Summary: Miss B complained the Council did not offer her emergency accommodation when she was homeless. She said because of this she had to sofa-surf and sleep overnight in her car. We found the Council at fault for failing to provide Miss B with interim accommodation and delays progressing her homelessness application. The Council will make a payment to remedy the outstanding injustice to Miss B and carry out service improvements.

The complaint

1. Summary: Miss B complained the Council did not offer her emergency accommodation when she was homeless. She said because of this she had to sofa-surf and sleep overnight in her car. She said this caused her distress and negatively impacted her health.

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 considered:
• Miss B’s complaint and the information she provided;
• documents supplied by the Council;
• relevant legislation and guidelines; and
• the Council’s policies and procedures.
5. Miss B and the Council had the opportunity to comment on a draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and Guidance

6. 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.
7. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household while it undertakes inquiries if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
8. A person is ‘threatened with homelessness’ if they are likely to become homeless within 56 days. A person is homeless if they have no accommodation in the UK or elsewhere which is available for their occupation and which that person has a legal right to occupy. (Housing Act 1996, section 175)
9. A person may be in priority need if they are:
• pregnant or have dependent children;
• a victim of domestic abuse;
• aged 16 or 17;
• former care leavers aged 18 to 20; or,
• vulnerable, for example, for medical reasons.
10. If a council is satisfied someone is homeless and eligible for assistance, it must take reasonable steps to help them get suitable accommodation that will be available for at least six months. This is the relief duty. The relief duty ends after 56 days. When the relief period ends the housing authority must decide whether it owes the person the main housing duty and tell them in writing. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
11. If a council is satisfied someone is eligible, homeless, in priority need and unintentionally homeless it will owe them the main homelessness duty. Generally, the Council carries out the duty by arranging temporary accommodation until it makes a suitable offer of social housing or private rented accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)

What happened

12. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
13. In November 2021, Miss B left her family home because of domestic abuse. Miss B stayed with family and friends outside London at weekends, and in London during the week so she could get to work.
14. Miss B made a homelessness application in May 2022. On the form she said she could stay with friends for a couple of days. Miss B selected an appointment in July 2022 for a homelessness assessment.
15. In June 2022, Miss B asked the Council to bring her assessment forward because she was going to be homeless from 9 June 2022. The Council brought the appointment forward to 8 June 2022. It completed a homelessness and a vulnerability assessment with Miss B. The Council recorded Miss B had to leave her home because of domestic abuse and was staying with friends and family. It noted she was not in contact with the perpetrator of the abuse. The Council decided she was not eligible for support from its domestic abuse team because the abuse was historical. In response to my enquiries, the Council explained it used the term ‘historical’ because the abuse was not ongoing, and Miss B had not had contact with the perpetrator since the end of 2021.
16. After the assessment, the Council sent Miss B forms to complete. Miss B returned these forms and extra evidence to support her homeless application two days later.
17. Miss B contacted the Council for an update on 10, 13 and 15 June 2022. She said she had been homeless since 9 June 2022 and had told the Council this many times. She told the Council she had to ask another friend if she could sleep on their couch. The Council said someone would call her back, but no one did. Miss B chased the Council for a response.
18. On 20 June 2022 Miss B complained to the Council. She said when she told the Council she would be homeless the following day it said someone would contact her, but no one did. She said she had to chase the Council. She told the Council she had to sofa-surf and spent one night sleeping in her car.
19. Miss B contacted the Council on 21 and 22 June 2022 asking for an update. The Council assigned her case to a housing officer in the single homeless prevention service (SHPS). The housing officer asked her to complete a fear of violence form. It contacted the police, her mother, and her grandmother to confirm her account.
20. The Council wrote to Miss B on 27 June 2022 and said it was satisfied she was eligible for help, homeless and it owed her the relief duty. It said it was continuing inquiries to see if it owed her any other duties. It told her how to ask for a review of its decision. The Council offered to refer Miss B to a charity that provided emergency hostel accommodation. Miss B said she would prefer to see if she could get an extension where she was staying.
21. The Council sent Miss B a copy of her personal housing plan. The plan said she would contact friends and family to see if she could stay with them until her homelessness was resolved.
22. The Council sent Miss B an updated personal housing plan in July 2022. It recorded she had provided the documents the Council asked for and completed a fear of violence form. It said she could stay with family and friends for a few days and may ask to extend this whilst engaging with SHPS, but she would need to consider a time frame for this.
23. The Council responded to Miss B’s complaint at stage one in July 2022. It apologised for not responding to her when she contacted the Council for an update in June. It explained her housing officer would have been busy conducting assessments with other homeless people and then went on annual leave. It said SHPS was experiencing staff shortages, sickness, and annual leave and this was why there was a delay. It apologised for the delay progressing her homeless application.
24. Miss B was unhappy with the Council’s response and asked it to consider her complaint at stage two. She said someone should have contacted her the day after her homeless assessment, but no one did.
25. In August 2022, the Council responded at stage two. It said Miss B did not ask for emergency accommodation until five days after her homeless assessment. The Council accepted it should have contacted her then, but it did not do so until 14 days later. It said it would remind relevant officers of the need to respond urgently when someone may need emergency accommodation. The Council offered Miss B £100 for the distress and frustration caused by its lapse in communication. Miss B brought her complaint to the Ombudsman in September 2022.
26. In October 2022, Miss B told SHPS she didn’t want to work with it anymore and she would contact the Council to consider her options.

Analysis

27. The Council delayed progressing Miss B’s homelessness application. The Council started its assessment on 8 June 2022, and Miss B gave it the information it asked her for two days later. There was then a delay. The Council did not progress her application until 21 June 2022. This delay was fault and delayed the Council accepting the relief duty for Miss B by 10 days. In its stage two response, the Council accepted it delayed contacting her and processing her homelessness application.
28. Miss B told the Council she was homeless from 9 June 2022. At this point, the Council should have considered whether it had a duty to provide Miss B with interim accommodation while it undertook its homelessness inquiries. The test for providing interim accommodation is whether the Council has reason to believe someone may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. This is a low threshold. The Council’s actions suggest it did have reason to believe she was in priority need. In the assessment appointment, the Council noted Miss B was homeless because of domestic abuse, and it made inquiries of the police and her family to confirm this. Therefore, the Council should have provided interim accommodation from 9 June 2022 until it decided whether Miss B was in priority need. Not doing so was fault.
29. There is no evidence the Council decided whether Miss B was in priority need or it owed her the main housing duty. It should have done this within 56 days of accepting the relief duty, without any delay this would have been the 10 August 2022. The Council did not do so, and this was fault.
30. The Council failed to offer Miss B interim accommodation while it decided whether she was in priority need and delayed processing her homelessness application. Miss B says because of the Council’s faults she had to sofa-surf and sleep overnight in her car. The Council will make a payment to Miss B for the lost opportunity to access interim accommodation. The Council’s poor communication also caused Miss B confusion about the duties owed to her, and frustration at having to chase the Council for a response. I do not consider the Council’s offer of £100 remedied the injustice to Miss B. The Council’s will make a further payment to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Agreed action

31. Within one month of the final decision, the Council will:
• Issue its decision about whether Miss B was in priority need and explain the reason for its decision.
• Pay Miss B £750 for the missed opportunity to access interim accommodation.
• Pay Miss B £300 in total (including the £100 the Council has already offered) to remedy the confusion and frustration caused by the Council’s poor communication.
32. Within two months of the final decision, the Council will:
• Review its procedure for deciding whether it has reason to believe a homelessness applicant is in priority need and therefore, whether it has a duty to provide interim accommodation.
• Remind staff to tell homelessness applicants in writing of its priority need decisions and how they can appeal.
• Remind staff working in SHPS of the timescale for ending the relief duty and deciding if it owes applicants the main housing duty.
• Review its procedure for covering staff sickness and annual leave.
33. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I have completed my investigation and uphold Miss B’s complaint. Miss B was caused an injustice by the actions of the Council. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman