Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that Mr X was non-priority homeless. It was reasonable for him to appeal to the County Court once the Council had carried out a statutory review.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision that he was non-priority homeless when he made a homelessness application. He also says he did not receive interim accommodation of a personalised housing plan under the homelessness relief duty. He also says the Council failed to respond promptly toa subject access request made under the Freedom of Information Act legislation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
3. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X applied to the Council as homeless in 2024. The Council accepted him under the relief duty but considered him to be a non-priority applicant so it did not provide interim accommodation during its enquiries. He says he did not receive assistance under a personalised housing plan or a copy of the plan. The Council says it sent a copy in May 2024.
7. Mr X asked the Council for a statutory review under s.202 of the Housing Act 1996 in August 2024. The Council reviewed its decision but concluded that the decision was correct and that he was not a vulnerable applicant and remained non-priority homeless. The review decision letter made it clear to Mr X that he had a right of appeal to the County Court on a point of law if he wished to challenge the deciosn and that he should seek assistance from an advice centre should he consider this.
8. We will not investigate a complaint where it is reasonable to appeal the Council’s decision not a court or independent tribunal. Mr X could complain to the office of the Information Commissioner if he believes the Council failed to respond to his request for personal information.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that Mr X was non-priority homeless. It was reasonable for him to appeal to the County Court once the Council had carried out a statutory review.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman