Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his homelessness applications and housing circumstances. There is no worthwhile outcome from investigating the faults already acknowledged by the Council. It is reasonable for Mr X to pursue the ongoing statutory review process and any subsequent appeal rights. We will not investigate the housing register issue because the Council is still considering that application.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council did not properly consider his pregnant wife's vulnerability, disability, and medical needs when assessing his housing circumstances and eligibility for social housing. He says she is exposed to smoke and lives with fear and anxiety. He says their baby remains at risk from smoke exposure and poor living conditions. He is now his wife's full-time carer and is concerned about bringing their baby into accommodation that is overcrowded and unsuitable for a family of three.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, 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))

3. 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/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complains about the Council's handling of his homelessness applications, housing circumstances and medical needs.
8. I will not investigate the Council's actions before December 2024 because Mr X complained to us more than 12 months after these events and I have seen no good reason to exercise discretion.
9. Mr X complains the Council wrongly closed his April 2025 homelessness application. The Council says it decided there had been no material change in circumstances since its previous decision and decided not to accept a fresh homelessness application. I have not seen sufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
10. The Council has accepted that it failed to properly assess Mr X's November 2025 homelessness application. It identified that relevant evidence should have been considered and apologised for this failure. Following this, Mr X made a further homelessness application in December 2025. We will not investigate this because a one-month delay is not significant injustice enough to justify our involvement
11. The Council has accepted there were delays progressing the December 2025 homelessness application. The Council acknowledged there were delays due to service demand and staff vacancies, apologised to Mr X, and explained it had provided additional supervision and support to the case officer. The application progressed through the homelessness process; an offer of accommodation was made. We are unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome by investigating the delay further.
12. Mr X disagrees with the Council's assessment of his housing needs, its consideration of medical evidence, and the suitability of the accommodation offered. However, these are matters that carry a statutory right of review under section 202. Mr X has exercised that right and the review remains ongoing.
13. The Ombudsman would not normally investigate matters where there is an alternative legal remedy available, and it is reasonable for the Mr X to use that remedy. If dissatisfied with the outcome of the review, Mr X may have a further right of appeal to the County Court.
14. Mr X also says the Council failed to consider him for social housing and medical priority. The Council has confirmed it is currently processing his housing register application submitted in April 2026 which is still under consideration by the Council. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X's complaint because there is no worthwhile outcome. It is reasonable for Mr X to pursue the ongoing statutory review process and any subsequent appeal rights in relation to the Council's homelessness decisions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman