Summary: The Council was at fault, it delayed making a decision on Mr X’s housing application by more than 15 months, failed to address Mr X’s concerns about officer conduct in its complaint responses and failed to respond to Mr X’s requests for support to make rent payments. The Council’s failures caused Mr X uncertainty and avoidable distress. The Council agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mr X to remedy the injustice caused. The Council agreed to make a service improvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council handled his housing application when he reported as homeless after fleeing domestic abuse. He said the Council treated him poorly, failed to place him near his support network, and did not provide clear rent payment information which led to him owing debt.
2. Mr X said these failings caused him avoidable distress, as well as emotional and financial hardship. He wants the Council to move him closer to his support network as soon as possible.

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. 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

5. I have investigated what happened between August 2024 and October 2025 when the Council issued its final complaint response.
6. I have also investigated matters that happened after the Council’s final response to Mr X in October 2025 because I consider they are matters of continuing fault and injustice, and I have sufficient evidence to reach a sound and balanced decision.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Mr 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 law and guidance

Applications

9. 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)

The relief duty

10. 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 (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

The main housing duty

11. 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 (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198).

Assessments and Personal Housing Plans

12. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent 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 should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)

Assessing homelessness and Domestic abuse

13. The Homelessness Code of Guidance (the Code) says councils should obtain an account of domestic abuse and support the victim to outline their experience. However, it says if the applicant’s experience has been documented already by a domestic abuse service – where possible – councils should utilise existing statements to avoid asking the victim to re-live their experience unnecessarily. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, Chapter 21)
14. The Code says councils should not have a blanket approach toward domestic abuse which requires corroborative or police evidence to be provided, as in some cases this kind of evidence is not available due to lack of adult witnesses or victims being too afraid or ashamed to report incidents to family, friends or the police. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, Chapter 21)

Interim accommodation - domestic abuse

15. If a council has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless as a result of domestic abuse, it should make interim accommodation available to the applicant immediately whilst it undertakes its investigations. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 21.25)

What happened

Background

16. Mr X was on the housing register but remained living with his parents in the family home. Mr X explained his family relationship became strained after both of his parents developed health problems. This led to frequent arguments and restrictions being placed on his use of the home. He further said daily arguments escalated to physical and emotional abuse. and said that, over time, he was placed under significant pressure to leave the property which impacted his own mental health. He made unsuccessful bids for social housing and was unable to afford accommodation in the private rented sector.

Matters subject to investigation

17. In August 2024, He informed the Council he was at risk of becoming homeless due to domestic abuse. Mr X said the Council failed to respond to his initial contact. He contacted the Council again at the end of August.
18. In September the Council assessed Mr X and accepted it owed him the relief duty and offered him interim accommodation in property A which he accepted. The Council sent him the relevant paperwork including an occupancy agreement and conditions of stay. It further said it had sent a rent card and payment instructions by post.
19. The Council then carried out a housing assessment, during which Mr X said the assessor was rude and inappropriate, particularly for suggesting he contacted a women’s support group. Mr X said he was upset especially as the assessor seemed to disagree with his view that men can also be victims of domestic abuse.
20. In January 2025, Mr X contacted the Council to make it aware he had not received the payment card and asked for instructions on how to make rent payments.
21. In February 2025, Mr X contacted the Council a further three times but failed to get a response to his questions about how to pay the rent.
22. At the end of February, Mr X contacted the Council to request an update on his housing application. The Council responded the same day, advising that his application was still under review and that he should remain at property A. The Council also informed him he did not currently have an allocated housing officer, but a new officer was due to start shortly.
23. In April 2025, the Council informed Mr X it had assigned a new housing officer to his case. It explained that it could not address his request to move closer to his support network while his application remained under review. The Council also apologised for issues relating to his payment card and confirmed it had issued it in February 2025. It said the new housing officer would urgently investigate the matter and help resolve any outstanding rent arrears.
24. In late July, the Council informed Mr X he owed £7,500 in rent arrears. Mr X complained the same day stating it did not provide a way for him to pay rent while he was in interim accommodation which led to the arrears, and that the accommodation was too far from his support network.
25. In August Mr X contacted the Council to discuss a payment plan for the rent arrears he had incurred.
26. In September the Council responded to Mr X’s complaint. It apologised for not responding to his messages between January and August 2025 agreeing it had failed to respond to his multiple enquires about how to pay the rent. It agreed a payment plan with Mr X and offered him a payment of £175 – (£150 for its lack of communication and £25 for his time and effort to complain) - to remedy any injustice caused by the Council’s lack of communication.
27. The Council further said that it had noted his request to be located closer to his support network as an important factor on his housing application and that his housing officer would provide him with an update on his application.
28. Shortly afterwards Mr X escalated his complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaints process. He remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response as it failed to address his complaint about the rude and inappropriate behaviour by its housing officer during the housing assessment. He further said the Council refused to acknowledge his interim accommodation was unsuitable due to his mental health conditions and the distance away from his support network and that it could not move him as he was not properly on the system which the Council said was due to staffing resource issues.
29. In October 2025, the Council issued its stage two response, stating that no decision had yet been made on Mr X’s housing application, and therefore he had no right to request a review of his accommodation’s suitability. It explained that, in the absence of significant concerns such as safety risks or disrepair, there were limited grounds to relocate him at that stage. While it had considered his medical conditions, they did not meet the threshold for a move during the ongoing assessment. The Council also apologised for delays in processing his application which it said were due to staffing shortages. It said it had already offered him a financial remedy of £175 to address this delay in processing his housing application. There is no record Mr X accepted the Council’s offer.
30. Mr X remained unhappy about the Council’s response and complained to us.
31. Following our enquiries, the Council confirmed it did not investigate Mr X’s complaint regarding the housing officer’s conduct during the housing assessment in September 2024 at either stage of its complaints process. It also acknowledged there was limited correspondence between the Council and Mr X between September 2024 and October 2025. The Council further confirmed it had accepted the main housing duty in February 2026 and following Mr X’s request in March 2026, it carried out a suitability review and concluded in April 2026 that property A was suitable.

My findings

Handling of Mr X’s housing application

32. Mr X contacted the Council in August 2024 as he was at risk of becoming homeless. The Council assessed Mr X, accepted it owed him the relief duty and offered him interim accommodation, which he accepted. After accepting the relief duty, the law says the Council should either discharge this duty or accept the main housing duty after 56 days if the applicant remains homeless and eligible.
33. The Council should have decided on Mr X’s housing application by the end of October 2024. It did not make another decision on Mr X’s application until February 2026 when it accepted the main housing duty. This was a delay of over 15 months and fault and delayed Mr X’s statutory right to request a suitability review of property A. This caused Mr X frustration and uncertainty. However, the Council subsequently found the accommodation suitable, so the delay did not result in Mr X remaining in unsuitable accommodation.
34. Following our enquiries the Council told us it embedded a new procedure within its Homelessness Service in January 2026 to ensure the timely reallocation of cases. We will continue to monitor progress of this through our casework and so, further service improvement recommendations - relating to tackling the delays in making decisions on housing applications - are not required at this time.

Failure to provide rent payment information

35. The Council accepted in its stage one complaint response that it did not reply to Mr X when he asked for help with rent payments which was fault. This caused Mr X uncertainty and avoidable distress. However, as Mr X was aware of his obligation to pay rent, the Council remained entitled to recover any arrears, and it agreed a repayment plan. In addition, the Council apologised to Mr X and offered £175 to acknowledge the injustice caused by its poor communication. This is suitable to remedy the uncertainty and avoidable distress this caused.

Council officer’s conduct during housing assessment

36. The Council accepted it failed to address Mr X’s concerns about the housing officer’s conduct in its complaint responses. This was fault which caused Mr X avoidable distress. The Council said it is committed to supporting all survivors of domestic abuse and provides regular staff training on the subject.

Back to top

Actions

37. Within one month of the final decision the Council agreed to take the following actions:
1. Apologise to and make a payment of £675 to Mr X in recognition of the uncertainty and avoidable distress caused by the Council’s:
1. delay in making a decision on Mr X’s housing application (£500),
2. failure to address Mr X’s complaint about the Council officer’s conduct in its complaint responses; and
3. lack of communication when Mr X requested support in making the rent payments (£175 already offered by the Council).

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. Ensure all relevant staff, including complaint handlers, receive training on domestic abuse. The Council should provide evidence of recent training delivered to staff to support their ability to identify domestic abuse, respond sensitively, and signpost applicants to appropriate advice and support services.
2. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

39. I have found fault and the Council agreed to remedy the injustice caused by the fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman