What do complaints teach us about end of life care?

See our latest report on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.

Homelessness


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • Leeds City Council (25 027 485)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 07-Jul-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of accommodation previously offered to Miss X and her current temporary accommodation. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, and Miss X has the right to request a review of the suitability of her current temporary accommodation.

  • Westminster City Council (25 014 061)

    Statement Not upheld Homelessness 07-Jul-2026

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council wrongly closed his homelessness application and failed to provide accommodation when he was sleeping rough. We find no fault in the way the Council decided to close his application and therefore we cannot question the outcome

  • Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (25 021 813)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 07-Jul-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s housing. This is because the issues complained of carried a right of appeal to a county court which it was reasonable for her to use.

  • London Borough of Hackney (25 023 741)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 07-Jul-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her homelessness case. Parts of the complaint are late and there are no good reasons to investigate them now. For the parts that are not late, we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome or there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

  • London Borough of Hackney (25 025 465)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 06-Jul-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s assessment of the suitability of her temporary accommodation. This is because it was reasonable for her to use her right of appeal to the County Court.

  • Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council (25 015 641)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 06-Jul-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because the Council has provided a proportionate remedy for her injustice. An investigation would not achieve more for Miss X.

  • Manchester City Council (25 017 215)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 06-Jul-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s offers of unsuitable accommodation at more than one address under its homelessness duty. It was reasonable for Ms X to appeal the review of the decisions to the County Court. She subsequently applied for judicial review of the Council’s decisions to the High Court and we have no jurisdiction to investigate matters which have been subject to court proceedings, regardless of the outcome.

  • Dorset Council (25 017 911)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Homelessness 06-Jul-2026

    Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with Mr Y’s homeless application and housing priority. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

  • London Borough of Barnet (25 009 476)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 05-Jul-2026

    Summary: Ms X complained about heating and hot water at her temporary accommodation. We found fault by the Council through delay and poor complaint handling which meant Ms X paid for communal heating she did not receive and caused her avoidable inconvenience. The Council has agreed to apologise, reimburse some of the heating and hot water costs and make a symbolic payment to Ms X. The Council will also ensure tenants receive adequate information about communal heating systems.

  • London Borough of Newham (25 001 225)

    Statement Upheld Homelessness 05-Jul-2026

    Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s handling of his homelessness application, his housing priority, and its review delays. The Council was at fault. It incorrectly handled Mr X’s homelessness, there were review delays by the Council, and its communication was poor. As a result, Mr X suffered distress and frustration, and he missed the opportunity to be relieved of his homelessness sooner. The Council has agreed to make symbolic payments, reimburse a court fee, and send us evidence of the actions it says it has taken to improve its service.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings