Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s homelessness. This is because we are satisfied with the action taken by the Council and we could not add to its investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council:
1. failed to take a homelessness application when it should have and instead told her to approach a different council;
2. falsified its case records; and
3. delayed responding to her complaint.
2. As a result, Ms X said the Council has prevented her from accessing housing support and caused her significant distress.
3. Ms X wants the Council to carry out training with its officers to prevent recurrence of these faults and seeks a higher financial remedy than that already offered by the Council.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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 we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation or we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), 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 approached the Council as homeless in 2025. The officer, Officer 1, said in their notes that Ms X had been offered support but refused it. Ms X said these notes were inaccurate. She said the officer instead told her to approach a different council.
8. Ms X approached the Council again a few months later. This officer, Officer 2, told her to approach a different council and the notes reflected this.
9. Ms X made a complaint. She said Officer 1’s records were falsified and she had now on two occasions been told to go to a different council, where she did not have a local connection, without her homelessness application being properly assessed.
10. The Council investigated her complaint and accepted it had been at fault. It said Officer 1 no longer worked for the Council so they could not establish why there was such a discrepancy between Ms X’s recollection and Officer 1’s notes. However it said regardless, a homelessness assessment should have been completed following both of Ms X’s approaches to the Council.
11. To remedy the impact of its failure to carry out a homelessness assessment, the Council:
• apologised to Ms X;
• spoke with Officer 2 to prevent recurrence of the fault in future;
• offered to pay Ms X £250 to reflect the injustice caused; and
• several days after the final complaint response, it carried out a homelessness assessment. This assessment happened approximately four months after Ms X first approached the Council for support.
12. I have decided we will not investigate Ms X’s complaint further because we could not add to the Council’s investigation. We have considered that the outcome of the homelessness assessment suggests it is unlikely Ms X missed out on any alternative accommodation during this time. Therefore the Council’s apology and its offer of £250 is appropriate to remedy the frustration caused by the delay in carrying out a homelessness assessment. The Council also took appropriate action to prevent a recurrence of fault by addressing the matter with staff.
13. Regarding the complaint about falsified records, we would not be able to prove this due to limited available evidence and so again, we could not add to the Council’s investigation. We will therefore not investigate this part of the complaint further.
14. As we are not investigating the substantive matter, we will not investigate how the Council managed Ms X’s complaint as it is not a good use of public money to investigate standalone complaint handling.
15. The outcome of the homelessness assessment suggests it is unlikely Ms X missed out on any alternative accommodation during this time. However if Ms X wishes to complain about the homelessness assessment carried out or any lack of support since then, she can make a new complaint to the Council about this later period. Ms X can ask us to consider this once it has completed all stages of the Council’s complaints process.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we are satisfied with the action the Council has already taken and we could not add to the investigation already carried out by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman