Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered Mr X’s homelessness application. The Council has agreed a proportionate remedy for Mr X’s injustice which removes the need to investigate.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision not to accept his homelessness application. Mr X says that as a result he and his family must stay with other family in an overcrowded property due to the immediate risk of violence at his current property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X made a homelessness application to the Council as he and his family wanted to leave their property due to violence and harassment. The Council asked several agencies for information on Mr X and his family’s circumstances. It then notified Mr X that it would not accept his homelessness application as it did not consider there was an immediate risk for his safety. The Council did not issue a formal decision.
6. If we were to investigate Mr X’s complaint, it is likely we would find fault causing injustice to him.
7. A council has a duty to make inquiries and decide, what, if any, homelessness duty it owes if it has reason to believe someone might be homeless or is threatened with homelessness. Reason to believe is a low threshold and the Council does not need proof before deciding whether to accept a homelessness application.
8. The Council made inquiries of several agencies to help it decide whether it should accept Mr X’s homelessness application. This action indicates the Council accepted its duty to make inquiries. It should therefore have issued a formal decision about Mr X’s homelessness application and notified him of his statutory right to challenge the decision. As a result, Mr X missed the opportunity to request a statutory review of the Council’s decision and appeal to the county court.
9. We therefore asked the Council to remedy Mr X’s injustice by considering his homelessness application again, issuing a formal decision and notifying him of his statutory review rights.

Back to top

Agreed Action

10. The Council agreed to resolve the complaint by considering Mr X’s homelessness application again, issuing a formal decision and notifying him of his statutory review rights. The Council will take this action within one month of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We have upheld this complaint. The Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman