Summary: Mr J complained the Council did not help him when he raised concerns about safety standards at his accommodation. He says it also delayed assisting him to claim a discretionary housing payment. We consider the Council is at fault. The Council offered an appropriate remedy for the personal injustice caused by its faults.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall refer to as Mr J, complains the Council failed to respond to his complaints about
• The poor conditions in his private supported accommodation.
• Seeking assistance to claim a Discretionary Housing Payment (DHP) to help him move.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future 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 Mr J. I have made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents it provided. Mr J and the Council and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

5. 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.
6. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. 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. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18).

The relief duty

7. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B).

Discretionary Housing Payments

8. A council may award discretionary housing payments (DHP) when someone needs help with housing costs and is claiming Housing Benefit or Universal Credit which includes housing costs towards rent. (Discretionary Housing Payments guidance manual February 2021, section 1.7, as amended)
9. Government guidance gives councils choice (discretion) about when to offer a DHP; there is no statutory right to payment. However, guidance stresses that DHP decisions must follow the ordinary principles of good decision making. Councils must act fairly, reasonably, and consistently, and must decide each case on its merits. Councils can exercise discretion in questions asked of applicants and decisions made. (Discretionary Housing Payments guidance manual February 2021, sections 1.11 and 5.1, as amended).

What happened

10. In 2022 Mr J applied to the Council as homeless after receiving a notice seeking possession.
11. The Council accepted Mr J was homeless or likely to become homeless within 56 days. However, it did not consider there was evidence he was in priority need. Therefore, the Council did not have duty to provide temporary accommodation.
12. Examples of applicants in priority need are:
• people with dependent children;
• pregnant women;
• people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability or old age;
• care leavers; and
• victims of domestic abuse
13. The Council gave information to Mr J about two housing providers One of which, a private supported housing provider, (landlord X) offered Mr J accommodation. Mr J accepted the accommodation and moved in.
14. The Council wrote to Mr J and advised its duty to assist him had ended according to section 189B of the Housing Act 1996. It said this was because he had suitable accommodation reasonably expected to be available to him for 6 months or more. The Council explained Mr J’s right to request a review of its decision.
15. In April 2023 Mr J complained to the Council regarding the lack of response from his housing officer. He said that he had issues with his supported accommodation, but the housing officer had not replied to his emails and texts.
16. The Council registered the complaint but there is no evidence the Council responded or took any action.
17. Mr J complained again in July and again said his housing officer had not responded to his attempts to contact them and his complaint. He said he needed the Council to sort out his accommodation and address the safety issues.
18. The Council registered the complaint but there is no evidence it responded or took any action.
19. Mr J made two further attempts to complain in August 2023. He said that his housing officer was ignoring him.
20. The Council registered these complaints but there is no evidence it responded or took any action.
21. In late August 2023 Mr X complained to the Ombudsman. He said that the Council had not responded to his complaints that his accommodation was not properly managed because and had safety issues. He said:
• It was infested with rats.
• The gas safety certificate was forged with different dates.
• There was no carbon monoxide detector.
• The landlord did not manage anti social behaviour or deal with an absent tenant.
22. Mr X said this had severely affected his mental health. He also said he had tried to claim a discretionary housing payment to help him move, but the Council’s online system had continually rejected his claim.
23. We referred Mr J back to the Council to make a complaint based on the information we hd. This was because it did not appear the Council had had an opportunity to have considered the complaint.
24. Mr J disagreed and sent the Ombudsman evidence of four complaints he had made since April 2023.
25. In response to our query to the Council about whether it had replied to Mr J’s complaint, the Council said it had not completed its complaint procedure. It said it would respond to Mr J’s complaints by 27 October 2023.
26. The Council did not respond to Mr J’s complaint by 27 October 2023.
27. An officer called Mr J in November and discussed how he could progress his claim for a DHP. However, Mr J said this call was rushed and the officer did not know about the complaints he had made regarding his accommodation. Mr J later tried to claim a DHP again, but this claim was also rejected automatically.
28. Mr J contacted the Ombudsman again in January 2024 because he had not received a reply from the Council. We asked the Council for an update, but it did not provide any information.
29. In March 2024 the Council wrote to Mr J and apologised for its delay in responding to his complaint in October 2023. It said its officer had called him in November and tried to help him claim a DHP. The Council said the officer was not aware of Mrs J’s complaints about his accommodation provider. The Council explained that Mr J’s complaints were raised with team managers but were not actioned. The Council apologised that Mr J’s concerns were not dealt with in a timely and appropriate manner. It said that it had now raised the concerns with landlord X, and the service had taken appropriate action.
30. The Council explained it did not have a relationship with the supported housing provider, did not refer applicants into these providers and did not have any formal or informal agreements in place. The Council said its officer had called Mr J to assist him with his claim for a DHP which was unsuccessful. Mr J had called the Council in March 2024 and the officer had agreed to support Mr J by offering him with payments for a deposit or the first months rent to assist him with a move.
31. In its response to my enquiries the Council has advised that at the time of Mr J’s initial complaint it was experiencing high demand, and had high staff absence levels and vacancies. The Council accepts that it should have responded to Mr J’s complaints. It further explains that the complaints are not ones that it could have taken action on because it does not have jurisdiction over landlord X. But it agrees it would have been helpful to explain this. In recognition of the Council’s poor complaint handling due to its failure to respond in a timely manner, and for the inconvenience this caused, the Council has offered Mr J £150.
32. The Council says that from September 2023 it has taken steps to prevent similar delays in future by:
• Appointing a new housing operations and development manager to respond to complaints and manage more complex issues.
• Appointing a Central Customer Feeback and Complaints Team, to offer guidance and support with complaint resolution alongside closer tracking and monitoring of open complaints.
• The complaints manager and performance officer for housing related complaint meeting on a bi monthly basis to consider open cases and ensure that they are assigned and managed by the correct area.

Analysis

33. The Council’s failure to respond Mr J’s complaints between April 2023 and November 2023 was fault. There does not appear to have been any oversight regarding the complaints and they were not addressed. This caused frustration, time and trouble, and inconvenience for Mr J.

• The Council did not write to Mr J after November 2023 and did not progress matters until March 2024 after the Ombudsman repeatedly sought an update. This delay was fault.

34. The Council stated it does not have jurisdiction over landlord X. The Council did not place Mr J in the property and its duty ended when Mr J moved into the accommodation. But it did not respond and explain this to Mr J. The Council could have passed the details about poor safety standards to its Private Housing Standards Team. That team could have investigated the matter and may have supported Mr J. At the very least the Council could have advised Mr J to make a formal complaint to the landlord. The Council’s failure to explain and pass the complaint to the appropriate team was fault.
35. The Council has made service improvements and has taken appropriate steps to improve its response to housing complaints. I consider this will prevent others being affected by the same faults.
36. I consider the Council’s offer to pay Mr J £150 is an appropriate remedy for the injustice its faults have caused him.

Back to top

Agreed action

37. The Council should ensure that within one month of my decision it
• Apologises for its delays and pays Mr J £150 for the frustration and time and trouble caused by its failure to deal with his complaints.
38. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

39. The Council has provided an appropriate remedy for the injustice it caused Mr J. I have completed my investigation and closed the complaint.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman