Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge its homelessness duty following the rejection of suitable temporary accommodation. It was reasonable for Ms X to ask for a statutory review of the Council’s decision.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s decision to offer her alternative temporary accommodation which she says was unsuitable for her and her daughter following a break-in to her current accommodation. She refused the offer and the Council told it was discharging its homelessness duty because she had refused the offer.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Ms X applied to the Council as homeless and was placed in temporary accommodation until the main housing duty. In October 2023 her door was kicked in by another tenant in the building where she lives. She asked the Council to move her to alternative accommodation because she was in fear of herself and her daughter being attacked.
6. The Council offered her a place in a local homeless centre because it was available for an immediate move and Ms X wished to remain in the area for work and school commitments. Ms X chose to refuse the offer and remains in her current temporary accommodation. She asked the Council to review its decision on the suitability of the accommodation under s.202 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Council did so. It did not uphold the review.
7. Ms X could have challenged the decision in the County Court but shortly after her refusal the Council told her it had discharged its main homelessness duty to her because she had refused to take the offer of alternative accommodation. Her solicitors aske the Council to carry out a review of this decision also.
8. The Council has not yet determined the review which has bene extended to consider further information. It says it will do so by the end of September and Ms X remains in temporary accommodation while the anti-social behaviour team is investigating her neighbour. It says it will decide the review by the end of September 2024.
9. It was reasonable for Ms X to challenge the Council’s decisions by using her right of statutory review. If the last review is not decided by the date given for the extension she could submit a new complaint about the delay. If the review is decided and it is negative then it is reasonable for her to challenge the decision by appealing to the court.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to discharge its homelessness duty following the rejection of suitable temporary accommodation. It was reasonable for Ms X to ask for a statutory review of the Council’s decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman