Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to handle Miss X's homelessness assessment and complaint fairly. This is because it was reasonable for Miss X to request a review of the Council’s decision, then to use her statutory right of appeal to county court. It is not proportionate to investigate the complaints handling issue on its own.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to handle her homelessness assessment and complaint fairly. She says sensitive disclosures she made were not accurately or sensitively recorded. Miss X also says concerns about the officer’s unprofessional conduct was not considered properly.
2. Miss X says this has caused her significant distress. She wants the Council to acknowledge its errors, apologise, review its complaints handling service and implement service improvements.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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 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))
5. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. In November 2025, the Council decided Miss X was not homeless. It told her she could ask for a review of that decision within 21 days. Miss X has not provided evidence that she requested a review.
9. If Miss X had requested a review and the Council had upheld its decision, she would then have had a statutory right of appeal to the county court on a point of law. We normally expect people to use the review and appeal rights available to them. It was reasonable for Miss X to use those rights if she considered the Council’s assessment or decision was wrong. We are not an appeal body, and the court is better placed to decide such matters. Legal aid may be available, subject to eligibility. I have seen no reason why it would have been unreasonable to expect Miss X to use the statutory review and appeal process, so we will not investigate this part of her complaint.
10. While Miss X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about.  We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it was reasonable for her to request a review of the Council’s decision, then use her statutory right of appeal to the county court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman