Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his homelessness applications. Some of the applications are late without good reason to investigate now. It was reasonable for him use his right of appeal on the most recent application.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the council’s handling of his homelessness applications and says it wrongly refused him homelessness assistance.
2. Mr X says the Council’s decisions have caused him significant hardship, including having to leave the district in search of affordable housing.
3. Mr X wants the Council to reassess his homelessness applications and provide him help without delay.

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 it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. 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)
6. 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)
7. The County Court deals with appeals about homelessness decisions.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by Mr X.
9. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. Some of the decisions that Mr X refers to were made more than 12 months before he complained to us. This makes this aspect of his complaint late. If Mr X was dissatisfied with those decisions then it was reasonable for him to complain to us at that time. Therefore, I will not investigate the earlier homelessness decisions.
11. In relation to the latest homelessness decision, Mr X had the option to ask the Council for a review. I have seen no evidence to suggest he has done this.
12. Even if Mr X did ask for a review and was dissatisfied with the outcome, he could have appealed the decision to the County Court, which is the appropriate body to consider appeals about homelessness decisions. I have seen no evidence to suggest it was unreasonable for Mr X to appeal and therefore I will not investigate his complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaints because some of them are late without good reason to investigate now. For those that are in time, it was reasonable for him ask for a review.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman