Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her homelessness case. Parts of the complaint are late and there are no good reasons to investigate them now. For the parts that are not late, we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome or there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of her homelessness case. She says the Council:
• placed her in unsuitable temporary accommodation between 2022 and 2025;
• wrongly decided she was intentionally homeless and refused her late review request;
• wrongly evicted her from temporary accommodation; and
• mishandled her discretionary housing payment application.
2. Ms X says the Council’s failures have caused her prolonged housing insecurity and significant distress. She wants the Council to acknowledge and apologise for its failures. She also wants the Council to review its processes and consider appropriate remedies for the injustice caused.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal; or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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 courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
8. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. We will not investigate Ms X's complaints about the suitability of her temporary accommodation prior to 2025. These matters are late and there are no good reasons to investigate them now.
10. In 2025, Ms X made further complaints about the suitability of her accommodation. However, by this time the Council had ended its main housing duty and she had been evicted from her temporary accommodation. In those circumstances, the Council was no longer under a duty to consider whether the accommodation remained suitable. There is therefore no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation on this point.

Intentional homelessness decision and late review request

11. In April 2025, the Council ended its main housing duty after deciding Ms X had become intentionally homeless because of rent arrears. The decision letter explained her right to request a review within 21 days.
12. In July 2025, Ms X asked for a review of the Council’s intentional homeless decision. The Council refused to accept the request because it was made outside the statutory time limit.
13. We will not investigate the Council's decision that Ms X became intentionally homeless. The evidence shows it considered the reasons for her rent arrears and the information she provided about her personal circumstances against the relevant legislative criteria. It explained the reasons for its decision and told Ms X about her right to request a review.
14. If Ms X disagreed with the Council's decision, she needed to request a review within 21 days. As she did not do so, the Council was entitled to refuse her late review request. It is not clear how the Council exercised its use of discretion when making that decision, however, there is nothing worthwhile to be achieved through investigating this now. Miss X has secured temporary accommodation with another council. If her circumstances have changed, she can make a further homelessness application to the Council.

Eviction from temporary accommodation

15. We cannot investigate the Council's decision to evict Ms X from her temporary accommodation because she has commenced court proceedings about that matter. The law prevents us from investigating issues that have been considered by, or are before, the courts.

Discretionary housing application

16. In August 2025, Ms X applied for discretionary housing payment for the period June 2023 to March 2025. The Council refused Ms X’s application because she was not in receipt of housing benefit during that period.
17. A discretionary housing payment can only be awarded where a person is entitled to housing benefit. I acknowledge that Ms X disputes that she was not entitled to housing benefit during the relevant period. However, any complaint about the Council's decision to suspend or end her housing benefit is now late. In these circumstances, the Council was entitled to refuse her discretionary housing payment application. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

18. We will not investigate Ms X's complaint. Parts of the complaint are late and there are no good reasons to investigate them now. For the remaining issues, we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome, the law prevents us from investigating, or there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman