Summary: Miss X complained about the support the Council provided after she became homeless in 2019. There were delays in how the Council considered Miss X’s requests for a review of its decision and how it responded to her complaint. This caused Miss X to miss out on the opportunity to move into a more suitable property and caused her avoidable distress, time and trouble. The Council agreed to pay Miss X a financial remedy and offer her a suitable property. It also agree to tell similarly affected people of their right to complain and review its practices.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the support the Council provided after she became homeless in 2019. She says the Council:
• provided unsuitable temporary accommodation and failed to resolve problems with insects and mould;
• left her in temporary accommodation for too long;
• offered her unsuitable permanent housing in March 2021; and
• took too long to review this decision, only completing the review in July 2022.
2. As a result, she says that she and her children spent too long in unsuitable temporary accommodation which caused them significant distress. She wants the Council to apologise and pay her compensation.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated events from when the Council offered Miss X a property in March 2021.
4. The final section of this statement gives my reasons for not investigating the rest of the complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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)
6. 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)
7. We may investigate matters coming to our attention during an investigation, if we consider that a member of the public who has not complained may have suffered an injustice as a result. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26D and 34E, as amended)
8. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. 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)
9. 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

10. I considered:
• the information Miss X provided and discussed the complaint with her;
• the Council’s comments on the complaint and the supporting information it provided; and
• relevant law and guidance.
11. Miss X and the Council now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Homelessness

12. 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.
13. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation 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)
14. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the certain decisions, including the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation 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.
15. Councils must complete reviews about suitability of accommodation, including accommodation which ends the main housing duty, within eight weeks of the date of the review request. These periods can be extended if the applicant agrees in writing.

Housing allocations

16. 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))
17. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme which enables housing applicants to bid for available properties which it advertises.
18. The Ombudsman recognises that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. He may not find fault with a council for failing to re-house someone, if it has prioritised applicants and allocated properties according to its published lettings scheme policy.

Council’s complaints procedure

19. The Council has a two stage complaints procedure:
• Stage 1 – the Council acknowledges complaints within two working days and will provide a response within 15 working days;
• Stage 2 – an independent officer will review the complaint and respond within 20 working days.

What happened

20. Miss X’s current period of homelessness began in 2019. The Council accepted it had a duty to house Miss X and placed her in her current temporary accommodation in February 2019. It also awarded Miss X ‘Band 2 Homeless Relief’ priority under its housing allocations scheme around the same time.
21. In early March 2021, the Council told Miss X she was the successful bidder for a two-bedroom housing association property. Miss X first told the Council that she did not want to accept the offer. However, she told the Council the following day that she had changed her mind and would accept the offer of accommodation.
22. Miss X sent the email accepting the property to both the Council’s allocations team, and the team that deals with suitability reviews. The Council says that, because she sent her email to the reviews team, it assumed Miss X was also asking for a review of the suitability of the offer. It opened a review case and told Miss X it would decide the review by the end of April 2021.
23. Miss X viewed the property the Council offered and signed a tenancy for the property in mid-March. The Council wrote to Miss X confirming that based on her accepting the offered property, it considered its duty to house her had ended. It also closed the review case it had started, although it did not tell Miss X that it had done this.
24. A few days after moving in, Miss X gave notice to the housing association to end her tenancy. The housing association notified the Council that Miss X had given notice and of her reasons why she thought the property was not suitable.
25. In early April 2021, Miss X reapplied to join the Council’s housing register. The Council accepted Miss X’s application but gave her a lower priority (Band 3 Overcrowding) based on its decision that it had ended its duty to house her under homelessness law.
26. During the following two months Miss X chased the Council for a response to her review request several times. The Council says it opened a new review case in early June 2021 and told Miss X it would make its decision within eight weeks.
27. In mid-July 2021 the Council sent Miss X income and expenditure forms to complete. It reminded Miss X to return these in mid-August 2021 and Miss X returned the completed forms at the end of August.
28. Miss X complained to the Council about the delays in completing the review in March 2022. The Council responded a few days later apologising for the delays.
29. Miss X asked the Council to escalate the complaint in mid-March 2022. However, the Council did not respond further to Miss X’s complaint until June 2022. Again, the Council apologised to Miss X for the delays but did not offer a date by which it would make its decision about the review.
30. The Council notified Miss X about its decision on her review in early July 2022, shortly after Miss X complained to the Ombudsman. The Council accepted Miss X’s argument that the property it offered was not suitable and it reinstated the main housing duty for Miss X. It told Miss X to share its decision with the choice based letting scheme. After she did so, the choice based letting scheme reinstated Miss X’s ‘Band 2 Homeless’ priority which it later backdated to the end of June; the date of the Council’s decision on the review.

My findings

31. Miss X complained to the Ombudsman in June 2022. Therefore, Miss X’s complaints about events before June 2021 are late. We can consider late complains if we decide there are good reasons to do so. I am satisfied the delays caused by the Council discussed below are good reasons to investigate events from March 2021.
32. I am satisfied the Council appropriately decided to end the main housing duty to Miss X in March 2021. The Council knew, at this time, that Miss X had signed a tenancy agreement for the property it offered her under that duty.
33. I am also satisfied with the Council’s explanation for why it closed the review case it opened in early March 2021. It opened this review before Miss X accepted the property and it then had reason to believe that Miss X was happy with the offered property. However, the Council failed to tell Miss X it had closed the review case. That poor communication was fault which caused Miss X avoidable confusion.
34. After Miss X gave notice on the property in March 2021, there was an initial delay on the Council’s part during which time Miss X contacted the Council several times about a review before it accepted one. The Council has accepted it should have opened a new review case in mid-March 2021, after Miss X gave notice to the housing association. In its response to my enquiries, the Council said it backdated the review case it opened in June 2021 to 18 March 2021. I accept that was the appropriate date on which the Council should have accepted Miss X’s review request. Based on that date, the Council should have sent Miss X its decision on her review within 56 days, by 13 May 2021.
35. However, the Council took until 7 July 2022 to complete the review and notify Miss X of its decision. This was 420 days late. I am not satisfied the Council’s explanation that it had a backlog of review requests justifies this delay and therefore, I am satisfied the delay was fault.
36. Had the Council properly acted on Miss X’s 18 March 2021 request for a review and made its decision by 13 May 2021, I am satisfied that the Council would have reinstated Miss X’s Band 2 priority at that time. Therefore, Miss X missed out on the opportunity to bid on properties while having the correct priority for over a year.
37. Evidence from the Council about the properties offered under its choice based letting scheme during the period shows there would have been 87 properties which Miss X could have bid on in her preferred areas. Of these, had Miss X had Band 2 priority from 13 May 2021 she would have been the successful bidder on 30 of those properties.
38. Although it is unlikely Miss X would have bid on all the properties available to her during that time, I am satisfied the evidence shows she would likely have been the successful bidder on a two-bedroom property by the end of 2021. Therefore, I am satisfied the evidence shows Miss X likely missed out on a permanent home due to the delay in the Council considering her review.
39. The Council says Miss X needs a two-bedroom property while Miss X’s temporary accommodation only has one bedroom. Therefore, I am satisfied the delays have meant that Miss X has been living in accommodation smaller than the Council accepts is necessary between January and October 2022.
40. There were also significant delays in the Council responding to Miss X’s Stage 2 complaint. Miss X asked to escalate her complaint in March 2022 but the Council only responded in June. I am satisfied this delay was fault which caused Miss X further frustration, time and trouble.

Others similarly affected

41. As part of my enquiries, I asked the Council to provide details of the other homelessness review requests it had received since March 2021.
42. The information provided by the Council shows that, of the reviews where it overturned the original decision, it took more than the allowed time in 121 cases.
43. The evidence also shows that of the reviews it has received since March 2021, the Council has 247 outstanding reviews which have already passed the maximum time allowed for a decision.

Back to top

Agreed action

44. Within one month of my final decision the Council will:
• backdate Miss X’s Band 2 Homeless priority under its choice based letting scheme to 13 May 2021 (the date by which it should have made its review decision);
• give Miss X the choice of either:
1. a direct offer of the next, available, suitable property for which she is eligible in her preferred areas; or
2. allow Miss X to resume bidding on her preferred properties with her amended priority;
• pay Miss X £1,650 to recognise the distress caused by living in a home smaller than she needs between January and November 2022; and
• pay Miss X £300 to recognise the avoidable distress, time and trouble caused by the poor communication and delays in responding to her stage 2 complaint.
45. Within three months of my final decision the Council will:
• write to all people who asked for a review of their homelessness decision since March 2021 where the Council took longer than the allowed time to complete the review and overturned its original decision. The Council should apologise for the delays in completing the review and tell those affected that they can complain to the Council if they believe the delay affected them.
• develop a plan to complete those reviews it has yet to decide which have been waiting for more than the maximum time allowed. This plan should be shared with the Ombudsman and the Council should keep the Ombudsman updated on the progress towards completing those reviews.
• review its information sharing arrangements with the choice based letting scheme. It should consider whether it can better share information about decisions made by its homelessness team which affect applicants’ priority under the scheme so such changes are made as quickly as possible and the correct priority dates are used.

Back to top

Final decision

46. I have completed my investigation. There were delays in how the Council considered Miss X’s requests for a review of its decision and how it responded to her complaint. This caused Miss X to miss out on the opportunity to move into a more suitable property and caused her avoidable distress, time and trouble. The Council agreed to pay Miss X a financial remedy and offer her a suitable property. It also agreed to tell similarly affected people of their right to complain and review its practices.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

47. I have not investigated Miss X’s complaints about events before March 2021. Miss X complained to the Ombudsman in June 2022, so her complaints about events before June 2021 are late. While I am satisfied the delays on the Council’s part justify investigating what happened from March 2021, Miss X could have complained to us about events before this sooner. I do not believe there are good reasons to consider Miss X’s complaint about earlier events now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman