Summary: The Council significantly delayed carrying out a review of its decision to discharge its housing duty to Mr B. As a result of the delay, Mr B was unable to bid on social housing for over a year. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mr B and backdate his registration and award dates. It has also agreed to make service improvements.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains that when the Council overturned its decision to discharge its housing duty to him, it did not backdate his housing registration date.
2. Mr B says that because of this, he is likely to be waiting in unsuitable temporary accommodation for several years before he is offered suitable permanent accommodation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have investigated Mr B’s complaint about his priority on the housing register.
6. I have not investigated Mr B’s complaint about his temporary accommodation, which he says is too small and is affecting his wife’s health. As explained in paragraph 11, the Council has a duty to provide the family with suitable accommodation. I have not investigated this aspect of Mr B’s complaint because I consider it would be reasonable for Mr B to ask the Council to review its decision that the accommodation is suitable.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• discussed the issues with the complainant;
• considered the documents the Council has provided; and
• given the Council and the complainant the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Homelessness

8. If a council is satisfied someone is eligible, homeless, in priority need and unintentionally homeless, it will owe them the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
9. Under the main housing duty, housing authorities must ensure that suitable accommodation is available for the applicant and their household until the duty is brought to an end, usually through the offer of a settled home. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 17)
10. Councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of his or her household. Applicants can ask a council to review its decision that the accommodation offered is suitable. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202 and 206)
11. A council’s main housing duty will end if an applicant refuses a final offer of accommodation after being informed of the possible consequence of refusal and of their right to request a review of the suitability of the accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)

The Council’s housing allocations schemes

12. The scheme introduced in January 2023 places applicants in a priority band from Band A (highest priority) to Band D (lowest priority). It says Band A will be awarded where the applicant is homeless and owed the main housing duty.
13. The previous scheme awarded Band 2 in the same circumstances. It placed applicants in a priority band from Band 1 (highest priority) to Band 4 (lowest priority).
14. Applicants in the same band are prioritised by the award date (the date they were accepted into the band) with earlier dates taking priority over later dates. Where two or more applicants still have the same priority, then priority is given to the applicant who applied to join the housing register first.

Key events

15. Mr B joined the Council’s housing register in January 2020. The Council decided that Mr B and his family were lacking two bedrooms and he was given a Band 2 overcrowding award.
16. A few months later, the family became homeless. The Council accepted the main housing duty to Mr B and placed the family in temporary accommodation.
17. Mr B remained on the housing register but his priority award changed from a Band 2 overcrowding award to a Band 2 homeless award.
18. In February 2022, the Council offered Mr B the tenancy of a three-bedroom house. It explained that if Mr B refused the offer, the Council would discharge its duty to him and no further offers would be made. It also explained that while Mr B may be entitled to remain on the housing register, he would lose any priority awarded due to homelessness.
19. Mr B wrongly believed he would receive three offers of accommodation, and so he decided to refuse the offer. The Council then discharged its duty to him. Mr B also lost his homeless housing priority and he was removed from the housing register.
20. Mr B requested a review of the Council’s decision to discharge its duty to him. He also applied several times to rejoin the housing register but each time his application was rejected because the Council did not consider he had a qualifying housing need.
21. The Council carried out a review of its decision to discharge its duty to Mr B in May 2023. It decided to use its discretion and make one further final offer of accommodation.
22. Mr B was then accepted back on to the housing register. He was placed in Band A with an award date of 13 May 2023. Mr B considers his award date should be backdated to 2020 when he first became homeless.

Analysis

23. The law says that the main housing duty will end if an applicant refuses a final offer of accommodation after being warned of the consequences of refusing the offer. When the Council made the final offer of accommodation, its letter clearly explained the consequences of refusal. I have found no fault in the way the Council decided to discharge its duty to Mr B.
24. Mr B requested a review of the decision in February 2022. Government guidance suggests eight weeks as a reasonable timescale for completing reviews. The Council took around 15 months to carry out the review in this case. This delay was fault and would have caused Mr B significant distress and frustration.
25. When the Council carried out the review in May 2023, it did not decide that its previous decision to discharge its duty to Mr B was wrong; it decided to exercise its discretion to make another offer of accommodation.
26. If there had been no delay by the Council, it would have reviewed its decision by 6 April 2022. I consider the decision is likely to have been the same as it was in May 2023, which was to exercise discretion to make another offer of accommodation. If the Council had made this decision in April 2022, Mr B would have qualified for a Band 2 homeless award and he would have been able to bid for social housing.
27. When the Council introduced a new housing allocations scheme in January 2023, all applicants with a Band 2 homeless award were moved to Band A. If there had been no delay in carrying out the review, Mr B would have been moved to Band A in January 2023.
28. I consider the Council should backdate Mr B’s registration date to 6 April 2022, and it should backdate his award date to 17 January 2023. I do not consider it likely that Mr B has missed out on any properties as a result of the fault identified in this case.

Back to top

Agreed action

29. Within four weeks of my final decision, the Council will take the following actions:
• Backdate Mr B’s registration date to 6 April 2022 and his award date to 17 January 2023.
• Apologise and make a payment of £200 to Mr B. This is a symbolic sum to recognise the distress Mr B suffered due to the Council’s delay. The Council will consider our guidance on remedies when making the apology.
30. Within eight weeks of my final decision, the Council will provide an action plan detailing the action it is taking to reduce delays in carrying out reviews of homeless decisions.
31. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

32. I have completed my investigation and uphold Mr B’s complaint. There was fault by the Council which caused injustice to Mr B. The action the Council has agreed to take is sufficient to remedy that injustice,

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman