Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s offers of unsuitable accommodation at more than one address under its homelessness duty. It was reasonable for Ms X to appeal the review of the decisions to the County Court. She subsequently applied for judicial review of the Council’s decisions to the High Court and we have no jurisdiction to investigate matters which have been subject to court proceedings, regardless of the outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council placing her in and offering her accommodation which she says was not suitable for her needs as a homeless applicant. She also says her belongings were disposed of when she left an earlier address in 2024.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X says she was placed in unsuitable accommodation by the Council under its homelessness duty in 2023. She left the accommodation in 2024 and says that some of her belongings were disposed of after October 2024.
8. We will not exercise discretion to investigate these complaints which concern matters which took place more than 12 months before she complained to us. The time for receiving complaints is from when someone became aware of the matter they wished to complain about, not when they complained to the Council or it issued its final response. We would expect someone to complain to us within a year, even if they were dissatisfied with the time the complaints procedure was taking. I have seen no evidence to suggest that Ms X could not have complained to us sooner.
9. Ms X also complained about her accommodation which was offered in late 2024 and which she still occupied. She submitted a s.202 review of suitability of accommodation to the Council in June 2025 and the Council failed to complete the review until November, which is why she complained to us.
10. The Council failed to carry out the review within 56 days and did not seek an extension. This delay was fault but the outcome of the review was to uphold the original decision that the accommodation offered was suitable. As the delay did not affect the outcome there is insufficient injustice resulting which would warrant a remedy.
11. The review decision carried appeal rights under s.204 of the housing Act 1996 Part 7 and Ms X was advised about this in the decision. Ms X did not appeal to the County Court but instead she sought a judicial review of the Council’s decisions in the High Court. This was unsuccessful and we have no jurisdiction to investigate matters which have been subject to court proceedings, regardless of the outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s offers of unsuitable accommodation at more than one address under its homelessness duty. It was reasonable for Ms X to appeal the review of the decisions to the County Court. She subsequently applied for judicial review of the Council’s decisions to the High Court and we have no jurisdiction to investigate matters which have been subject to court proceedings, regardless of the outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman