Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a homelessness application. it was reasonable for Miss X to challenge its review decision on her case by appealing to the court.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to re-house her under its housing allocations policy and subsequently under its homelessness duty when she made an application. She says she has been living in unsuitable private accommodation with her child and that she needs to be re-housed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X says she made a housing application because the private-rented home she lives in suffers from dampness which is affecting her daughter. The application was not given priority and in 2025 she submitted a homelessness application because she believes it is unreasonable for her to occupy her home.
7. The Council told her that she was not homeless and closed her case. She used the s.202 review right under the Housing Act 1996 Part 7 to challenge the Council’s decision. The Council took longer than the statutory 8 weeks to decide the review but the outcome was negative so this did not affect Miss X’s situation. The review decision letter referred to her rights to appeal the decision to the County Court. Miss X did not appeal but complained to us.
8. Since her complaint to us Miss X’s representatives Shelter did not appeal on her behalf but instead submitted a new homelessness application based on the fact that she had received new medical evidence to support her case. In response to our enquiries the Council says it was considering ending its duty under the new application by offering her a private sector tenancy. This is outside the scope of the original complaint to us and will carry further review/appeal rights if Miss X refuses the offer.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of a homelessness application. it was reasonable for Miss X to challenge its review decision on her case by appealing to the court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman