Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s homelessness and housing register applications. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision not to provide emergency accommodation. Mr X can use his right of review and then appeal about the suitability of the private tenancy the Council secured for him.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his homelessness and housing register applications. He says the Council:
1. failed to provide emergency housing despite knowing about his medical conditions;
2. ended its duty into an unaffordable and unsuitable private tenancy;
3. cancelled his application for social housing despite telling him it would not do so; and
4. failed to provide any help and support while Mr X was homeless and sleeping in a van.

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, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, 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))

3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Councils have a duty to provide emergency accommodation to someone if they have reason to believe the person might be homeless and might have a priority need. The Council gathered information from Mr X about his medical conditions and sought advice from its medical adviser. It decided it did not have reason to believe Mr X might be in priority need and so did not provide emergency accommodation.
7. We are not an appeal body. That means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was right. Our role is to consider whether the Council made decisions properly, in line with the relevant law and guidance. If it did, we cannot question the decision it made. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council decided not to provide accommodation to Mr X to justify investigating this part of the complaint further.
8. Mr X has a statutory right of review and then appeal to court on a point of law about the suitability of the private tenancy the Council secured to end its duty. It is reasonable for him to use this alternative remedy and so we will not investigate.
9. In response to Mr X’s complaint, the Council accepted it wrongly closed his application for social housing. It apologised and said it would reinstate the application. It agreed to backdate the application to the date of his previous one. The backdate puts Mr X back into the position he would have been but for the fault. There is no worthwhile outcome we could achieve by investigating this part of the complaint further.
10. The Council accepted that although it gave Mr X a personalised housing plan, it did not tell Mr X about services that could help him while he was homeless or refer him to any specialist services. It apologised for this and said it would provide training to its officers to ensure this did not happen again. This is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused to Mr X and so we will not investigate this part of the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault and he has a right of review and appeal it is reasonable for him to use. There is no worthwhile outcome for us to achieve by investigating other matters.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman