Summary: Miss B complained the Council failed to meet its duties to her when she became threatened with homelessness and then homeless. She says the Council wrongly advised her to stay in her rented property even after the landlord asked her to leave. We found fault in how the Council handled Miss B’s homeless application which caused her distress at a difficult time and meant she was subject to legal action which could have been avoided. The Council agreed to apologise to Miss B, review its procedures, and issue reminders to its staff.

The complaint

1. Miss B complains about the Council’s actions after she got a section 21 notice to leave her tenancy from her landlord. She says the Council:
• advised her to stay in the house even though she said she wanted to move and avoid legal action;
• failed to offer her temporary accommodation and she was homeless for three days;
• failed to hold weekly meetings with her as it said it would; and
• failed to put reasonable adjustments in place for her.
2. Because of this her landlord took legal action against her and this caused her avoidable distress. Additionally, because the Council did not offer her interim accommodation she was homeless for three days.
3. Miss B found alternative accommodation but says that because of the distress the events caused her she is not able to work.

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 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)
5. We may investigate matters coming to our attention during an investigation, if we consider that a member of the public who has not complained may have suffered an injustice as a result. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26D and 34E, 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 considered:
• information provided by Miss B;
• copies of the communications Miss B received from the Council, provided by Miss B;
• relevant law and guidance; and
• the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Jurisdiction and Guidance on Remedies.
9. Miss B and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Homelessness law and guidance

10. 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.
11. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)

Homeless applications

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)
13. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council:
• they are likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• they have been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)
14. 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 pplicantts 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)

The prevention duty

15. If a council is satisfied an applicant is threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, it must help the applicant to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. This is called the prevention duty. In deciding what steps it is to take, a council must have regard to its assessments of the applicant’s case. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

The relief duty and interim accommodation

16. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is called the relief duty. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
17. A council must secure accommodation for an applicant and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
18. Examples of applicants in priority need include people with dependent children, pregnant women, people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems or disability, and victims of domestic abuse.
19. The relief duty ends when the applicant accepts or refuses an offer of accommodation which is suitable and likely to be available for at least 6 months, or, failing this, if 56 days have passed.

Equality act

20. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. It provides the UK with discrimination law which protects individuals from unfair treatment and promotes a fair and more equal society.
21. The Act says, a public authority must, in the exercise of its functions, have due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it.
22. The Ombudsman’s remit does not extend to making decisions on whether a body in jurisdiction has breached the Equality Act – this can only be done by the courts. But the Ombudsman can make decisions about whether a body in jurisdiction has had due regard to the Equality Act in their treatment of someone, as part of our consideration of a complaint.

Reasonable adjustments

23. The reasonable adjustment duty is set out in the Equality Act 2010 and applies to any body which carries out a public function. The Act lists the relevant protected characteristics which include disability.
24. It aims to make sure that a disabled person can use a service as close as it is reasonably possible to get to the standard usually offered to non-disabled people.
25. When the duty arises, service providers are under a positive and proactive duty to take steps to remove or prevent obstacles to accessing their service. If the adjustments requested are reasonable, they must make them.

What happened

26. Miss B has a brain injury, dyslexia and autism. This means that she needs organisations to make reasonable adjustment for her to allow her to access services in the same way she would, had she not been disabled. Those adjustments include going over written information with her and explaining the contents of emails and letters.
27. In late November 2023 Miss B’s landlord served her a section 21 notice. This is the first step in the process to make Miss B leave her home.
28. In early December 2023 Miss B applied to be on the Council’s housing register. The Council recorded the application and awarded her band A because it decided she was in priority need.
29. At the end of the month the Council told Miss B it owed her the prevention duty. Two days later, the Council explained it owed her the relief duty and was responsible for relieving her homelessness and said that it had given her a Personal Housing Plan.
30. The Council did not explain this to Miss B until early January 2024. The Council told Miss B that it had accepted the relief duty towards her. It told her about her Personal Housing Plan and asked her to bid for properties. It advised her that she should not bid for one-bedroom properties because of her needs and her not wanting to live alone.
31. A few days later, the housing officer told Miss B that they would arrange a meeting with her to discuss her options and they confirmed she would get a written summary before the meeting as a reasonable adjustment.
32. The day before the meeting Miss B emailed the Council and asked for the meeting agenda. The Council responded on the same day and summarised the points it wanted to talk about with Miss B during the meeting.
33. The Council met with Miss B and explained its duties to her and her PHP. The Council also said that it would support her in finding shared accommodation because of her health needs.
34. A few days later the Council contacted Miss B’s landlord and told him that she was actively looking for alternative accommodation, but it was unlikely she would be able to move out on the day he asked her to. The landlord replied on the same day, and he told the Council that he would take legal action against Miss B if she remained in the property after the section 21 notice expired.
35. At the end of the month the Council told Miss B that her landlord confirmed he began legal action. It also told her she could stay in the property and did not have to move her belongings out unless she had somewhere to store them. On the same day Miss B asked the Council to house her temporarily as she did not want to face any legal action from her landlord. She also asked if she would be responsible for any legal costs. The housing officer told her they were waiting to speak to the temporary accommodation team and that she may be responsible for legal costs. The following day, Miss B’s section 21 expired.
36. Two days after Miss B’s section 21 expired the Council’s records show that at this point it still considered that it was under the relief duty. Miss B’s housing officer spoke to the temporary accommodation team and a deputy housing options manager was supposed to be consulted about the case.
37. The Council’s records show that the temporary accommodation team contacted Miss B’s housing officer and said that they would not offer Miss B temporary accommodation because her landlord had not applied for a possession order.
38. The following day, Miss B got an eviction notice and court papers in the post. At this point Miss B was already packing, and in the process of getting another tenancy. Miss B’s friend reached out to the Council and asked what support it would offer to her because of her imminent homelessness. The Council said that it would not be able to support her with the move.
39. Miss B decided to move out of her house two days after she got the eviction notice and with no alternative property to go to. Miss B’s therapist asked the Council if there would be any help the Council could offer with packing or moving into a new place. The Council said that it could not help her pack, and since she had money to move it would not help with this either.
40. The Council’s records show that the temporary accommodation team called Miss B on the same day to discuss her housing needs but said they could not offer her temporary accommodation because she was “unwilling to discuss it”.
41. The following day Miss B told the Council that because it failed to offer her alterative accommodation, she stayed in the house of someone she did not really know that well but felt she had no other option. She spoke to her housing officer later in the day and confirmed that she was staying with a friend and her belongings were safely stored.
42. The housing officer noted that the Council would offer her temporary accommodation if Miss B needed it.
43. The following day the housing officer noted the Council did not offer temporary accommodation to Miss B because she did not ring back and say if she needed it.
44. In late February 2024 Miss B complained to the Council. She said:
• it told her that her landlord would warn her before taking legal action, but he did not;
• she told the Council during the housing meeting that she did not want to go to court because she would find the process difficult because of her disabilities, but this happened anyway;
• the housing officer made it seem like she had to stay in the house;
• the Council told her it would hold weekly meetings with her, which did not happen; and
• the lack of the Council’s support left her homeless for three days.
45. The Council issued its complaint response in early March 2024. It:
• apologised for the misleading information it gave her about the requirement for her landlord to inform her before taking legal action;
• said that it did not action her request to speak to the temporary accommodation team after her section 21 notice expired; and
• said that it made reasonable adjustments for her because it conducted an in-person assessment, regular meetings and additional write ups of meetings.
46. Four days later Miss B asked the Council to consider her complaint further. She said that:
• she wanted to leave her home when the section 21 notice expired but the Council did not offer her any accommodation and she did not want to make it seem like she was making herself intentionally homeless;
• the Council did not consider her requested reasonable adjustments enough and this caused her additional stress; and
• she was worried about additional court costs that she may be responsible for because of the Council’s inaction.
47. At the end of March 2024, the Council told Miss X that it no longer had a housing duty towards her because it was satisfied she had a prospect of accommodation for the next six months. This happened after Miss X told the Council she moved into another privately rented accommodation.
48. The Council issued its final response to Miss B’s complaint in early April 2024. It said that:
• her landlord did not have to let her know about what legal action he was taking, and apologised for the misunderstanding during her conversation with the housing department;
• it should have offered her interim accommodation when her section 21 notice expired but it did not;
• it was sorry for the stress Miss B experienced but it had considered her reasonable adjustments and took appropriate action to ensure it was meeting its duties under the Equalities Act 2010;
• it was aware that she was in dispute with her landlord over her deposit and £355 court fees.
49. The Council apologised for its failure to offer her interim accommodation and offered to pay her the £355 court fee.
50. Miss B did not accept £355 from the Council because she considered it was not a suitable remedy because it did not address the stress that the legal proceedings caused her.
51. Ultimately, Mrs X’s landlord dropped the legal case against her, and she was not liable for any legal costs.

Analysis

52. When Miss B first contacted the Council, she evidenced she was threatened with homelessness and asked the Council for assistance. The Council says it accepted she was threatened with homelessness at this point. However, the evidence suggests it did not tell Miss B it had accepted the prevention duty, or produce a personalised housing plan (PHP), in line with statutory guidance. This was fault. This meant Miss B did not have clarity about the steps the Council would take, or would expect her to take, at the prevention duty stage. This caused Miss B avoidable distress at an already difficult time. Had the Council produced a PHP sooner, Miss B would have had the right to request a review if she disagreed with the steps the Council said it would take at the prevention stage. She was therefore denied this opportunity, which was an injustice.
53. Additionally, at that time the Council told Miss B that she could stay in her house. It was reasonable for Miss B to stay in her home until the section 21 notice expired. However, the Council’s records show it failed to consider how reasonable it was for her to remain in the home after the section 21 notice expired. This is fault. We consider it was unlikely that it was reasonable for Miss B to stay in her home after the section 21 notice expired, given that her landlord told the Council he would seek possession upon the expiry of the notice. Additionally, given Miss B’s disabilities, which the Council was aware of, she pointed out that she would be at a disadvantage if she had to take part in legal proceedings.
54. When the Council accepted the relief duty, it updated Miss B’s personalised housing plan. This was in line with the statutory requirements and is not fault.
55. However, following late January 2024 when Miss B’s section 21 expired and she told the Council she did not want to stay in her property the Council failed to offer her interim accommodation.
56. The Council’s records show that in the first instance this was because her landlord had not yet started the legal proceedings. This was fault. The Code says it is unlikely to be reasonable to continue to occupy accommodation once a notice expires unless the Council is working with the landlord to delay or prevent possession. Miss B’s landlord told the Council that he would not cooperate and would start legal action against Miss B if she had not moved out by the time her section 21 notice expired. On balance, therefore, Miss B was homeless once her notice expired. There was reason to believe she was in priority need because of her disabilities and so the Council should have provided interim accommodation. Failure to do so was fault. This caused Miss B avoidable distress and frustration and meant she had to sofa surf for three days. This is a significant injustice to Miss B.
57. The Council’s temporary accommodation team contacted Miss B in mid-February to discuss any offer of temporary accommodation the Council could make to her. Unfortunately, the call came a day after Miss B was served with eviction papers and because of her disabilities she was unable to meaningfully take part in the discussions with the temporary accommodation team. The Council’s case notes refer to her as “unwilling” to participate. We consider this to be fault. Throughout the homelessness process Miss B was open about her disabilities and the reasonable adjustments she needed to remove the barriers to her accessing the Council’s services. We consider that the Council failed to have due regard to its duties under the Equalities Act 2010 when it decided not to offer interim accommodation to Miss B because she could not speak to the temporary accommodation officer because of the impact of her disabilities. This caused Miss B avoidable distress and frustration and left her without the support she needed at an already difficult time.

Back to top

Agreed action

58. Within one month of our final decision the Council will:
• apologise to Miss B for the faults identified in how it handled her homeless application, and the distress this caused her at an already difficult time. 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;
• pay her £400 to recognise the avoidable distress and frustration the Council’s failure to offer her interim accommodation and make reasonable adjustments caused her.
59. Within three months of our final decision the Council should:
• review its procedures for processing and recording homeless applications to ensure it meets its statutory duties and correctly records whether it owes a duty to provide interim accommodation;
• issue reminders to relevant staff in its housing and homelessness teams about the need to ensure information in communications to applicants is accurate, and clearly sets out any duties accepted; and
• issue reminders to relevant staff in its housing and homelessness teams about the need to ensure that staff agree, record and implement reasonable adjustments throughout the application process.
60. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

61. There was fault in how the Council handled Miss B’s homelessness application between December 2023 and March 2024. The Council agreed to our recommendation and our investigation is now complete.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman