Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation offered to Mr X. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. It was also open to Mr X to use his legal right to appeal to court on the suitability of each property.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council failed to provide suitable temporary accommodation that met his medical and support needs.
2. He complains he needed suitable accommodation close to his family and hospital services. He says he has mental health has been adversely affected.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate complaints about the provision or management of social housing by a council acting as a registered social housing provider. (Local Government Act 1974, paragraph 5A schedule 5, as amended)
4. People may complain to us about injustice caused by:
• ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ by a public organisation we could investigate; or
• the actions of an organisation in connection with privately arranged adult social care.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1) or section 34C(1)(a)).

5. 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 (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), or section 34B(8)).
6. 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

7. I considered information provided by the complainant.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Firstly, we cannot look at any tenancy management issues pre-dating Mr X’s homelessness application. This is because we are prohibited from considering the actions of the Council acting as a registered social housing provider. These issues are subject to the jurisdiction of the Housing Ombudsman.
10. The law means we can choose only to investigate a complaint where the person has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by the body complained about. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
11. While I recognise the circumstances of Mr X’s complaint affected him, there is no evidence of a significant ongoing injustice to warrant us investigating.
12. Based on the information seen, it appears Mr X refused accommodation at one location due to concerns about space, facilities, forthcoming surgery, mobility needs and proximity to family support. The Council says Mr X later declined accommodation at another location because the lift was not working. And that he declined another offer due to concerns about fire damage, communal facilities and distance from his support network. Therefore, it does seem the Council subsequently offered alternative accommodation on several occasions after Mr X reported his concerns.
13. The Council has already considered Mr X’s concerns through its complaint’s procedure and accepted fault in relation to the assessment of his longer-term medical and support needs. It has apologised, identified service improvements, reassessed his medical requirements and updated the criteria to be applied when identifying future temporary accommodation.
14. It is also the case that Mr X could have asked for a formal review of the suitability of the accommodation offered. If he was still dissatisfied after any review decision by the Council, it was open to him to use his legal right to appeal to the county court on a point of law. The Ombudsman normally expects complainants who have statutory review and appeal rights available to make use of them.
15. Finally, we will not investigate separately the way the Council handled the complaint and correspondence. This is because there is not enough evidence of a separate injustice to warrant it.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate this complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. It was also open to Mr X to use his right to appeal to court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman