Summary: Ms X complained the Council delayed making a formal decision on her homeless application and in providing her with a Personalised Housing Plan when she approached it as a victim of domestic abuse. The Council was at fault due to delays in providing accommodation, in notifying her of the relief duty, in providing a Personalised Housing Plan and in the complaints process. These delays caused Ms X frustration and distress. The Council has agreed to make a symbolic payment of £500 to Ms X to acknowledge the frustration and distress caused. It has also agreed to remind staff of the need to issue timely decisions.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council delayed making a formal decision on her homeless application and in providing her with a Personalised Housing Plan when she approached it as a victim of domestic abuse. This delayed her opportunity to join the housing register and caused her uncertainty and distress. She also complains about the way she was treated and the lack of empathy demonstrated when she approached the Council, which she says added to her distress.

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 must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the information provided by Ms X and have discussed the complaint with her on the telephone.
5. I have considered the Council’s response to my enquiries and the relevant law and guidance.
6. I gave Ms X and the Council the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered any comments I received in reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The relevant law and guidance

Homelessness

7. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
8. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. The threshold for taking an application is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular council department. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
9. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
10. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan (PHP). PHPs should be kept under review. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance chapter 11).
11. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
12. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of his or her household. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
13. Most housing decisions should be confirmed in writing, and applicants have the right to ask for a review of the decision. If the person is unhappy with the outcome of a review, they may appeal to the County Court on a point of law.

Homelessness and domestic abuse

14. Chapter 21 of the Homelessness Code of Guidance sets out the Council’s duty to those who are homeless or threatened with homelessness as a result of domestic abuse.
15. From 5 July 2021, following the implementation of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 (The Act), a person has a priority need if they are homeless as a result of being a victim of domestic abuse.
16. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing.  All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
17. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme which enables housing applicants to bid for available properties which it advertises. Priority on the housing register is based on date and a points scheme. Points are awarded based on an assessment of circumstances. The Council awards 100 points to those it to whom it owes a homelessness duty.

What happened

18. On 23 September 2021 Ms X emailed a senior manager in the Council’s housing department. She asked for urgent assistance as she was a victim of domestic abuse. She said she would like to leave home but could not do so without support and guidance from the Council. The manager responded that they would pass the query to a member of the team to contact her. They advised Ms X to call 999 if she was in danger and provided the Council’s out of hours number.
19. A housing officer contacted Ms X the next day and Ms X agreed for the officer to make a referral to an Independent Domestic Violence Advocate (IDVA). The housing officer emailed Ms X that they would contact her for an assessment once she had spoken with the IDVA.
20. On 27 September the IDVA emailed the housing officer setting out the parts of the Council’s area Ms X needed to avoid living in. The housing officer emailed Ms X on 28 September asking her to provide some documentation and to call them to arrange an assessment. The IDVA also contacted the housing officer to advise they had spoken to Ms X and completed a safety plan. They had given her the number of the national domestic violence helpline and they were going to check the availability of refuges. The housing officer completed the housing assessment later that day.
21. The IDVA contacted the housing officer the next day to advise there was no availability at any refuges and there were long waiting lists. They said Ms X did not feel safe at home. The Housing officer responded that they had received Ms X’s documents that day and would see if there was any private rented accommodation available and, if not, they would request emergency/interim accommodation. They sought and got approval from their team leader to arrange accommodation that day. But they did not offer Ms X accommodation that day.
22. On 29 September 2021 the IDVA advised the housing officer Ms X said she had stayed with people she did not know but met on the street as she did not feel safe going home. She also had made a complaint about how she had been treated and that she felt disbelieved.
23. Ms X emailed the housing officer on 30 September as she had not heard for them since the assessment. Ms X said she felt she had been ignored and asked about the next course of action. The housing officer responded that they were in the process of requesting a placement for her in temporary accommodation. If it was not sorted that day the Council could place her in emergency accommodation for the night. The Council placed Ms X in emergency accommodation in a hotel that night.
24. On 1 October 2021 the Council placed Ms X in emergency accommodation. It wrote to Ms X to set out this was interim accommodation while the Council considered if it owed Ms X a housing duty. Ms X contacted the Council later that week to ask if the Council would consider placing her in accommodation nearer to where she worked due to the journey time. The Council says it generally considers a journey time of up to 90 minutes for employment was reasonable and Ms X’s journey to work was one hour. It considered a journey time of one hour did not make the interim accommodation unsuitable for Ms X. They advised they had referred Ms X to the private rented accommodation team who would be in touch to discuss her options in the private sector.
25. In November 2021 the IDVA closed Ms X’s case as they considered Ms X had been given relevant support and signposting to services for ongoing support.
26. In mid December 2021 Ms X contacted the Council to request an update on her housing application. She said she had not received a personalised housing plan or decision on her homeless application. She considered the relief duty had ended as 56 days had passed and the Council had not issued the main duty. She was frustrated by the Council’s lack of care and empathy. She also said she had not received a response to her complaint of 28 September.
27. The housing officer contacted the private rented team for an update. It said Ms X was not engaging with it. It had tried to call several times. Ms X did not want to pay more than £500 in rent and did not want to share accommodation. It said it had explained the local housing allowance rates and the private rented sector but had not heard from Ms X since.
28. The housing officer sent Ms X a PHP in mid-December 2021 setting out the steps the Council and her should take to help resolve her housing situation. The officer apologised for the delay and advised they would continue to investigate to determine if Ms X was owed the main housing duty.
29. The Council wrote to Ms X in response to her complaint of 28 September on 20 December. It apologised for the delay in responding. It said:
• It found no evidence officers had written to Ms X in an inappropriate manner. It advised it did not record calls so could not comment further on how Ms X was spoken to but had reminded staff they were expected to deal with customers in a compassionate and professional manner.
• It considered the housing officer had all the evidence available to make the decision that it owed Ms X the relief duty by 5 October 2021 and it should have sent Ms X a PHP at that time. The PHP contained notification that the Council formally accepted the relief duty from the date it was issued. Ms X did not receive the formal notification and PHP until mid December 2021 so the relief duty formally started from that date. It accepted there was a delay in providing Ms X with the notifications.
• Because the relief duty and PHP were issued late, this had delayed a decision on Ms X’s homeless application as the relief duty could not be ended until 56 days had passed. It apologised for the frustration this caused.
• Ms X remained unhappy and the Council responded at the next stage of its complaints procedure in January 2022. It reiterated what was said in the stage one response and apologised again for the delays.
30. In late January 2022 the housing officer called Ms X to complete a review of the PHP. They recorded Ms X said she had been searching on-line for a property. The officer advised the private sector team had closed the referral as Ms X was not engaging. Ms X disputed this and said she had asked for specific viewing times due to work commitments. She agreed to be re-referred. Ms X said the current accommodation was too far from work. The officer noted they said it was difficult to get accommodation in central London. The officer explained rooms cost around £700 or £100 to £1200 for a studio but Ms X said she did not want to spend over £500. The officer noted they reiterated the reality of renting in London. The officer emailed the private sector team that day and asked them to re-open the case.
31. In mid-February 2022 the Council wrote to Ms X ending its relief duty. It also wrote to Ms X accepting its housing duty as she was eligible for assistance, homeless but not intentionally and in priority need. It also accepted her on the housing register with a priority date of 28 September 2021 with 100 points (homeless and in temporary accommodation). The letter set out Ms X’s right to review this decision and of the suitability of her temporary accommodation.

Findings

32. When Ms X first approached the Council, it referred Ms X to an IDVA which was appropriate. However, it failed to consider whether interim accommodation should have been provided straightaway. Where the Council has reason to believe someone is homeless, eligible and in priority need it must provide interim accommodation. The threshold is low. Given Ms X’s circumstances, on balance, it is likely they would have would have had reason to believe she may be homeless, eligible and in priority need at that point and therefore the duty to provide interim accommodation arose. It did not provide interim until a week later. This was fault and caused Ms X distress.
33. I cannot comment on what was actually said to Ms X or how things were said as I was not present. However, there is nothing in the records to indicate officers disbelieved Ms X when she first approached the Council.
34. Although the Council carried out a housing assessment in late September 2021, it did not issue Ms X with a PHP or a decision to confirm it owed her the relief duty until mid December 2021. It accepted it had sufficient information to do this by 5 October 2021. This delay was fault and caused Ms X frustration and uncertainty. Had the Council sent Ms X this sooner she would have had more clarity about what she needed to do and what the Council would do on her behalf.
35. The delay also meant the Council did not formally start the relief duty until mid December although there is evidence the private sector team had, in any case, contacted Ms X to look at private sector options. In line with government guidance, the Council could not make a decision about whether it owed Ms X the main housing duty during the relief period. This delayed Ms X receiving a decision on about her acceptance on the housing register. However, the Council has awarded Ms X the correct points on its housing register and backdated the effective date to 28 September. The delay caused Ms X frustration but, given the high demand for properties in the Councils’ area, I cannot say Mss X is likely to have missed out on a property because of this delay.
36. In addition, when the Council accepted it owed Ms X the main housing duty, the letter set out Ms X’s right to request a review of the suitability of the temporary accommodation and provided a link to the review procedure. If Ms X remained unhappy with the suitability of her accommodation it was open to her to request a review.
37. The Council also significantly delayed responding to Ms X’s complaint. This was fault and caused her frustration.

Back to top

Agreed action

38. Within one month of the final decision the Council has agreed to:
• Pay Ms X £500 to acknowledge the frustration and distress caused by the delay in providing her accommodation, delays in the complaints process, in starting the relief stage and with issuing the PHP.
• Remind staff of the need to issue notifications of the relief duty and associated review/appeal rights and PHPs in a timely manner.

Back to top

Final decision

39. I have completed my investigation. There was fault causing injustice which the council has agreed to remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman