Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s significant delays with making a new decision on his homeless application, after it withdrew its original one. The Council offered a remedy as it accepted fault with its lack of robust or timely action, poor communication and poor case management. This caused Mr X significant distress, uncertainty and frustration. We considered the Council’s symbolic payment offer appropriate to recognise his injustice and did not make further recommendations.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of a homeless application he made in early 2024. He lodged a court appeal to challenge a decision it made, the Council later withdrew it and significantly delayed with issuing a fresh decision after it said it would. He also said it placed him in unsuitable interim accommodation. This caused him significant frustration, distress and uncertainty for a prolonged period.

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 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 recommend a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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)
4. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)
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. Mr X’s complaint relates to a homeless application he made to the Council at the start of 2024 and events linked with this. Mr X complained to us in October 2025. In line with Paragraph 3, events before October 2024 are late. I have not considered these. I have not seen good reasons why Mr X could not have formally complained sooner to the Council or us about these earlier events.
7. In any event, the Council made a formal decision about Mr X’s homelessness and priority need in early 2024 and in summer 2024. It later upheld this decision after a review. Mr X lodged a court appeal against this in autumn 2024.
8. In line with Paragraph 4, I cannot investigate the Council’s actions before October 2024, including the decisions it made, and events tied up with these. These are closely linked with the subject of Mr X’s appeal. He exercised his statutory right of review and later started a court appeal. This means we have no jurisdiction to investigate these events.
9. The main crux of Mr X’s complaint is the Council’s delay with its fresh decision from December 2024 to December 2025; this is the general key issue I am considering. I have not considered events after the Council issued its new decision as they do not fall within the scope of his original complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I discussed the complaint with Mr X and considered his views.
11. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its written responses and information it provided, as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
12. Mr X and the Council 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

Background

13. In early 2024, Mr X made a homelessness application to the Council. The next month, the Council accepted the relief duty. It decided it did not have an interim duty to accommodate Mr X. It said he was not in priority need. Mr X asked for a review, mentioning his mental health conditions.
14. Mr X spent a short period in hospital due to mental health concerns as he had no accommodation. After this, the Council provided Mr X with interim accommodation at a hotel while it reviewed its duty to him.
15. In summer 2024, the Council sent Mr X a letter ending the relief duty. It decided he was not in priority need and would end the interim accommodation. Mr X asked for a review. The Council wrote to him with the outcome; it upheld its decision.
16. The next month, Mr X’s solicitor lodged a court appeal against the Council’s decision he was not in priority need. In December 2024, the Council sent Mr X a formal letter. It confirmed during his appeal, it decided to withdraw its decision and agreed to carry out a fresh review. It would issue a new decision.

What happened – summary of key relevant events I am considering

17. In June 2025, Mr X formally complained to the Council. He said the last contact he had was 6 months previously, after it confirmed it would make a new decision. He had still not received this and wanted it as soon as possible.
18. In August 2025, the Council made Mr X an offer of a flat as alternative interim accommodation. Mr X said he was still waiting the new decision about his homelessness. He would not move until he received this.
19. In October 2025, the Council sent a Stage 1 response to Mr X’s complaint, upholding it. It apologised for its late reply and for its lack of contact. It asked the caseworker to contact him soon. Mr X then complained to us.

Events since Mr X’s complaint to us

20. In December 2025, the Council wrote to Mr X with its new decision. It decided he was eligible, homeless and in priority need. It confirmed it was now providing his current accommodation under the main housing duty. It considered it suitable and outlined his right to request a review if he disagreed.
21. A few days later, in response to our contact, the Council sent a Stage 2 complaint response to Mr X. It accepted poor management of his case, and failure to act in line with its expected service standards. It found fault with its delays in issuing a final decision after overturning its previous decision. It outlined steps it would take to prevent similar incidents in future. It apologised for the distress caused and offered Mr X a remedy of £450.
22. In early 2026, the Council offered him alternative accommodation and he has since moved. Mr X confirmed he is happy with this placement. In discussing his complaint with him, he said he told the Council several times his previous interim hotel accommodation was unsuitable for him.

The Council’s response to my enquiries

23. In response to my enquiries, the Council said it should have been proactive with Mr X’s case to make sure it made the new decision within a reasonable timeframe. It said its actions were not sufficient or robust to ensure this was done. It would reinforce the importance of timely and effective managerial escalation in future cases to relevant staff.
24. The Council said from its records, it was not clear Mr X told it the hotel interim accommodation was not suitable for him. I asked Mr X and he said he verbally told his case officer on the phone a few times. He said he asked his solicitor to help with his suitability concerns, but the Council did not respond. He did not have evidence such as written emails as his solicitor was no longer involved.

Analysis

Delays, communication, and complaint handling

25. The Council took 12 months to send Mr X a new formal decision about his homelessness, after it withdrew its previous decision. This far exceeded the expected 8-week timeframe outlined in the Homelessness Code of Guidance. The Council accepted it was at fault for this avoidable delay. It also accepted poor case management, and it did not communicate effectively with Mr X about this pending decision. The Council also took 4 months to respond to Mr X’s complaint at Stage 1. This is fault and significantly outside its complaints policy timeframes (it said it should respond within 10 working days).

Interim accommodation

26. The Council offered interim emergency accommodation in spring 2024. Mr X said he told the Council this was unsuitable from the start. I am not considering that far back for reasons outlined in Paragraph 6.
27. But looking during the period I am considering (in Paragraph 9), I have not seen supporting evidence Mr X made his concerns about suitability known to the Council for it to consider or act on. He did not mention suitability concerns in his formal complaint to it. I also note the Council made an offer of alternative flat interim accommodation in August 2025. He sent an email declining to move from the hotel based on not having received his new decision. I appreciate he had his reasons, but he had the opportunity to move and that was his choice. On balance, taking all this into account, I have not made a finding of fault on this part.

Injustice and remedy offered

28. The faults with delays, poor communication and complaints handling caused significant frustration and distress to Mr X, impacting on his mental health and vulnerabilities. He had prolonged uncertainty about his homelessness situation for far longer than necessary. He had avoidable frustration with complaints handling due to the delayed response.
29. The Council apologised for all of the above and offered a remedy of £450 to recognise the injustice caused. I welcome the Council’s acknowledgement of its faults and positive officer. I consider this in line with our guidance on remedies. It is open to Mr X to accept this if he wishes, but I do not recommend anything further.

Back to top

Decision

30. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has offered a suitable remedy for the injustice caused and I do not recommend anything further. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman