision.

Back to top

Action

61. To remedy the injustice caused, within one month of the final decision the Council agreed to take the following action:
1. apologise to Mrs X for the injustice caused to her by the failings identified during this investigation. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended.
2. Pay Mrs X £2,900 to recognise the distress, uncertainty, frustration, time and trouble caused by the Council’s failure to award housing duties correctly, provide suitable temporary accommodation and for its poor complaint handling.
3. Write to Mrs X accepting the main housing duty and provide her and Y with suitable temporary accommodation.
4. Amend Mrs X’s priority to Band 3 and backdate it to 2 November 2024, the date of her original application.
62. To remedy the injustice caused, within two months of the final decision the Council has agreed to take the following action:
1. Review the offers it made to applicants on the general housing register in band 3 between December 2024 to date. If the Council finds, within this period, it would have made Mrs X an offer of a suitable property had it properly awarded her band 3, it should make Mrs X an offer of the next suitable available property.
63. Within three months of the final decision the Council agreed to take the following action.
1. Through training or briefing and using this case as an example:
1. remind relevant officers of the importance of notifying homeless applicants of the correct homelessness duty and ensuring the Council accepts and ends the correct duties at relevant times;
2. remind relevant officers of the importance of providing interim accommodation where the Council has reason to believe an applicant may be eligible, homeless and in priority need;
3. remind relevant officers of the importance of making a decision about the main housing duty after 56 days, only extending this in specific circumstances in line with the Homelessness Code of Guidance; and
4. remind relevant officers of the importance of dealing with complaints in line with its published policy and that it should complete any agreed actions without delay.
2. Produce an action plan showing how it will ensure it acts on the steps it sets out in Personalised Housing Plans in a timely manner and maintain appropriate oversight of homelessness cases.
64. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

65. I found fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman