Summary: Miss Y complained about the Council’s response to her approach as homeless and failure to provide her with emergency accommodation. We have found fault by the Council, causing injustice, in failing to: respond properly to her request for assistance when she told it she was experiencing domestic abuse; properly assess its duties to Miss Y under the Housing Act 1996, in particular the duty to provide interim accommodation; carry out a review of its decision about her homelessness; and with its delays and communication failures. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice by apologising to Miss Y, making a payment to reflect the distress caused and service improvements.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss Y, complains the Council failed to properly respond to her approach as homeless and in priority need, initially when fleeing from domestic abuse, and later following the sale of her home. She said it failed to provide her and her children with emergency accommodation.
2. She said this failure left her at risk of further domestic abuse, and with extra housing costs she had to arrange and pay for herself.
3. She wants the Council to pay redress for the additional housing costs and upset and stress caused by its failures.

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.
5. 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)
6. 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.

7. 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

8. I spoke to Miss Y, made enquiries of the Council and read the information Miss Y and the Council provided about the complaint.
9. I invited Miss Y and the Council to comment on a draft version of this decision. I considered their responses before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

Duty to provide advisory services: S179 of the Housing Act 1996

10. Councils must provide to anyone in their district information and advice free of charge on a number of issues including preventing homelessness, the rights of people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness and the duties of the authority.

Homeless applications

11. 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)
12. A person is to be considered homeless if they do not have accommodation they are entitled to occupy, which is accessible and physically available to them (and their household) and which it would be reasonable for them to continue to occupy. Housing Act section 175)
13. It is not reasonable for a person to continue to occupy accommodation if it is likely this will lead to violence or domestic abuse against them. (Housing Act section 177(1))

The prevention duty

14. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help the applicants to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. In deciding what steps they and the applicant are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases and be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. (Housing Act 1996, sections 189A and 195 Housing Act 1996, and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18))

The relief duty

15. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

Duty to arrange interim accommodation (section 188)

16. A council must secure interim accommodation for an applicant and their household if it has reason to believe the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)

Priority need

17. Examples of applicants in priority need include people with dependent children and victims of domestic abuse.

Review rights

18. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of certain decisions, including about:

• their eligibility for assistance; and
• what duty (if any) is owed to them if they are found to be homeless or threatened with homelessness.

19. The Council must complete a review of these decisions within eight weeks of the review request. (Housing Act 1996 section 202)

What happened

20. I have set out a summary of the key events below. It is not meant to show everything that happened. It is based on my review of all the evidence provided about this complaint.

May/June 2023: Miss Y’s initial approach for help with her housing situation

21. Miss Y asked the Council, at the end of May, for help with her housing situation. She told it she was experiencing domestic abuse from a former partner and frightened about staying in her home.
22. An organisation supporting people experiencing domestic abuse had completed a Domestic Abuse, Stalking and Honour Based Violence (DASH) risk assessment with Miss Y to assess the risk to her from domestic abuse. This recorded Miss Y’s answers about the nature of the abuse, that she felt very frightened and unsafe in the property.
23. My understanding is the Council initially treated Miss Y’s contact as an application for housing and it began an assessment of her eligibility to join the register.
24. Miss Y heard nothing further from the Council. She contacted it on 5 June and asked for a call back.
25. The Council’s housing team referred Miss Y’s contact to its homelessness team on 14 June.
26. The homelessness team spoke to Miss Y. The Council says it had not been sent the DASH risk assessment at this point. Its note of the call records:

• it advised Miss Y it could potentially look at offering interim accommodation because of the domestic abuse, but she made it clear she did not want temporary, private sector rented or out-of-borough accommodation. She was only looking for social housing; and
• there was no reason to believe Miss Y was homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days. It did not take a homelessness application and provided general advice under S179.

August 2023: Miss Y’s further request for help

27. Miss Y contacted the Council again in August. The Council’s records say:

• Miss Y called three times, told it she wasn’t safe to remain in the property and asked it to re-allocate her case urgently;
• it decided Miss Y was not homeless on 11 August; and
• Miss Y told it on 25 August she had exchanged contracts for the sale of her property, with completion in 84 days. She asked whether the Council could now assist her with housing.

28. I have not seen evidence of the Council’s responses to Miss Y’s requests for help in August. The next record of contact I have seen is in November 2023.

14 November 2023: Council’s response to Miss Y’s request for help

29. The Council told Miss Y by letter headed “Housing Act 1996 Part VII General advice”:

• she had approached it on 7 August with a request for assistance;
• in response to her request, it was required to ask if she was homeless, or threatened with homelessness within the next 56 days, was seeking accommodation or assistance in obtaining accommodation; and
• it had considered the information gathered about her circumstances during its assessment and was satisfied it had reason to believe she was threatened with homelessness.

30. After setting out details of the information gathered, it said it had a duty to provide her with advice, including about preventing homelessness. This advice was:

• She would not qualify for the housing register because she had the financial means to find her own accommodation in the private rented sector.
• The main route of assistance from the Council would be help to find private sector rented accommodation, subject to the outcome of a financial assessment.
• It could help her secure private rented accommodation with an interest free loan for the deposit and advance rent. If it accepted she was homeless, it would offer this as an option.
• It also accepted she was in priority need and would be offered interim accommodation in the worst-case scenario.

31. The Council set out the further information it required to confirm her homelessness, including details about her income, and purchase of her new property.

Sale of Miss Y’s property

32. The sale of Miss Y’s property completed on 16 November. I understand at some stage Miss Y told the Council she had bought a new-build property which would not be ready until early 2024.

16 November 2023: Decision on Miss Y’s homelessness application

33. The Council issued its decision on Miss Y’s homelessness application. It said Miss Y was not homeless because:

• there had been no domestic abuse incidents since a recent non-molestation order was made;
• she had access to her current property for 84 days and, based on her financial assessment, she would be required to make her own housing arrangements until her new property was ready;
• she could consider a short-term private sector tenancy or staying with family or friends on a temporary basis; and
• it considered it reasonable for her to continue to occupy her accommodation and it had no duty to secure other accommodation for her.

34. The Council told Miss Y she had the right to ask for a review of the decision.

Decision on Miss Y’s housing application

35. The Council also issued its decision on Miss Y’s application to join the housing register on 16 November.
36. It told Miss Y she did not qualify to join the housing register because she had the financial means to afford her own property and had the right to request a review of its decision.

Miss Y’s request for a review

37. Miss Y immediately asked for a review of the Council’s decision she was not homeless. She said she had:

• told the Council she was experiencing domestic abuse early in 2023 but it refused to help;
• approached it again in mid-year. She had an interview with an officer and provided all the paperwork but heard nothing further despite chasing;
• not been asked for details of her income and expenditure; and
• sold her property and placed a deposit on a new house. But this would not be ready to move into until early 2024 and she and her children had nowhere to live until then.

38. Miss Y also said she was not asking for social housing. But the Council should provide her with accommodation until she could move into her new property. She was not able to rent in the private sector because of her credit status and level of income. She outlined that she had mental health issues and a disability. She asked what the Council expected her to do in these circumstances.

Miss Y’s complaint

39. Miss Y also complained to the Council about its response to her requests for assistance with her housing situation.
40. In its notes about Miss Y’s complaint the Council recorded:

• she was not at any risk of domestic abuse. It had investigated the situation. Miss Y had a non-molestation order in place and her former partner had made no contact with her for the year;
• Miss Y had been advised about her options when she approached it earlier this year. She had previously said she only wanted social housing;
• she had now sold her property, received the sale proceeds and put down a deposit on a new property. Although she was not able to move in until early 2024, the Council could not be used as a stop gap for accommodation. Miss Y had the means to alleviate her housing situation in the meantime; and
• it had decided Miss Y was not homeless.

February 2024: The Council’s review decision

41. The Council reviewed its decision Miss Y did not qualify to join the housing register. It said its November 2023 decision that she did not qualify was correct. She had no demonstrable housing need because:

• she had the right to occupy her property until completion of the sale on 16 November 2023;
• at that point she was in housing need because she was not expected to move into the new property until early 2024;
• but she also had savings, at that point, in excess of £30,000 and sufficient resources to secure her own accommodation; and
• even if she had been homeless, this did not qualify her to join the housing register.

42. The Council said it would address the issues with Miss Y’s homelessness application separately under its complaints procedure.

Miss Y’s response to the review decision

43. Miss Y told the Council:

• her complaint was not about her housing register application. It was about her application for temporary housing and assistance to flee domestic abuse;
• the Council left her and her children homeless for nearly 3 months. It could have prevented this; and
• she wanted a response to this part of her complaint, together with an apology and reimbursement of the cost of her 13-day hotel stay and parking costs.

The Council’s response to Miss Y’s complaint

44. In its final response to Miss Y’s complaint, the Council accepted there had been a number of failures including:

• it should have issued a personalised housing plan (PHP) when she first approached it in May 2023 and again in August 2023, as a person fleeing domestic abuse, and worked to prevent her becoming homeless; and
• it had reason to believe on 7 August, she might be homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need. Therefore it should have provided her with emergency accommodation until it had decided what duties if any it owed. It failed to do this and instead asked her to come back for a housing needs assessment on 9 August.

45. It also said:

• her contact with it between August and November was about her housing register application not her homelessness application;
• although it had a duty to provide her with interim accommodation before she sold her property, there was limited availability as to the type and location of the accommodation it could have offered, and it would most likely have been outside of the borough; and
• after the sale of her property, she had the freedom to move to a safe location of her choice and was no longer homeless as a result of fleeing domestic violence. She would also then have been ineligible for housing benefit and had to pay for any temporary accommodation arranged by the Council. This would have been more than her hotel costs.

My view – was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

46. I consider there were significant failures by the Council at every step of the process following Miss Y’s initial approach when she told it she was experiencing domestic abuse.

Miss Y’s request for assistance in May/June 2023

47. In my view the Council did not respond properly to Miss Y’s request for help in May 2023 because it failed to:

• identify she was asking for immediate help because she was experiencing domestic abuse and felt unsafe staying in her property; and
• treat Miss Y’s request for help as a homelessness application. Instead, it initially progressed her approach only as an application to the housing register.

48. I also consider the Council failed, when it finally referred Miss Y’s request to its homelessness team in June 2023, to properly assess the duties it owed her. This is because:

• it recognised she was experiencing domestic abuse. But went on to record that although it could potentially offer her interim accommodation there was no reason to believe she was homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days;
• it failed to properly assess her experience and risk from domestic abuse before making this decision. It failed to make proper enquiries to establish the information Miss Y had provided about her experience of domestic abuse in the DASH assessment. There is no record of any assessment by the Council or of how and on what basis it made its decisions; and
• The DASH assessment records Miss Y said she was experiencing domestic abuse and frightened about staying in her property. Based on this information, I consider the Council had reason to believe she ‘may be’ homeless and should have considered what, if any, further duty it owed her, in particular the duty to provide her with interim accommodation; and
• it should have confirmed its decisions in writing with notice of the right to request a review where appropriate.

49. These failures were fault.

Miss Y’s further request for assistance in August 2023

50. In my view the Council again failed to respond properly to Miss Y’s further request for help because:

• it noted she had told it a number of times she wasn’t safe staying at her property;
• there is no record of the basis on which it decided on 11 August she was not homeless;
• it delayed telling her about its decision, or her right to request a review until November 2023, by which time her circumstances had changed.

51. These failures were fault.

Impact of the failures from May to August 2023

52. Had the Council properly considered its duties, on balance, based on the information I have seen, it is more likely it would have decided it should offer Miss Y interim accommodation because it had reason to believe she might be homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need.
53. I don’t know what interim accommodation the Council had available to offer Miss Y from May to August 2023. It is most likely to have been short-term private rented accommodation and may have been outside the borough initially. I can’t say whether Miss Y would have accepted this type of accommodation.
54. But the Council’s failures meant Miss Y’s request for help when she was experiencing domestic abuse and frightened for her safety, was not properly considered, causing her upset and worry.
55. Had the Council properly explained its duty, the type, location and potential cost of available interim accommodation, Miss Y would have had time to consider her options before she found herself with nowhere to live when the sale completed in November.

The Council’s decisions about Miss Y’s homelessness in November 2023

56. Although, in its letter of 14 November, the Council told Miss Y it had decided she was threatened with homelessness, it did not confirm whether it had accepted the prevention duty or issue her with a PHP setting out the steps she and the Council should take to prevent her becoming homeless.
57. It also wrongly said in its decision letter of 16 November Miss Y could continue to occupy her property for another 84 days. It failed to note the sale had completed that day and Miss Y said she and her children had nowhere to live. Its decision it was reasonable for Miss Y to continue to occupy her accommodation was based on an incorrect assumption.
58. This was fault. Because of this Miss Y lost the opportunity to have her request for assistance and the Council’s duty to provide interim accommodation properly assessed and options explained.
59. I consider it likely that Miss Y would have had to pay the cost of any interim accommodation provided for her by the Council after the sale. I have not recommended the Council reimburse her for the costs of the hotel accommodation she arranged. But the failure caused Miss Y further upset, worry and uncertainty.

Response to Miss Y’s review request

60. The Council also failed to respond properly to Miss Y’s request for a review of its decision it did not have a duty to offer her interim accommodation. I consider it should have been clear she was asking it to review this decision. But it wrongly responded to this request through its complaints procedure and instead reviewed its decision on the housing register application (which she had not disputed).
61. Miss Y asked for a review of the decision about her homelessness on 16 November. The Council should have completed its review by 11 January 2024. It did not respond to her complaint until February 2024, a delay of over four weeks. This was fault.
62. By this point she no longer needed help with her housing situation because she had moved into her new property. But the delay caused her upset and uncertainty about her situation.

Service improvements

63. The Council accepted in its complaint response, there were some failures in the way it handled Miss Y’s request for assistance with her housing situation.
64. We recommended the Council carry out the following service improvements in a case published on our website earlier this year (reference 23012661):

• it should provide us with an update on the steps it has taken to resolve its staffing issues and recruitment in its Housing Team. This is to ensure it can progress homeless applications and complaints without delay; and
• it should remind its housing staff of the duty to share all housing decisions with applicants in writing to ensure transparency in decision making and provide appeal rights without delay.

65. But, having considered the evidence seen in this case, I am concerned the Council’s guidance and procedures for its housing and homelessness teams about how it should handle approaches for help in domestic abuse cases have not been appropriately updated to reflect the important changes made by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, and to the Homelessness Code of Guidance. In addition to the faults set out above, I noted the Council:

• told Miss Y it would only offer interim accommodation in ‘worst case scenario’, when this should be offered automatically as soon as the low section 188 threshold is reached and not in just ‘worst case scenarios’;
• referred to “domestic violence” rather than domestic abuse, despite the changes to the definition made by the Domestic Abuse Act 2021; and
• suggested a need for ‘proof of domestic violence’. Although there there might have been a particular reason for this, councils should not put the onus of providing “proof” on the victim.

66. I have set out further service improvements below to address this concern.

Back to top

Agreed action

67. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults and, within four weeks from the date of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. apologise to Miss Y for its failures to; properly respond to her requests for help and assess her homelessness application; properly consider its duty to provide her with interim accommodation and her request to review its decision about her homelessness; and its communication delays and failures. This apology should be in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology; and
2. pay Miss Y £500 to reflect the avoidable upset and uncertainty, time and trouble caused by its failures. This is a symbolic amount based on our guidance on remedies
68. And within three months from the date of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. provide training or guidance on domestic abuse to all housing staff to ensure they understand the requirements of chapter 21 of the Homelessness Code of Guidance and how to appropriately deal with homelessness and housing register applicants at risk of domestic abuse; and
2. share with its housing staff our recently published Good Practice Guide - Domestic abuse in housing
69. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

70. I have completed my investigation and found fault by the Council causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take the above action to remedy this injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman