Summary: We found fault with the way the Council responded when Ms X reported she was at risk of domestic abuse in her temporary accommodation. We did not find fault with the way the Council applied its allocation scheme to Ms X’s housing application. The Council agreed actions to remedy the injustice to Ms X.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s response to her homelessness because of domestic abuse. She said the Council:

• Placed her in the incorrect band for her housing need.
• Failed to move her to suitable temporary accommodation.
• Gave her misleading information about refusing an accommodation offer.

2. She said this caused her distress and exposed her to further risk of abuse. She would like the Council to move her to different temporary accommodation and increase her priority for housing.

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 an injustice, 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

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke to Ms X and considered the information she provided with her complaint. I made enquiries with the Council and considered its response with relevant law and guidance.
6. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

Homelessness

7. The Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 applies to all homelessness applications. The Homelessness Code of Guidance (the Code) is the statutory guidance to Council’s on homelessness duties and carrying out their functions.
8. If someone is homeless, or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, they can seek help from the Council. They must be eligible for assistance.
9. Where the person is threatened with homelessness, the prevention duty may apply. Where the person is actually homeless, the relief duty may apply.
10. Where the Council arranges accommodation this must be suitable for the person and those who can reasonably be expected to live with them.
11. The Code provides guidance to councils providing homelessness services to people who have experienced, or are at risk of, domestic abuse.
12. Homeless applicants may request a review of the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation (within 21 days) offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.
13. The review must be carried out by someone who was not involved in the original decision and who is more senior to the original decision maker. The reviewing officer needs to consider any information relevant to the period before the decision was made (even if only obtained afterwards) as well as any new relevant information the Council has obtained since the decision. (The Homelessness (Review Procedure etc.) Regulations 2018, Homelessness Code of Guidance Chapter 19)
14. Councils must complete a review of the suitability of accommodation within eight weeks of the date of the review request. This can be extended if the applicant agrees in writing.
15. The council must advise applicants of their right to appeal to the county court on a point of law, and of the period in which to appeal. Applicants can also appeal if the Council takes more than the prescribed time to complete the review. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202, 203 and 204
16. Applicants may ask a council to provide accommodation pending the outcome of a review. Councils have a power, but not a duty, to accommodate certain applicants and members of their household. (Housing Act 1996, sections 188(3), 199A(6), 200(5))

Allocations

17. Every local housing authority (council) 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))
18. The Localism Act 2011 introduced new freedoms to allow councils to better manage their waiting list and to tailor their allocation priorities to meet local needs.
19. An allocations scheme must give reasonable preference to applicants in the following categories:

• homeless people;
• people in insanitary, overcrowded or unsatisfactory housing;
• people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds;
• people who need to move to avoid hardship to themselves or others;

(Housing Act 1996, section 166A(3))

20. Councils must notify applicants in writing of the following decisions and give reasons:

• that the applicant is not eligible for an allocation;
• that the applicant is not a qualifying person;
• a decision not to award the applicant reasonable preference because of their unacceptable behaviour.

21. The Council must also notify the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))
22. Housing applicants can ask the council to review a wide range of decisions about their applications, including decisions about their housing priority.

The Council’s allocations scheme

23. The Council’s allocations scheme sets out how it determines priorities and the procedure it follows to make decisions about who is eligible and their Banding.
24. The scheme sets out the categories of applicants in Section 167 of the Housing Act 1996 that are given reasonable preference.
25. Band A is the highest priority and Band D is the lowest. The priority bandings are explained in its scheme.
26. The scheme explains the review process for applicants who wish to challenge their banding decision.

What happened

Background

27. The Council accepted it owed Ms X the main housing duty in 2018. Ms X and her children have been living in temporary accommodation and have moved several times to properties across different boroughs.

Chronology

28. What follows is a brief summary of key information and events. It does not contain all the information I reviewed during my investigation.
29. Ms X moved to property A in January 2021, this was also temporary accommodation provided by the Council. Ms X applied to join the Council’s housing register. The Council assessed her application and medical evidence. It placed her on the register in Band C.
30. In November 2021 the Council received notification of a high risk domestic abuse incident where Ms X was assaulted at her property. The Police shared information with the Council and said Ms X needed to move because she was at risk of further violence.
31. In December the Council offered Ms X alternative temporary accommodation. Ms X declined the offer because of its location. Later in December Ms X requested a review of the temporary accommodation the Council had offered and attached a supporting letter from a social worker. Ms X complained about the information she was given about the consequences of declining the temporary accommodation.
32. In January 2022 the Council told Ms X it would withdraw the temporary accommodation offer and make her an alternative offer. It also explained her housing band and how long she could expect to wait for permanent social housing.
33. Ms X responded and explained the perpetrators bail conditions were due to expire so she felt at an increased risk of harm. She said she disagreed with the Council’s banding decision. She explained the delay offering her alternative temporary accommodation was causing her distress and uncertainty. She asked the Council to increase her band to Band A to facilitate an urgent move to alternative accommodation that would meet their needs.
34. The Council told Ms X she did not meet the criteria for an emergency transfer because she was not a Council tenant, and the alternative accommodation would be temporary.
35. In February Ms X complained that she was still living in unsuitable accommodation because the Council had failed to move her to alternative temporary accommodation.
36. In March the Council responded to Ms X’s complaint about the information she was given when she declined the offer of temporary accommodation in December 2021. It said it was satisfied the written information it gave Ms X was accurate and it did not have a recording of the telephone conversation.
37. In March and April Ms X chased a response to her complaint about being left in unsuitable accommodation. Following Ms X’s email in April, the Council sent an internal email about the temporary accommodation:

“This is an overdue TA (temporary accommodation) transfer case. Police referred her case in December 2021 confirming she is at risk of violence, and I’ve been asking for her to be transferred since then… can you please ensure she is made a further offer without delay”

38. Ms X complained to the Ombudsman in April. We initially sent the complaint back to the Council to complete its complaint process. Ms X remained unhappy with the final response and returned to the Ombudsman in May.
39. In May Ms X was offered alternative accommodation, which she accepted. She requested a suitability review of the new temporary accommodation.
40. In July Ms X complained because she had not received a response to her review request. The Council responded in August and upheld her complaint about the delay.
41. In August the Council wrote to Ms X about her review request. It apologised for the delay and asked for more information to assist the review.

My findings

42. I have summarised my findings below under the main complaint issue headings.

Allocations

43. I did not find fault with the Council for the way it assessed Ms X’s housing application.
44. The Council accepted Ms X’s housing application and placed her Band C. Ms X’s medical situation changed in March 2021. The Council reconsidered her situation and placed her on a transfer list, but at this stage it did not change her banding.
45. Ms X used her right of review and with the additional information she provided about her medical needs and situation the Council increased her banding to Band B.
46. Ms X complained because she thought she should be in Band A. She said she met the criteria for Band A because she was a victim of domestic abuse. She wanted the Council to place her in Band A for an emergency transfer.
47. This was not correct. The Band A category for emergency transfers due to risk of violence is for existing Council or housing association tenants. Ms X was not a tenant for the purposes of this category. Ms X was housed in temporary accommodation under the Councils homelessness duty. Any issues with the suitability of her temporary accommodation would be dealt with as a suitability review.
48. I did not find fault with the way the Council considered Ms X’s housing application or reached its banding decision. Where there does not appear to be fault with the way the decision was made we would not question the professional judgement of the decision maker.

Temporary accommodation

49. I found fault with the Council for the way it responded when Ms X said she was at risk of violence in her temporary accommodation.
50. Ms X told the Council she was at risk of domestic abuse on 25 November 2021. An officer spoke to her on 26 November. The Police shared information on 16 December and the Council offer her alternative temporary accommodation 17 December.
51. Ms X declined the temporary accommodation because of its location. At that point the Council could have ended its duty to Ms X and she would have had the right to request a review of its decision. However, the Council used its discretion to make Ms X another offer of alternative temporary accommodation. When it undertook to do this it was aware Ms X was deemed to be at risk in property A. Miss X remained in property A until May 2022. This meant she spent a further five months in unsuitable accommodation where she could have been at risk of further violence. This caused Ms X distress and placed her at risk.
52. In its correspondence with Ms X the Council explained the delay was due to a shortage of suitable temporary accommodation. This may be the explanation, but it suggests a wider issue for the Council, that led to service failure in this case.
53. Ms X complained the Council failed to carry out the review request when she declined the offer in December 2021 because it should have carried out the request even though she declined. Whilst this may be the case it would not have led to a different outcome because the Council agreed to make an alternative offer, which would have been the same outcome if it agreed the accomodation was unsuitable.
54. Ms X was unhappy with the way the Council communicated with her about the temporary accommodation. The Council responded to this part of her complaint in its final complaint response. It explained the written correspondence about when it can end its duty. There was no recording of the telephone conversation with the officer so further consideration of this part of the complaint is unlikely to achieve a different outcome.

Delays

55. There have been delays throughout this case that caused Ms X frustration, time and trouble and added to her distress.
56. There were the delays in relation to the temporary accommodation, as I have explained above. There were also delays in the complaint handling and responses, which Ms X had to repeatedly follow up.
57. There have been further delays with Ms X’s request for a suitability review of the temporary accommodation she moved to in May 2022.

Back to top

Agreed action

58. Within one month of my final decision the Council agrees to:

• Apologise to Ms X for the fault identified in this statement.
• Pay Ms X £1000 in recognition of the distress and risk she experienced due to remaining in property A.
• Pay Ms X £300 in recognition of the distress, frustration, time and trouble she experienced because of the delays.
• Conclude Ms X’s suitability review of her current temporary accommodation.
• If the Council decides her accommodation is unsuitable it should move Ms X without delay. It should pay £200 per month from the date Ms X requested the suitability review until she is moved to alternative accommodation.

59. Within two months of my final decision the Council agrees to:

• Present this case to the relevant committee to consider how the service failure in relation to supply of temporary accommodation can be addressed.

Back to top

Final decision

60. I found fault causing injustice. I completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman