Summary: Miss X complains the Council failed to provide suitable temporary accommodation and failed to correctly assess her housing priority. We have found the Council at fault for the way it administered Miss X’s housing application, for delays in providing Miss X with a right of appeal, and for its record-keeping. We have made recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of her homelessness application. In particular, she says the Council:
1. failed to provide suitable temporary accommodation over a long period; and
2. failed to correctly prioritise her homelessness application.
2. Miss X says she stayed in unsuitable accommodation for longer than she should have and was unable to bid on suitable properties. This had a detrimental impact on her wellbeing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information provided by Miss X and discussed the complaint with her.
6. I considered information provided by the Council.
7. Both Miss X and the Council were able to comment on a draft version of this decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

Relevant legislation, guidance and policy

Homelessness

8. 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.

The relief duty

9. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is the relief duty.
10. The relief duty ends after 56 days. The Council can extend this by 15 days if it needs to make more enquiries to reach a decision about what further duties may be owed after the relief duty ends. When a council decides this duty has ended, it must tell the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

The main homelessness duty

11. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need, the council has a duty to secure accommodation that is available for their occupation (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

Decision letters

12. After completing enquiries, the council must give the applicant a decision in writing. If it is an adverse decision, the letter must fully explain the reasons. All letters must include information about the right to request a review and the timescale for doing so. (Housing Act 1996, section 184, from 3 April 2018 Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.32 and 18.33)

The published scheme

13. Every local housing authority 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))

Suitability of accommodation

14. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of his or her household. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
15. The Homelessness Code of Guidance says space and arrangement will be key factors in deciding whether accommodation is suitable. However, it says councils should also consider whether the accommodation is suitable in the light of the relevant needs, requirements and circumstances of the homeless person and their household. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.4)

Review rights

16. Homeless applicants may seek a review within 21 days of being notified of certain decisions about their homelessness application. Relevant to this case, applicants can ask the Council to review the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted. Applicants can ask for a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.
17. Councils have a duty to keep the suitability of accommodation under review. An applicant may also ask a council to reconsider whether their current temporary accommodation is suitable, if their circumstances change. This may be for medical reasons or because of a change in the size of the household.
18. If the Council decides the accommodation is suitable, that decision must be put in writing and the applicant must be notified of the right to request a section 202 review. The applicant can then use the section 202 review procedure to challenge the decision on suitability.

Principles of Good Administrative Practice

19. The Ombudsman published the Principles of Good Administrative Practice (the Ombudsman’s Guidance) in 2018. The Ombudsman’s Guidance sets out the Ombudsman’s benchmark for the standards expected when investigating local authorities’ actions.
20. The Ombudsman’s Guidance stresses the importance of being open and accountable, explaining the reasons for decision making, and keeping proper, suitable records.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of events

21. Below is a summary of the key events leading to this investigation. It is not an exhaustive chronology of every exchange between parties. Where necessary, I have expanded on some of these events in the analysis section of this decision statement.
22. In June 2019, Miss X approached the Council as homeless. The Council provided temporary accommodation and wrote to Miss X to confirm it owed her the relief duty. The Council’s letter provided Miss X with a right of appeal against the Council’s decisions.
23. In October 2019, Miss X completed a re-housing application form, requesting a move to different accommodation on health grounds. The Council’s records suggest it sought advice from its independent medical advisors on different occasions in 2020.
24. In January 2021, the Council again sought an assessment from its independent medical advisors about the medical information Miss X had submitted. The independent medical advisors told the Council Miss X’s recommended housing needs were:
• Any ground floor property.
• A property on any floor where a lift was available.
• A property with a few internal or external steps could also be considered.
25. In March 2021, the Council completed its assessment of Miss X’s housing application and accepted a main housing duty towards her. The application registration date was set as the 4 March 2021.
26. The Council wrote to Miss X in April 2021 confirming it accepted the main housing duty towards her. It explained she had the right of appeal against this decision and against the suitability of the accommodation the Council had provided.
27. In November 2021, Miss X made a complaint to the Council via a representative. Summarised, the grounds for the complaint were:
1. Miss X’s current accommodation was not suitable for her needs.
2. The Council had suggested Miss X had refused two suitable offers of accommodation, but Miss X said these had not been suitable for her medical needs.
3. The Council had not considered her mental and physical health, despite there being evidence from her GP.
28. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaint in December 2021. In its response, the Council:
1. said Miss X was an accepted homeless applicant and was eligible to bid on permanent homes.
2. said it had considered Miss X’s medical conditions when allocating her current temporary accommodation.
3. said it had offered Miss X a suitable ground-floor property, but Miss X had declined this due to its location. It also said it had offered a potential property in September 2021, with 12 steps.
4. said there was a shortage of available accommodation in the area and it could not say when Miss X would be offered a different property. The Council highlighted Miss X’s rent arrears, saying this could prevent permanent accommodation being allocated. It asked her to contact the Council to put in place a plan to clear the outstanding balance.
29. Miss X wrote to the Council to escalate her complaint to the next stage of its complaints procedure via a representative.
30. In March 2021, the Council and Miss X discussed a payment plan for her outstanding rent arrears. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint at stage two of its complaints procedure. Responding to the specific points Miss X made, the Council:
1. said Miss X’s health conditions had been considered when she was allocated her current temporary accommodation. It said this accommodation was a ground floor, en-suite property, which was suitable based on Miss X’s housing needs.
2. said any other temporary accommodation offered would likely be studio accommodation, as there was no medical reason this would be unsuitable for Miss X. It said Miss X could bid for both studio and one-bedroom properties for permanent accommodation.
3. accepted Miss X’s application had been incorrectly prioritised. It said it had increased Miss X’s priority with immediate effect. The Council apologised to Miss X and said this would not affect her chances of being offered a suitable property.
4. accepted Miss X’s housing application had been given the wrong registration date and said it had backdated her application to 20 June 2019. It had previously been set at 4 March 2021.
5. asked Miss X to confirm if she agreed to set up a standing order to address the outstanding arrears balance, further to its previous discussions on this matter.
31. In May 2022, Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.
32. In June 2022, after Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman, she moved to alternative temporary accommodation. The Council told us it verbally explained the terms and conditions relating to the property, as well as verbally explaining the right to request a review. It said it did not need to issue a formal written offer, as Miss X had already accepted the property.
33. The Council told me Miss X had requested the Council review the suitability of her new accommodation. When responding to my enquiries, the Council said this review was ongoing. It later told me it had completed this review and provided Miss X with notice of its decision, as well as the right of appeal.

Analysis

Jurisdiction

34. As set out in paragraph 4, we cannot consider late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons.
35. In this case, I have exercised discretion to consider the time taken by the Council to decide it owed Miss X the main housing duty. Although this happened more than 12 months ago, I believe this directly relates to other events considered as part of this investigation and the current injustice to Miss X.

The relief and main housing duties

36. The Council accepted a relief duty towards Miss X on 20 June 2019. The relief duty ends after 56 days.
37. The Homelessness Code of Guidance says an authority should be able to tell the applicant on or around day 57 whether it has decided they have a priority need and are unintentionally homeless. Where councils need more information, the Code recommends authorities complete further enquiries in no more than 15 further working days, beyond the date 56 days have passed.
38. This means the Council should have made a decision about whether it owed Miss X the main housing duty no later than 5 September 2019. The Council did not write to Miss X to confirm it owed her the main housing duty until 6 April 2021, a delay of around 403 working days. I have found the Council at fault for this.
39. I believe this fault caused Miss X an injustice. Miss X did not receive her right of appeal against the suitability of her temporary accommodation when she should have, with there being a delay of more than one year. It is likely Miss X would have exercised her appeal right much sooner, had it been provided. I cannot say what the outcome would have been, had she done so, but the denial of appeal rights and the uncertainty this causes is an injustice to Miss X.

Priority and registration date

40. When the Council accepted the main housing duty, it registered Miss X’s application from the 4 March 2021. When responding to Miss X’s stage two complaint, it accepted Miss X’s registration date and priority were incorrect. It increased Miss X's housing priority and backdated her registration date to the 20 June 2019.
41. I asked the Council whether Miss X would have been able to secure permanent accommodation sooner, had the Council correctly registered and prioritised her application. The Council said Miss X would not have been eligible to bid for properties, due to her rent arrears. It provided a copy of Miss X’s rent account from 2021 onwards as evidence.
42. I accept that Miss X’s rent arrears may have been a factor in whether she was able to secure permanent accommodation. However, my view remains there is uncertainty about what could have happened, had the Council properly registered and prioritised Miss X’s homelessness application over a year prior.
43. The Council’s allocations scheme says that where applicants are less than 10 weeks in arrears, their bids for permanent accommodation are unlikely to be affected. Miss X’s arrears in late 2019, and throughout 2020, may have been significantly lower than they were in 2021. With appropriate intervention and a payment plan in place, any existing arrears may not have been a barrier towards Miss X bidding for suitable permanent accommodation at the time.
44. I cannot say for certain what would have happened, even on a balance of probabilities. I recognise the Council has accepted the delay in correctly registering and prioritising Miss X’s housing application is fault and I agree with this conclusion. However, I believe this fault causes Miss X an injustice in the form of significant uncertainty. I believe this uncertainty has not been appropriately acknowledged or addressed.

Suitability

45. At both stages of the Council’s complaints procedure, Miss X challenged whether the temporary accommodation provided to her was suitable. In its responses, the Council said the accommodation met Miss X’s housing needs, as identified by the Council’s independent medical advisors, and it therefore considered the accommodation suitable. In response to my enquiries, the Council provided the same rationale.
46. The accommodation type and layout are factors which inform decisions about suitability, but there are also other matters the Council should consider. These are set out briefly in paragraph 15. While the Council can take the advice of independent medical advisors into account, it is the Council who must decide whether the accommodation offered is suitable, after weighing up the advice it has received and the individual facts of the case.
47. I have seen no evidence of how or if the Council considered factors beyond property layout, such as location and access to amenities, when deciding if the accommodation provided to Miss X was suitable. This is also contrary to the principles set out in the Ombudsman’s Guidance. I have found the Council at fault for this.
48. The Council concluded the temporary accommodation was suitable, but did not inform Miss X of her right to request a review of its decision in its response. I have found the Council at fault for this.
49. I have also seen no evidence the Council considered whether the accommodation it had provided to Miss X was still suitable, given the passage of time and possible changes in Miss X’s medical conditions. It relied on older assessments of Miss X’s housing need, instead of considering whether there had been a material change in circumstances it needed to take into account. I have found the Council at fault for this.
50. Cumulatively, I believe these faults caused Miss X an injustice. The Council being unable to show it took account of all relevant matters and up-to-date information leads to uncertainty about how it made its decision. Further, the Council not advising Miss X of her right to seek a review means Miss X lost the opportunity to challenge its conclusions. Doing so may have meant Miss X did not need to approach the Ombudsman for clarity on her complaint.
51. Miss X no longer lives at this property and so I cannot ask the Council to address this injustice by considering its decision again. The Council told me it did not provide a formal offer in writing for Miss X’s new temporary accommodation when she moved. It said this was not necessary, because Miss X had accepted the accommodation. It said it had explained all necessary information verbally, including Miss X’s right of appeal.
52. I have found the Council at fault for this. In making an offer of temporary accommodation, the Council decided the accommodation offered was suitable. This decision comes with a right of appeal. As set out in paragraphs 12 and 18, the Council’s decisions should have been set out in writing. These letters should have clearly explained how the Council reached its decision and how Miss X could appeal against it.
53. While I have found the Council at fault, I cannot say this fault caused Miss X an injustice. Miss X did appeal against the suitability of her new temporary accommodation shortly after moving in. The Council not formally notifying Miss X of its decision and her right of appeal did not prevent Miss X from exercising this right at the appropriate time.
54. However, the Council should be mindful of the requirement for it to set out its decisions and the corresponding rights of appeal in writing. If replicated elsewhere, this fault could cause injustice for other homelessness applicants. I proposed service improvements to address this.

Back to top

Agreed action

55. Within four weeks of the final decision being issued, the Council has agreed to:
1. Apologise to Miss X for the faults and injustice identified in this statement;
2. Pay Miss X £500 in recognition of the uncertainty and distress the Council’s faults have caused. I have considered the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies for distress when recommending this figure. In particular, I have considered:
1. the length of the delay in the Council making a decision about whether it owed Miss X the main housing duty and providing a right of appeal;
2. the extent of the uncertainty arising from this delay; and
3. the further uncertainty caused by the lack of evidence documenting the Council’s decision-making at key points.
3. Remind all relevant officers of the timescales set out in the Homelessness Code of Guidance for making enquiries and ending the relief duty;
4. Remind relevant officers the Council has an ongoing duty to consider whether temporary accommodation remains suitable, considering any changes in the applicant’s circumstances; and
5. Remind all relevant officers that offers of temporary accommodation made under the main housing duty are decisions that should be made in writing and which should clearly set out the applicant’s right of appeal.
56. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

57. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault causing injustice. I have made recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman