Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the failure by the Council to provide housing support for a single mother at risk of street homelessness for one night. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X, on behalf of a small charity, complained the Council failed to reimburse the charity for the cost of arranging hotel accommodation when it failed to do so.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

What happened

6. Ms X was acting as representative for Ms Y. Ms Y was homeless but was not eligible for housing assistance, so a referral was made to the Council’s children’s social care team to consider whether to arrange housing support under section 17 of the Children Act 1989.
7. Ms X complained the Council failed to arrange accommodation for Ms Y and her child for one night in 2025. Therefore, the charity had to step in to arrange a hotel to prevent a mother and young child being left street homeless. Ms X complained the Council later refused to reimburse the charity for the cost of doing so, after it submitted an invoice.
8. In response to my enquiries, the Council provided records to show the friends Ms Y had been staying with had agreed she could stay a further two nights, the first of which was the night the charity arranged the hotel accommodation.

My assessment

9. It is not our role to determine whether the charity’s invoice is valid. It is more appropriate for the charity to take court action to pursue the debt it considers it is owed.
10. We could consider a complaint from Ms X, acting as representative of Ms Y, about the failure to arrange accommodation on the night in question. And, if we found fault, we could consider recommending a payment to remedy any injustice caused. However, the records provided do not indicate the Council was under a duty to provide accommodation that night. There is, therefore, insufficient evidence of fault to justify further investigation.
11. We do not investigate complaints about complaints handling unless we are also investigating the underlying complaint. In any case, the complaint was not put to the Council as a complaint by Ms X, on behalf of Ms Y, so it was not fault for it to treat it as a professional communication rather than a complaint.
12. For all the above reasons, we will not consider the complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman