Summary: The Council accepted there were failings in the way it handled Miss X’s homelessness application when she sought assistance after fleeing domestic abuse. It will pay her £3,900 for the distress caused and an additional £150 for a delay in responding to her complaint. It will also make changes to its processes.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s lack of support when she asked for assistance after fleeing domestic abuse. In particular, she complained the Council failed to:
1. provide interim accommodation for her even though she considered she was in priority need;
2. secure long term accommodation for her despite her meeting the criteria for the main housing duty;
3. put its decisions in writing, and tell her about her rights of review and appeal; and
4. respond to her complaint at stage 2 in a timely manner.
2. As a result of these faults, Miss X said she was street homeless, and sometimes sofa surfing in unsafe situations, for 13 months. She said it was upsetting when she later found out the Council should have helped her. This was aggravated by the Council’s failure to take her complaint seriously.

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. 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)
5. 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)
6. Miss X complained in October 2022 about events from 2018. She explained she had not discovered until July 2022 that there was reason to complain. In its initial response to her complaint, the Council said it would not usually investigate complaints about events so long ago but would do so on this occasion because of the seriousness of the issues raised. It is clear from its response that it had sufficient records available to enable it to investigate.
7. I have exercised discretion to investigate the period from 2018 on the basis that there were good reasons for Miss X not complaining earlier and that there are sufficient records available for me to make robust findings and achieve a worthwhile outcome.
8. 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)
9. Miss X would normally have the right to ask for a review of key housing decisions, such as whether she was in priority need, following which she could appeal to the county court on a point of law. However, Miss X complained the Council did not send her any decisions in writing and did not give her information about her review/appeal rights. It is not reasonable to expect her to go to court if she was not advised she could do so, and I have therefore exercised discretion to investigate all aspects of her complaint.
10. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.
11. 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

12. I considered:
• the information Miss X provided and spoke to her about her complaint;
• the information the Council provided in response to my enquiries;
• relevant law and guidance, as set out below; and
• our guidance on remedies, available on our website.
13. Miss 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

Relevant law and guidance

Homelessness

14. 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.
15. Where a council is satisfied a person is homeless and eligible for support, it has a duty to take reasonable steps to help the person secure accommodation that will be available for at least six months. This is the relief duty, and it lasts for 56 days.
16. A council must secure interim accommodation for the person and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188.)
17. Examples of applicants in priority need are:
• pregnant women
• people with dependent children
• people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability or old age
• from 5 July 2021, those who are homeless because they are fleeing domestic abuse.
18. 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 Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
19. The council must make enquiries to decide whether it owes the applicant a main housing duty. It will usually owe a main housing duty if it is satisfied the applicant is homeless, eligible, in priority need and not intentionally homeless.
20. If, after making enquiries, the council decides the applicant is not in priority need, it should send a decision in writing setting out its reasons. The applicant has the right to ask for a decision of the decision within 21 days. Following the review, they can appeal to the county court on a point of law.

Complaints handling

21. The Council operates a two-stage complaints process. At stage 1 the complaint will be addressed by the department complained about and a response will be issued within 10 working days.
22. At stage 2, which the Council calls the Chief Executive’s stage, the complaint is considered by the corporate customer service team, which should respond within 20 working days.

Back to top

What happened

23. Miss X approached the Council for assistance in late 2018 after fleeing domestic abuse. She had left her home the previous day after calling the police, who assisted her to go to hospital, and arranged accommodation for her for one night.
24. She said the police told her to attend the Council offices the following day and ask for emergency accommodation, which she did. She said she completed some forms and provided her passport. She said that whilst she was completing the forms, the police officer, who had assisted her the previous day, also attended the Council offices. She said he told Council officers about her situation and that, during the meeting, he made a hand written note to confirm what he had said. This note, which was included in the Council’s records when it later responded to Miss X’s subject access request, confirmed she had been subjected to months of abuse and listed some of the injuries she had sustained. It said she was “at risk of further harm with no place to sleep”.
25. Miss X said she was initially asked to wait after completing the forms, but that some hours later she was told she could leave, and that the Council would contact her. She says she asked it to contact her by email as she had no way to charge her mobile phone, but she could use the library to pick up emails. I note that in the homelessness application she recorded her preferred method of communication was by email. She said she told the officer she had nowhere to go and would be on the street.
26. Council records show a housing officer made a referral to a charitable organisation that could provide night shelter accommodation for up to 28 days the same day Miss X approached the Council. Miss X says she was only told about the night shelter two weeks later.
27. Miss X said she went to the night shelter but only stayed one night because she was uncomfortable having to share facilities with men. She also said it was not suitable because she could not stay there during the day. She did not tell the Council she had left the night shelter, nor that she considered the accommodation was not suitable.
28. In response to my enquiries, the Council said:
• the housing officer did not consider there was sufficient information to give them reason to believe Miss X was in priority need. On this basis, the Council did not accept a duty to provide interim accommodation;
• it accepts it should have issued a letter explaining why it did not owe a duty to provide interim accommodation, and explaining it had identified alternative accommodation with the night shelter;
• the housing officer recalled making calls to other refuges before identifying the night shelter they referred Miss X to, but did not identify any other refuges with space available that day. They did not make a record of the they calls made, which the Council accepts they should have done;
• the night shelter the Council referred Miss X to was operated by a charity that provided mixed gender hostel accommodation, including breakfast and dinner, and supports vulnerable adults with a range of support needs; and
• the housing officer gave Miss X a letter confirming it had accepted a relief duty. This letter, which I have seen, also included a personalised housing plan (PHP). Miss X signed the bottom of the PHP to confirm she had received it.
29. The PHP stated Miss X:
• had been given the Council’s help and advice for single homeless people booklet, including details of hostels she could refer herself to;
• should look for an affordable room to rent in the private sector and should use family and friends to help her. If an affordable room was identified, she should provide details to the Council so it could secure a tenancy for her;
• should complete and return the income and expenses form given to her; and
• should register with home finder UK (website address given) and bid regularly for any suitable property on that scheme.
30. The PHP said the Council would:
• make the referral to the night shelter where Miss X could stay for 28 days;
• refer her to its private sector opportunities scheme so she could be considered for any suitable accommodation available through that scheme;
• make further referrals for housing when Miss X had provided evidence of her income;
• contact her to view any affordable private rented room it identified; and
• negotiate with any prospective landlord, including applying for a reasonable deposit if required to secure the tenancy.
31. I have seen the housing officer’s email to the night shelter, sent on the day Miss X approached the Council, confirming the referral and referring to a telephone conversation earlier that day.
32. Council records show it attempted to call Miss X two weeks after the initial appointment, but she did not answer, so they sent an email offering an appointment for further advice two days later. Miss X said she attended the appointment, but the Council has no record of this. At that appointment Miss X said she was given information about the Council’s Home Finder service and was shown how to use it. However, she said officer she saw was dismissive and said the Council would not be providing housing for her.
33. In mid January 2019 the housing officer emailed a colleague asking if Miss X had been in touch with them. They said Miss X needed to complete a medical form. There is no evidence to show the housing officer or their colleague tried sending this by email.
34. In early February 2019, Council records indicate the housing officer sent an email to the night shelter to ask if Miss X was still staying there. The Council said there was no copy of this email on Miss X’s file. There is also no record of a reply.
35. In late March 2019, the housing officer decided Miss X did not have a priority need for housing. They made this decision based on the information Miss X had provided at the outset, and without making any further enquiries, including contacting Miss X. In response to my enquiries, the Council accepted it should have contacted Miss X to obtain details about the depression and anxiety she reported on the homelessness application form before deciding she was not in priority need.
36. The housing officer issued a letter setting out the reasons for their decision and Miss X’s right to ask for a review if she was unhappy with this decision. This letter was held on file for her to collect on the basis that Miss X had not been engaging with the Council. They did not send the letter to her by email, despite this being her preferred method of communication. In its response to my enquiries, the Council accepted this was fault, which meant Miss X was not aware of its decision or her review rights.
37. A few days after this, in early April, the housing officer sent an email to Miss X. The email said they had tried to contact her by telephone and by email to review the PHP and record any changes to her housing needs. They said they could not keep her application open for ever and advised her to contact them by the next day with an update or they would consider closing the application due to her lack of contact.
38. Miss X responded to the email the same day. She said: “I am still homeless sometimes on the street sometimes sofa surfing I’m not able to check my emails all the time”. In response to my enquiries, the Council said the housing officer spoke to Miss X the following day but did not make a record of the call on the file. Following the call, the housing officer emailed Miss X to say she could contact them for further advice and assistance.
39. The Council said it had not sent a letter ending its duty because it hoped Miss X would subsequently re-engage with it. Instead, it kept the file open. There is no record of any further action or communication with Miss X until 2020 when she made a fresh homelessness application.

Complaints handling

40. Miss X said she only became aware the Council should have done more to help her in 2022. She made a subject access request, and the Council sent her the relevant records. On 10 July 2022, she made a formal complaint. She explained the background to her request for assistance and set out why she considered the Council had failed in its duty of care towards her.
41. The Council responded on 20 July 2022. It said:
• the day she approached it for assistance, it gave her advice about her housing options and issued a PHP. It said she had no medical or disability problems so it had referred her to a charity that could provide accommodation for up to 28 days;
• it said Miss X did not respond to the officer’s telephone calls and only responded to one email. Therefore, it had closed the case after 56 days;
• it then set out some details relating to the later application, which Miss X had not complained about, and concluded the complaint was not upheld.
42. Miss X asked the Council to escalate the complaint to stage 2 on 26 July. She said some parts of the response were inaccurate. She said she had attended the appointment two weeks after her initial contact, and she set out what was discussed at that meeting. She also said she had responded to the email asking for an update but did not receive any advice or assistance.
43. The Council sent a “holding letter” on 28 July 2022. It said it would let her know when her complaint was registered, and an investigation started. After various communications with no substantive update, Miss X complained to us. In response to our notification of the complaint in October 2022, the Council confirmed it was investigating the complaint. On 9 November 2022 the Council wrote to Miss X to apologise for its delay in acknowledging the complaint and said it would send its response by 13 December. The Council did not send its response until 21 December, which was 21 weeks after Miss X asked it to consider the complaint at stage 2.
44. The Council apologised for the delay in responding at stage 2 and offered to pay Miss X £100 in recognition of this. It did not uphold the complaint. It said its response was based on the records available, and it accepted that some of what it said differed from Miss X’s account. It said;
• at the time Miss X approached it, applicants fleeing domestic abuse were not automatically in “priority need”, but that it had referred her to a charitable organisation, which was the only accommodation available at the time;
• Miss X had missed the appointment set up 2 weeks after she first approached, and that the housing team continued to make efforts to contact her after this;
• it had issued a “no priority” decision letter but had held this on file because Miss X was not contactable. The law allows it to put decision letters on file for applicants to collect.
45. Miss X was unhappy with the response. She said she only received two emails, both of which she responded to. She asked why the Council had only sent two emails, given she had said this was her preferred communication method, and why it did not send the medical form and decision letter by email. She said the Council had still not explained why it did not provide emergency or longer term accommodation.

Lessons learned

46. In response to my enquiries, the Council identified a number of lessons learned from reviewing this case and set out the action it is taking to address the lessons, which it said was ongoing. This included:
• ensuring a letter was issued to the applicant when the Council did not accept a duty to provide interim accommodation under section 188;
• all telephone calls and emails to be stored as notes on the applicant’s file for a clear audit trail of the actions taken;
• all decision letters to be issued to the applicant’s email address, where provided or, if an email address if not available, to be issued to the applicant in person wherever possible; and
• recruiting additional staff to deal with complaints.
47. It accepted its failings had caused significant distress and that it had not provided stable accommodation for Miss X for a period of 13 months. It offered to pay her £300 per month for that period, which totals £3,900. It offered her a further £150 for the delay in responding to her complaint. This offer is in line with our guidance on remedies.

Back to top

My findings

48. Miss X approached the Council for assistance in late 2018. At that time, an applicant fleeing domestic abuse was not automatically in priority need. Where the applicant was not pregnant or had dependent children, councils were required to consider whether they were vulnerable, for example, on grounds of health.
49. When the applicant first approaches it for assistance, a council must consider whether it has reason to believe an applicant may be in priority need, in which case it has a duty to provide interim accommodation. This is a low bar.
50. Miss X had indicated on her homelessness application that she suffered from depression and anxiety, and the police officer said she was at risk of harm. The Council has not been able to demonstrate how it considered whether it had reason to believe she may be in priority need, nor did it set out its reasons in writing for deciding it did not owe a duty to provide accommodation to her. This was fault.
51. On balance, if it had properly considered the question when Miss X first approached it, the Council would have accepted a duty to provide interim accommodation.
52. Accommodation may be suitable in an emergency that would not be suitable longer term. This means the Council may have referred her to the mixed gender hostel, although it should moved her from accommodation where she had to share facilities with men as soon as possible, given she was fleeing domestic abuse.
53. The Council accepts its records are incomplete. I cannot say what happened the day Miss X initially contacted it, including whether she was given information about the night shelter that day or two weeks later. If she had failed to attend an appointment, I would have expected the Council to follow up with her about that, but there is no evidence it did so. On balance, I find:
• the Council failed to make appropriate contact with her to provide advice and assistance, and failed to email her, despite her stating this was her preferred communication method;
• failed to make enquiries about her medical conditions before deciding she was not in priority need in March 2019;
• failed to issue her with its decision that she was not in priority need, which meant she was unaware of its decision or her right of review; and
• failed to issue her with a decision that it was ending its relief duty after 56 days, and instead left the case open but without taking any further action.
54. When Miss X complained, the Council did not uphold her complaint and did not identify any of the failings it later accepted in response to my enquiries. It also took 21 weeks to respond to the complaint at stage 2, which was an undue delay. Accordingly, I find fault with its complaints handling.

Back to top

Agreed action

55. Within one month of the date of the final decision, the Council will:
• apologise to Miss X for the failings identified; and
• pay her £3,900 to remedy the distress caused by the lack of accommodation for 13 months due to the Council’s fault, and a further £150 for the additional frustration caused by the Council’s delay in responding to her complaint. This is the sum the Council offered and is in line with our guidance on remedies.
56. Within one month of the date of the final decision, the Council will remind relevant staff of the importance of ensuring that they:
• properly consider whether there is reason to believe an applicant may be in priority need, and confirm in writing their reasons for deciding the Council does not owe a duty to provide interim accommodation to the applicant;
• store records of all telephone calls and emails on the applicant’s housing file to ensure a clear audit trail of actions taken;
• make appropriate enquiries of the applicant and relevant third parties before deciding whether the Council owes a main housing duty, and specifically that it seeks information from the applicant before deciding if they are in priority need; and
• send all decision letters to applicants by email, where an email address is available, or in cases where an email address is not available, to issue the decision letter to the applicant in person if at all possible.
57. Within two months of the date of the final decision, the Council will review whether there are any further lessons to be learned from the complaints handling in this case and, in particular, consider why the Council did not identify any failings in its handling of the homelessness application during the complaints process. It should share the learning with relevant staff.
58. The Ombudsman is aware of issues with the timeliness of complaint responses and is considering this separately. Therefore, no further recommendations about complaints handling are appropriate.
59. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

60. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to personal injustice. I have recommended action to remedy that injustice and prevent recurrence of the fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman