Summary: Ms X complains that the Council wrongly considered she did not qualify for the housing register and did not consider her homelessness application. The Council is at fault as it did not properly consider Ms X’s housing register application and failed to consider a homelessness application made by her representative. As a result, the Council’s decision that Ms X did not qualify for the housing register was wrong. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice to Ms X by apologising to her and making a payment of £400. It will also now place Ms X on the housing register.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains that the Council wrongly considered she did not have housing need so did not qualify for the housing register despite telling the Council that she was fleeing domestic abuse. Ms X also complains that the Council did not deal with her homelessness application. Ms X considers that as a result she has been living with the risk of domestic abuse for longer than necessary.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
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

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have investigated how the Council has considered Ms X’s housing register application and homelessness application from January 2023. I have not investigated earlier events as these are out of time and it is reasonable to expect Ms X to have made a complaint about these matters sooner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have:

• Considered the complaint and the information provided by Ms X;
• Discussed the issues with Ms X;
• Made enquiries of the Council and considered the information provided;
• Invited Ms X and the Council to comment on the draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

8. 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))
9. 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))
   

10. Councils must notify applicants in writing of certain decisions and give reasons. This includes decisions that the the applicant is not a qualifying person. Where an authority considers an applicant may have difficulty in understanding the implications of a decision on ineligibility or disqualification it would be good practice to make arrangements for the information to be explained verbally in addition to providing a written notice (Allocation of accommodation: guidance for local authorities, paragraphs 5.19 and 5.20)
11. The Council must also notify the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9))
12. If someone contacts a council seeking accommodation or help to obtain accommodation and gives ‘reason to believe’ they ‘may be’ homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, the council has a duty to make inquiries into what, if any, further duty it owes them. The threshold for triggering the duty to make inquiries is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular department of the council. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)

What happened

13. The following is a summary of the key facts relevant to my consideration of the complaint. It does not include everything that happened.
14. In March 2023, Ms X applied for the housing register. The Council refused Ms X’s application as it considered there was no evidence of housing need.
15. Ms X made a homelessness application as she had been asked to leave her property by a relative. The Council asked Ms X to provide documents for her homelessness application and the contact details of the relative who had asked her to leave. Ms X did not provide the requested information so the Council closed Ms X’s application.
16. Ms X made a further housing register application in early November 2023. On her application Ms X said she was making her application to get away from abuse and gave details of her Independent Domestic Violence Advisor (IDVA). She included a letter from her IDVA which said Ms X was at risk of domestic abuse. The IDVA’s letter also said Ms X would like to make a homelessness application and that it was not reasonable for her to continue to occupy her property.
17. The Council records show that in late November 2023 it decided Ms X had no evidence of housing need so she did not qualify for the housing register. The Council did not consider the homelessness application at this time.
18. In February 2024, Ms X complained to the Council that it had not notified her of the outcome of her housing register or homelessness applications. The Council responded and advised an officer had contacted her by telephone to inform her of the housing register application decision. In response to my enquiries the Council said that during the call an officer explained how Ms X could seek a review of its decision that she did not qualify for the housing register.
19. The Council also advised Ms X to submit a new homelessness application if she was threatened with homelessness.
20. I asked the Council to explain how it considered Ms X’s disclosure on her application form that she was fleeing abuse. I also asked what enquiries it had made of Ms X’s IDVA when making its decision that she did not have housing need. The Council has said information from her IDVA regarding abuse was put on the system on 1 November 2023. This was after her last application was closed so it did not have that information at the time it assessed her case.
21. The Council considered a homelessness application from Ms X in April 2024. Its records note that officers discussed interim accommodation with Ms X as she said she was fleeing domestic abuse. Ms X said she preferred to stay living at the property with her relative while she found alternative accommodation. The Council accepted the prevention duty and I understand it continues to accept this duty.

Analysis

22. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council considered Ms X’s housing register and homelessness applications in March 2023. Ms X did not indicate she was fleeing from domestic abuse on either her housing register application or homelessness application. There is also no evidence to show Ms X provided the information required by the Council to deal with her homelessness application.
23. There is evidence of fault in how the Council considered Ms X’s housing register application in November 2023. On her application form, Ms X has said she was making the application to get away from abuse. She also provided her IDVA’s details on the form. There is no evidence to show the Council gave any consideration to this information when deciding Ms X had no housing need. This is fault.
24. The Council has said that Ms X uploaded the supporting letter from her IDVA after it had considered her housing register application. But the Council’s records show an officer decided Ms X’s housing register application a few weeks after Ms X had uploaded the letter from her IDVA. I therefore consider, on balance, that the Council had the IDVA’s information when determining Ms X’s application. Its failure to consider the supporting letter is therefore fault.
25. The Council notified Ms X of its decision that she did not qualify for the housing register by telephone in January 2024 as a reasonable adjustment. The Council should also have notified her of its decision in writing. This would have supported the information provided by telephone and ensured Ms X was fully aware of how she could challenge the decision. The statutory guidance also provides the decision should be in writing. I therefore consider the failure to issue a written decision is fault.
26. The IDVA’s letter clearly stated that Ms X wanted to make a homelessness application. There is no evidence to show the Council acted on this letter and considered a homelessness application at this time. This is fault.

Injustice to Ms X

27. On balance, I consider the Council would have accepted the prevention duty to Ms X if it had considered the IDVA’s letter in November 2023. There is no evidence to show Ms X’s circumstances changed between November 2023 and April 2024 when the Council accepted the duty. The Council therefore delayed by five months in accepting the duty and providing support to Ms X to prevent her homelessness.
28. I also consider the Council would have decided Ms X qualified for the housing register in November 2023 as she would have had reasonable preference by virtue of the Council accepting the prevention duty. I cannot know, on balance, what priority the Council would have awarded to Ms X if it had placed her on the housing register in November 2023. This is because I do not know if the Council would have accepted Ms X was fleeing domestic abuse in November 2023. I therefore cannot know if Ms X would have successfully bid for a property. But the fault caused distress to Ms X. It also caused uncertainty to Ms X which the Council should remedy by now considering her priority.
29. The Council changed its allocations scheme in April 2024. The Council should therefore consider what priority it would have awarded to Ms X in November 2023 and how that is affected by its new allocations scheme.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. That the Council will:
1. Send a written apology to Ms X for the distress and uncertainty caused by the failure to properly consider her housing register and homelessness applications. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
2. Make a payment of £400 to Ms X to acknowledge the distress and uncertainty caused to her.
3. Place Ms X on the housing register and consider what priority it should have awarded in November 2023, what priority should be awarded under the new allocations scheme and to backdate that priority as appropriate. The Council should write to Ms X to notify her of her priority and also provide this information by telephone, if necessary.
4. Review its procedures for considering housing register applications to ensure officers consider all the information provided by an applicant in support of their housing register application, send written decisions and ensure officers refer any homelessness application made at the same time to the homelessness team for consideration.
31. The Council should take the action at a) to c) within one month and the action at d) within two months of my final decision. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

Fault causing injustice to Ms X.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman