Summary: A woman complained that the Council wrongly placed her in supported housing she did not need, and failed to take responsibility for the problems she subsequently experienced in the accommodation. However the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint, mainly because it was made late.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Miss B, complained the Council wrongly placed her in supported housing in 2015 despite her having no support needs. In particular Miss B complained the Council made false statements about her in a referral form to the supported housing provider and fabricated other evidence in her case. Miss B also said the Council was wrongly paying housing benefit (HB) in respect of services from her landlord she did not receive, and that it was not doing enough to help her move to more suitable accommodation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if, for example, we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely an investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

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 an authority has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Miss B provided with her complaint and her comments when we spoke on the telephone. I also considered Miss B’s comments in response to a draft version of this decision. In addition I took account of information from the Council about its responses to Miss B’s complaints.

Back to top

What I found

5. In 2015 Miss B approached the Council for help with housing. The Council’s Single Homeless Team (SHT) subsequently referred Miss B to a housing association providing shared, supported housing. Miss B moved into the supported housing in August 2015.
6. But Miss B said the agency providing support at the property told her the accommodation was not suitable for her as she did not need its services, and she should go back to the Council and ask it to re-house her.
7. Miss B then complained to the Council about her placement in the supported housing. She said the SHT had not explained the accommodation was supported, and she believed it had fabricated information about her when making the referral. But the Council did not accept its SHT officers had done anything wrong.
8. In early 2016 Miss B complained to the Housing Ombudsman about her housing situation. Later that year Miss B also escalated her complaint with the Council, and it sent a final response to her in March 2017.
9. In May 2017 Miss B complained to the Ombudsman about the Council placing her in supported accommodation and the officers who dealt with her at that time.
10. But we decided we should not investigate Miss B’s complaint because she had made it late. This was because the law says normally we cannot investigate complaints made to us more than 12 months after the complainant became aware of the issue in question. We also found there were no grounds to exercise discretion about this matter.
11. In April 2018 Miss B complained again to the Ombudsman about what happened when the Council placed her in the supported housing in 2015.
12. In particular Miss B disputed that the SHT interviewed her at the time, as the Council claimed. Miss B also said the Council had lied in the referral form by saying she had never managed her own tenancy and that she required support to address mental health needs. In addition Miss B complained the accommodation was unsafe because of break-ins, her possessions had been damaged and her post had gone missing.
13. We referred Miss B’s complaint to the Council for consideration under its complaints procedure. During this process Miss B added a complaint about the Council paying a substantial amount of HB to her landlord in respect of service charges for care and support she did not need or receive.
14. In 2018 Miss B also made Freedom of Information requests to the Council about her case, as a result of which it provided copies of the supported housing referral form the SHT completed in 2015.
15. The Council sent Miss B a final complaint response in February 2019. In particular it said there was no evidence to indicate Miss B’s meeting with the SHT in May 2015 did not take place, or that the officer who dealt with her case fabricated information about her.
16. The Council also said the agency providing support at the accommodation had not substantiated what Miss B had said about safety concerns and other incidents at the property. In addition the Council confirmed that no part of Miss B’s service charge related to care and support, but she would need to contact her landlord, the housing association, to query matters further as they were responsible for setting her rent.
17. Miss B was unhappy with the Council’s response and re-submitted her complaint to the Ombudsman in April 2019.

Back to top

Analysis

18. However, having considered the information provided in Miss B’s case, I have reached the view that we should not investigate her complaint.
19. This is mainly because we have already looked at the main issue in question about her placement in supported housing when she complained to us in 2017. It also seems very unlikely we could carry out a fair investigation or reach meaningful conclusions now about events in 2015. In addition there appears no sign of fault by the Council in other respects which would warrant our intervention in Miss B’s case.
20. The Ombudsman would normally not re-consider issues already looked at in a previous complaint unless there is significant new information which might affect the earlier decision. But I do not see that Miss B has provided any new information which would justify us changing our view about her previous complaint in 2017, and I still consider there is evidence she came to us over 12 months after she first became aware of the issues in her case.
21. Miss B said that part of the reason she did not come to us before 2017 was that the Council did not respond to her complaints at the time. But as we noted in our decision statement about Miss B’s previous complaint, it is reasonable to expect her to have contacted us sooner if she thought there was delay in the Council’s complaints process.
22. Miss B also said she only knew the full picture about the Council fabricating the referral form in 2015 when she received a copy of the form in the responses to her Freedom of Information requests in 2018. But even if we accepted that Miss B’s complaint about this issue is not late, I am not convinced we would be justified in using our resources to investigate now events dating back to 2015.
23. In particular I consider it is very unlikely we could carry out a sound investigation now about what happened well over four years ago, especially given that some of the officers involved no longer work for the Council. In addition it appears there are sharply conflicting accounts of events but few records of what took place. In the circumstances I very much doubt we would be able to uncover enough objective evidence now to justify a finding of fault against the Council.
24. Miss B complained that the Council has been fraudulently paying HB to her landlord to cover service charges for support she does not need or receive. But I consider the jurisdictional restriction on us pursuing late complaints also applies to this matter. In particular I note Miss B queried this issue with the Council in April 2017, but she has only recently raised this with us as a complaint.
25. Miss B also complained to the Council about recent incidents at her accommodation, including about people entering her room without permission and destroying or damaging her possessions, and about her post being intercepted. She also complained about the support agency interfering in her personal life. Miss B felt the Council had not done enough to assist her in response to these problems, particularly regarding re-housing.
26. But I am not convinced there is sign of fault by the Council in these respects. In particular it appears the Council made appropriate enquiries to the support agency in response to Miss B’s concerns about incidents at the property but found no grounds to pursue any matters. In addition I consider the Council gave Miss B suitable advice that she should complain to the support agency about these issues as they were the appropriate body to address her concerns.
27. Furthermore I suggest the Council has offered Miss B suitable help in finding alternative accommodation. In particular it has offered to pay rent in advance and a deposit to assist her in securing independent private rented accommodation if she is able to identify an affordable property.

Back to top

Final decision

28. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that the Council wrongly placed her in supported housing in 2015 and has failed to take responsibility for the subsequent problems she has faced in her accommodation. This is mainly because Miss B has complained late about these issues, and there is no good reason for us exercise discretion and pursue matters now in her case.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman