Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his homelessness applications. Some parts are late with no good reason to investigate it now. On the parts that are not late, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his homelessness applications since 2023. He says he has suffered rough sleeping due to the Council’s failures. He wants the Council to end his homelessness and compensate him for its failures.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. In August and November 2024, the Council made decisions that Mr X was homeless but not in priority need. Mr X appealed one of the non-priority decisions to the County court. The Court dismissed Mr X’s appeal.
9. Mr X later approached the Council for homelessness assistance again. The Council declined to accept his new applications as there had been no change of circumstances since the previous non-priority decisions.
10. We will not investigate the Council’s homelessness decisions from 2024. This is because:
• They are late with no good reason to investigate them now. If Mr X was dissatisfied with the decisions in 2024 then it was reasonable for him to complain to us at that time; and
• The law prevents us from investigating the decision Mr X appealed to the County Court. This remains the case even though the County Court dismissed his appeal.
11. We also will not investigate the Council’s handling of Mr X’s most recent applications. The homelessness code for local authorities states that where a council receives a further application from an applicant it previously decided on, it may rely on its previous decision if there are no new facts or the new facts are of a trivial nature. Therefore, the Council was entitled to refuse Mr X’s further applications as there had been no change of circumstances. There is not enough evidence of fault in how it made this decision to justify us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because one part is late without good reason to investigate now. On the part that is not late, there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman