Summary: The Council’s failure to provide Miss X with interim accommodation, issue written decisions with review rights on her homeless application and her application to the housing register, and delay responding to her complaints were fault. Miss X was at risk of domestic abuse and the Council’s fault caused her avoidable frustration and distress. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X, and act to improve its services.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained that the Council did not help her when she wanted to move to its area to escape domestic abuse. In particular she says the Council:
1. Failed to process her application to the housing register in October 2021
2. Wrongly told her she would not qualify for the housing register in November 2021 but failed to give her a decision with review rights
3. Failed to provide interim accommodation and failed to issue a decision in writing on her homeless application
4. Wrongly closed her case and failed to respond to requests for contact
5. Delayed in responding to her complaints.
2. As a result, Miss X says she remained living in a property known to the perpetrator in an area where she did not feel safe.

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 Miss X and considered the information she provided.
6. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
7. I referred to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
8. Miss X and the organisation 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

Homelessness law and guidance

9. 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.
10. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must make inquiries into what, if any, duty it owes. The threshold for taking an application is low. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5) 
11. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. If a council has reason to believe an applicant might be homeless because of domestic abuse, it should provide interim accommodation immediately. (Housing Act 1996, section 188 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 21.25)
12. A person is homeless if it is not reasonable for them to continue to occupy accommodation. This includes if it is probable that this will lead to violence or domestic abuse against them or any other member of the household. (Housing Act 1996, section 177(1))
13. In assessing whether someone is homeless due to domestic abuse, councils should refer to the DASH risk assessment. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 21.21)
14. 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)

Housing 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. 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;
17. The Council must also notify the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))
18. The Council’s scheme says to qualify, applicants must have lived in its area for at least three of the last five years. However, there are exceptions to this rule. This includes applicants from outside the area who “are victims of domestic violence who cannot return to their place of origin as to do so would place them at risk of violence.”

What happened

19. In October 2021, Miss X wrote to the Council to ask about joining its housing register. She said her ex-partner, from whom she experienced domestic abuse, knew her address and was continuing to harass her. She said the police had placed a marker on the address.
20. In November, the Council responded to Miss X by email. It said it could not accept an application from her unless she had been living in the Council’s area for at least three of the last five years. It also said that because she had accommodation in the private sector, it would consider her “adequately housed and [her] application turned down on these grounds as well.” It signposted her to the Council’s homelessness service.
21. Miss X approached the Council’s homelessness service in early November. The Council’s records say it had reason to believe Miss X was homeless. It sought further information from the police and asked Miss X to provide various information, including police incident numbers, which she did.
22. Miss X’s domestic abuse worker wrote a letter to the Council in support of her application to move. This said a move would mean the perpetrator would no longer know Miss X’s address and could no longer harass her.
23. In late November, Miss X wrote to the Council asking for an update about her case.
24. In April 2022, the Council’s records say it called Miss X to ask if she still needed help. It left her a voicemail and closed her case.
25. Miss X made a complaint to Nottingham City Homes (NCH) in June 2022. NCH is an Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO) set up by the Council to manage its social housing.
26. NCH did not tell the Council’s complaint team about Miss X’s complaint until mid-August. The Council responded at stage one of its complaint process at the end of the month. It said:
• The Council had decided Miss X was not at imminent risk because the police had put a marker on the property
• It had agreed to make enquiries of the police and Miss X had provided incident numbers for this
• The police had not responded to the Council’s request
• It closed her case after she didn’t respond to its attempt to contact her
• The officer who dealt with her homeless application had left the Council, which might explain why Miss X did not receive a response
27. Miss X was unhappy with this response and asked the Council to consider the complaint at stage two. The Council responded in early December. It said:
• It was satisfied the Council tried to contact her by landline and mobile before closing her case
• The Council did not know Miss X’s landline number had changed
• Because the officer had since left the Council, it could not check if she had sent emails
28. Miss X remained dissatisfied and brought her complaint to the Ombudsman.

My findings

29. I have set out my findings on each complaint in the order listed in paragraph 1:
1. The Council says it did not receive an application to the housing register from Miss X in October 2021. However, its email to her in November confirms it received her letter, tried to telephone her and then sent an email. The Council should have provided Miss X with information about how to apply to join the register. The Council’s failure to do so was fault.
2. In its email in November, the Council told Miss X she would not qualify to join its housing register because she did not meet the local connection criteria. This failed to consider whether Miss X’s experience of domestic abuse and her need to move home to escape harassment meant she met the exception to this rule.

The Council should have allowed Miss X to apply to join the register. Had it done so, it would have properly considered her circumstances and issued her a written decision. Not to do so was fault. This decision would have included a right of review. The Council did not give Miss X this right, which was fault. I cannot say whether the Council would have decided Miss X qualified to join the housing register. However, Miss X must live with this uncertainty, which is an injustice.

3. The Council’s records show it had reason to believe Miss X was homeless in November 2021 because of domestic abuse. It therefore had a duty to provide Miss X with interim accommodation and make inquiries into what, if any, further duty it owed. Failure to do was fault. Miss X has since secured housing from a different council and so she is no longer at risk. However, the Council’s failure to provide interim accommodation means she remained at risk for longer than necessary. This is an injustice to Miss X.

In its complaint response, the Council said it decided Miss X was not at immediate risk because the police had put a marker on the address. It said it would reconsider this decision once it got information from the police. There is no evidence of this in the contemporaneous records of this decision. The Council did not refer to the DASH risk assessment or try to assess the risk to Miss X. Instead, it relied on seeking information from the police. It also failed to follow up when the police did not respond. This was not in line with the Code of Guidance and was fault.

After making inquiries, the Council should have issued a decision in writing, setting out Miss X’s statutory right to ask for a review. Failure to do so was fault. This denied Miss X access to her statutory review rights, which is an injustice.

4. Miss X asked the Council for an update on her homeless application in late November. There is no evidence the Council responded to her letter. This was fault. There are no case notes or other records to show the Council made any efforts to contact Miss X between November 2021 and April 2022, when it closed her case. The Council should have tried to contact Miss X sooner. Failure to do so was fault.

Miss X says she sent several emails to her housing officer. The Council says because this officer left the Council, it cannot check this. On balance, I accept Miss X sent these emails. In any event, the Council should have contacted Miss X, and any other applicants with open cases, when the officer left to say who would now be managing the case. Failure to do so was fault. The Council’s poor communication caused Miss X avoidable frustration and distress at an already difficult time. This is an injustice to Miss X.

5. Miss X complained to NCH in June 2022. As an ALMO, we consider it to be acting on behalf of the Council. It received a complaint and told Miss X it would pass this on to the Council. It did not do so until August, when Miss X sent a further email chasing a response. This delay of two months was fault.

Miss X asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage two in early September. The Council did not respond until early December. Under its policy, it should have responded within 25 working days. The Council did not contact Miss X to tell her it would not respond to her complaint on time. The Council’s delay of over two months in responding to Miss X’s complaint was fault. These delays caused Miss X avoidable frustration and time and trouble, which is an injustice.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. To remedy the injustice to Miss X from the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Miss X in writing
• Pay Miss X £500 in recognition of the impact of the Council’s faults in her homelessness application
• Pay Miss X £250 in recognition of the impact of the Council’s faults in allocations and complaint handling
31. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
32. The Council should also take the following action to improve its services:
• Remind relevant staff they should provide information about how to apply to the housing register to anyone who seeks it.
• Remind relevant staff of the circumstances in which those fleeing domestic abuse can join the housing register under the exceptions to the local connection criteria.
• Remind relevant staff the duty to provide interim accommodation to those it has reason to believe are homeless and may be in priority need arises immediately and should be met while the Council makes inquiries.
• Provide training or guidance to relevant staff on Chapter 21 of the Homelessness Code of Guidance to ensure the Council completes risk assessments and is aware of the statutory duties and guidance which apply when it has reason to believe an applicant is homeless because of domestic abuse.
• Ensure all ALMOs and contractors delivering services on behalf of the Council are aware of the Council’s complaints policy and have procedures in place to either deal with or refer complaints.
• Issue guidance to staff with responsibility for responding to complaints on keeping complainants informed when the Council will not meet the timescale in its complaint policy.
33. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within eight weeks of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman