Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about her housing. The Council has already investigated and provided a remedy for the delay in processing her homelessness application, and we could not achieve any worthwhile additional outcome by investigating this matter further. It is reasonable for Miss X to use her statutory rights to appeal the Council’s decisions about the suitability of accommodation and discharging its main housing duty.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council:

• delayed processing her homelessness application for approximately two years;
• failed to offer suitable accommodation; and
• unreasonably ended its homelessness duty towards her.

2. Miss X said these matters caused her significant distress and negatively affected her mental health. She wanted the Council to restore her position on the housing register with the correct priority, apologise, and provide financial redress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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
• 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))

4. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

Delay in processing the homelessness application

7. Miss X said the Council failed to properly consider information provided by Adult Social Services when assessing her housing needs. She said this contributed to a significant delay in the handling of her homelessness application.
8. The Council investigated this complaint and accepted there had been failings. It identified that relevant information had not been properly considered because of an administrative error. The Council apologised to Miss X, awarded her priority position one on its housing register, and offered £465 in recognition of the distress and uncertainty caused by the delay.
9. We will not investigate this matter further. The Council has already acknowledged fault, investigated the circumstances, and provided a remedy. We are unlikely to achieve a different outcome or add meaningfully to the Council’s investigation.

Suitability of accommodation and discharge of homelessness duty

10. In November 2025, the Council made Miss X an offer of accommodation which it considered suitable to meet its homelessness duties. Miss X refused the offer because she did not consider the accommodation suitable for her circumstances.
11. Following her refusal of the offer, the Council discharged its homelessness duty on the basis that suitable accommodation had been offered. Miss X exercised her statutory right to request a review of that decision.
12. The suitability of accommodation offered under homelessness legislation, and a council’s decision that its homelessness duty has ended, are matters for which Parliament has provided a statutory review and appeals process.
13. Miss X has already begun the reviews process in relation to the Council’s decision to end the main housing duty. It was also reasonable for her to do so for the Council’s decision the accommodation it offered was suitable, if she has not already done so. If she remains dissatisfied with the review decisions, she has a right of appeal to the county court on a point of law.
14. We will not investigate these matters because it is reasonable to expect Miss X to use the statutory appeal remedy available to her. The courts are better placed to determine disputes about a review decision and the suitability of accommodation offered under the homelessness legislation. Legal aid is available for this process. There is no reason the Ombudsman should investigate the matter instead.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman