Summary: We found fault with the way the Council communicated with Mrs X about her homelessness and housing. The Council agreed actions to remedy the injustice to Mrs X.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about further issues with the Council’s communication about her homelessness and housing.
2. She said despite the Ombudsman’s previous finding of fault it continued to cause her distress and frustration due to its lack of communication and action.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

3. I did not investigate events prior to March 2022 because this was covered by a previous Ombudsman decision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. 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

6. I spoke to Mrs 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.
7. Mrs 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

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.
9. Councils must provide to anyone in their district information and advice free of charge on:

• preventing homelessness;
• securing accommodation when homeless;
• the rights of people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness;
• the duties of the authority;
• any help that is available from the authority or anyone else, for people in the council’s district who are homeless or may become homeless (whether or not they are threatened with homelessness), and
• how to access that help.

10. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
11. Assessments and personalised housing plans must be kept under review throughout the prevention and relief stages, and any amendments notified to the applicant. Councils will wish to establish timescales for reviewing plans, and these are likely to vary according to individual needs and circumstances. Some applicants will need more intensive housing authority involvement to achieve a successful outcome than others, and the timescales for regular contact and reviews should reflect this. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.32)
12. 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)
13. After completing inquiries, 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)
14. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:

• their eligibility for assistance
• what duty (if any) is owed to them if they are found to be homeless or threatened with homelessness
• the steps they are to take in their personalised housing plan at the prevention duty stage
• giving notice to bring the prevention duty to an end
• the steps they are to take in their personalised housing plan at the relief duty stage
• giving notice to bring the relief duty to an end
• giving notice in cases of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate
• to notify their case to another authority when the Council considers the conditions for referral are met
• whether the conditions are met for the referral of their case to another housing authority
• the conditions for referral to another authority are not met so the notifying housing authority owes the main housing duty
• 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.

Allocations

15. 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))
16. 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))

17. 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.

18. The Council must also notify the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))
19. Housing applicants can ask the council to review a wide range of decisions about their applications, including decisions about their housing priority.
20. Statutory guidance on the allocation of accommodation says:

• review procedures should be clear and fair with timescales for each stage of the process
• there should be a timescale for requesting a review - 21 days is suggested as reasonable;
• the review should be carried out by an officer senior to the original decision maker, or by a panel not including the original decision maker;
• reviews should normally be completed within a set deadline - 8 weeks is suggested as reasonable.

21. 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.
22. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme which enables housing applicants to bid for available properties which it advertises.

What happened

Background

23. In 2021 Mrs X left her home because of domestic abuse. She made a homeless application and the Council placed her in emergency accommodation. It assessed her case and decided she was homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need. It moved her to temporary accommodation.
24. In December 2021 and March 2022 the Ombudsman found fault with the Council for the way it communicated with Mrs X about her temporary accommodation and duties it owed her.

Chronology

25. What follows is a brief chronology of key events from March 2022. It does not contain all the information I reviewed during my investigation.
26. In March 2022 the Council wrote to Mrs X. It told her it accepted the main housing duty. It said she would remain in the temporary accommodation and explained how to request a suitability review.
27. Mrs X complained to the Council in April. She said her housing officer wrongly accused her of fraud and refusing suitable properties. The Council replied. It did not uphold her complaint. It said the questions about her finances were part of the enquiries in relation to her homeless application. It also explained the most likely way to relieve her homelessness would be through the private sector.
28. In June Mrs X asked for her complaint to be considered at stage two. Mrs X said she felt the officer had been disrespectful to her and threatened her with eviction. She asked for compensation for travel coast and the delays in her case.
29. In July Mrs X’s support worker contacted the Council for an update because it had not been in contact with Mrs X since May. It told them the officer had completed their enquiries and would make a decision about the main duty.
30. The Council sent its stage two complaint response. It:

• Apologised that Mrs X felt the housing officer was disrespectful to her. The officer denied this.
• Said there was no evidence Mrs X had been threatened with eviction but said it could have explained the end of relief duty better.
• Did not find any evidence she was accused of fraud.
• Would not reimburse travel expenses because it was unnecessary.
• Apologised for the delays making the main housing duty decision but declined to offer any compensation.

31. Mrs X remained unhappy with the Council’s response and complained to the Ombudsman.
32. Mrs X’s support worker chased the main duty decision again in August and September.
33. In September the Council told Mrs X’s support worker her case was still under assessment. It could not provide the name of her housing officer.
34. In October the Council wrote to Mrs X. It told her it accepted it owed her the main housing duty. It also emailed her about her housing application and bidding number.

My findings

35. I found fault with the way the Council communicated with Mrs X about her homelessness and housing application.
36. The communication with Mrs X and her support worker about the main housing duty was inconsistent and misleading. The Council wrote to Mrs X accepting it owed her the main housing duty in March 2022. Due to the lack of contact her support worker followed this up between July and September. The Council told them the case was still being assessed and the decision had not been made.
37. This caused Mrs X frustration and uncertainty about what was happening with her homelessness and housing.
38. Mrs X’s housing officer changed in March 2022 but she was not given the name of her new officer until the end of September 2022. Not only was this confusing for Mrs X but it also meant her case was allowed to drift with no meaningful action. This was fault.
39. There was a meeting with Council officers and Mrs X’s support worker in June 2022. The support workers correspondence following the meeting referred to an agreed action for a professionals meeting. The Council was unable to provide any minutes or case notes in relation to the meeting. It said the officers did not recall agreeing to a professionals meeting, but there was no record to support this. The lack of case recording and meeting minutes was fault. It was another example of poor communication and case management.
40. There was fault with the way the Council managed Mrs X’s PHP. The PHP contained little detail and Mrs X was not involved in the review process when the plan was updated. The PHP should have reflected Mrs X circumstances and needs. It should have been kept under review with Mrs X’s involvement. This may have helped avoid some of the drift and inconsistency in this case.
41. There was fault with the way the Council communicated with Mrs X about her housing application. Mrs X has an active housing register application. This was backdated to March 2021. The Council told Mrs X about her application in October 2022 and included her bidding number. It did not tell her about the start date or banding.
42. Mrs X had the right to request a review of the banding decision if she disagreed. The Council denied her that opportunity because it failed to explain her banding in its communication with her. I do not think this caused an injustice as it is unlikely Mrs X would have secured a property in this time.

Summary

43. It was concerning that there were further failures and fault with this case despite two previous Ombudsman decisions about similar issues. The Council should take action to ensure this does not continue.
44. We welcomed the Council’s response to our investigation. It acknowledged the fault and proposed the following remedies in recognition of the injustice it caused Mrs X:

• An apology.
• Review the suitability of Mrs X’s temporary accommodation.
• Review and update the PHP in conjunction Mrs X.
• The Council is already in the process of updating its IT system within the housing service.
• Remind officers of the importance of record keeping and take action when this does not happen.
• Pay Mrs X £200 in recognition of the injustice it caused her.

45. My recommendations below included an increased financial remedy.

Back to top

Agreed action

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

• Pay Mrs X £500 in recognition of the distress, frustration, time and trouble it caused her.
• Meet with Mrs X (either in person or online) to review and update her PHP. The PHP should be regularly reviewed and updated.
• Carry out a suitability review of Mrs X’s temporary accommodation. It should communicate with Mrs X to ensure it fully understands the reasons she says the property is not suitable.
• If the Council decides the property is unsuitable it should move Mrs X to a suitable property without delay.
• The Council should fully explain Mrs X’s banding decision in writing. It should ask if she would like to request a review of her banding decision. The Council should accept a late request for the reasons outlined in my decision and backdate the banding if there is any change because of the review.
• The Council should tell the Ombudsman what action it will take to avoid repeated failures in this case.
• Remind relevant officers of the importance of record keeping, PHP reviews and communication of decisions in writing with review rights included.

47. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

48. I found fault with the Council causing injustice. I completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman