Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a homelessness case. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault its decision-making to justify our involvement. It was reasonable for Miss X to use the statutory appeals procedure to challenge the Council’s review decision.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained that the Council mishandled her homelessness application. She says the Council failed to follow its role in her personailsed housing plan, its staff acted inappropriately and she was offered unsuitable accommdoation. When she refused the Council’s offer it discharged its homelessness duty and closed her case.

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)

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. Miss X was accepted under the Council’s homelessness Prevention duty and subsequently under the Relief duty. This involved the issue of a personalised housing plan which she says the Council did not adhere to, and then an offer of accommodation. The Council made it clear that this would be a final offer and that if she refused it then it would discharge its homelessness duty.
6. From the documents submitted the Council gave Miss X sufficient time to view and accept the property. In early September 2025, they advised her that she could accept the property and submit a review. She initially accepted the property and then declined it as she did not want to be liable for the tenancy.
7. The Council’s s.202 review concluded that the offer was suitable and it subsequently discharged its homelessness duty. These reviews carry a right of appeal to the County Court and as Miss X had been supported by a housing advice body it was reasonable for her to challenge this decision. She could have raised her concerns about the conduct of the Council’s officers in assessing her case as part of her appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint against the Council’s handling of her homelessness case. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault its decision-making to justify our involvement. It was reasonable for Miss X to use the appeals procedure to challenge this decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman