Summary: Miss X complains that the Council delayed in referring her to another council for housing and transferred her to unsuitable temporary accommodation. The Council was at fault as it delayed in referring Miss X to some councils for a reciprocal agreement for housing, failed to tell Miss X about the action it was taking and did not carry out a suitability assessment of her current temporary accommodation when Miss X indicated it was unsuitable. These faults caused uncertainty to Miss X which the Council has agreed to remedy by apologising and making a symbolic payment of £400 to her.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council:

• Delayed in dealing with her request for a referral to another council for housing and failed to respond to her chasing emails which caused distress to her.
• Transferred her to unsuitable temporary accommodation. Miss X considers the accommodation is unsuitable as it is too far from her child’s school and the long journey is detrimental to their welfare.

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)
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 not investigated if Miss X’s current temporary accommodation is suitable for her. Miss X had the right to seek a review of the suitability of the accommodation when it was offered to her and then appeal to the county court. I am satisfied it was reasonable to expect Miss X to seek a review as the Council’s letter notifying her of the offer explained her right to seek a review. However, I have considered if the Council should have carried out a suitability assessment when Miss X raised concerns about the property being too far from her child’s school.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have:

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

What I found

Law and guidance

8. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
9. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of certain decisions. This includes the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.
10. Under Section 213 of the Housing Act 1996, a council can ask for assistance from another council to provide temporary or settled accommodation for homelessness applicants. The council receiving the request for assistance must “cooperate in providing such assistance as far as is reasonable in the circumstances”. The Code, at paragraph 16.15 says this would be appropriate where an applicant is at risk of violence or serious harassment in the area where they applied for assistance.
11. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)

Council’s complaints procedure

12. The Council complaints procedure provides it will investigate a complaint and respond within 20 working days.

What happened

13. The following is a summary of the key events relevant to my consideration of the complaint. It does not include everything that happened.
14. Some years ago, Miss X made a homelessness application to the Council. The Council accepted the main housing duty and placed Miss X and her child in temporary accommodation outside its area. A private landlord supplied the accommodation.
15. The Council notified Miss X that it needed to move her to alternative temporary accommodation as the landlord wanted the property back. Miss X advised the Council that she could not return to its area due to the risk of domestic abuse. Miss X wanted to stay in the area where she was living as her child was settled at a school which met their needs. Miss X asked the Council to transfer her to council A which was the council for the area where she was living.
16. The Council’s records show it sent an email to council A asking for it to house Miss X in its area under a reciprocal agreement. Council A did not respond. Miss X chased the Council on several occasions. In her emails Miss X said she had not heard from the Council about referring her to council A and she was concerned her property was due to be returned to the landlord.
17. The landlord did not enforce the notice for Miss X to leave so she remained at the property.
18. The Council’s records show it chased council A for a response to its request for a reciprocal agreement. This was three months after its first request. Council A did not respond.
19. Approximately three months later, Miss X contacted the Council again asking for a referral to council A. The Council chased council A again for response to its request for a reciprocal agreement. Council A did not respond.
20. Miss X then notified the Council that her former partner was threatening her and was aware of her address. She also provided a letter from council A explaining it could not accept a homelessness application from her as she had a homelessness application with the Council. Miss X requested a move to areas surrounding council A.
21. Shortly afterwards the Council offered alternative temporary accommodation to Miss X in another council area which was some distance from her child’s school. The Council’s letter offering the property notified Miss X that she could seek a review of the suitability of the accommodation if she considered it to be unsuitable. Miss X did not seek a review but she continued to ask for a referral to council A or close to council B where her child’s school was located.
22. Three months later Miss X made a complaint to the Council. She said officers had not responded to her emails and telephone calls and had not responded to her request to be transferred to council A. Miss X chased the Council for a response on several occasions.
23. The Council responded four months later. In response to my enquires, the Council said that the delay in dealing with Miss X’s complaint was due to the housing department’s workload. It said that the timeliness of complaint responses remained a focus and there was no specific concern about the Council’s ability to respond to complaints.
24. The Council apologised for the delay in responding to her complaint. The Council also acknowledged that it had not always responded to her contact in a timely way. It apologised for the service she had received.
25. The Council also explained that it could not transfer Miss X to council A as the Council held the duty to accommodate Miss X. It had made requests to council A to enter into a reciprocal agreement to house Miss X but council A had not responded. The Council undertook to send another request to council A and asked Miss X if there were any other councils it should approach.
26. Miss X asked the Council to approach an additional three councils – councils B, C and D. The Council’s records show it asked councils B and C to enter into a reciprocal agreement. Both councils declined. The Council has said it did not contact council D as it did not have contact details to send the referral to. There is no evidence to show it contacted council A again.
27. Two months later, Miss X contacted the Council to say it was now safe for her to return to its area so she was bidding on properties. Miss X also said she was finding the long journey to and from her child’s school to be getting too much and too unsafe to continue due to her child’s needs.
28. The Council has said it offered a settled property to Miss X in its area. Miss X declined the offer.

Analysis

Referral to other councils and communication with Miss X

29. The evidence shows the Council made a referral for a reciprocal agreement with council A in response to Miss X’s requests. It also chased council A for a response on several occasions. The referral did not proceed as council A did not respond. I am therefore satisfied that the Council did not delay in making the initial referral to council A.
30. However, the Council let the matter drift when council A did not respond to the referral or chasers. I am mindful that the Council moved Miss X to alternative temporary accommodation due to the risk of domestic abuse during this time. But Miss X continued to tell the Council she wanted to move to other council areas so the Council should have explored with her much sooner where she wanted to be referred to. The Council did not do this until approximately 15 months after it had made the first referral. This was fault.
31. The evidence shows the Council made referrals to councils B and C. There is no evidence to show it made a further referral to council A as the Council had undertaken to do when responding to Miss X’s complaint. The Council has acknowledged it did not make a referral to council D as it did not have contact details. There is no evidence to show it attempted to obtain the contact details for the relevant service at council D. So, I cannot be satisfied, even on balance, that the Council took sufficient action to pursue the referrals with all of Miss X’s preferred councils. This was fault.
32. I cannot say, on balance, what would have happened if the Council had made referrals to Miss X’s other preferred councils sooner or if it had made a further referral to council A and a referral to council D. I cannot know if those councils would have accepted a reciprocal agreement to house Miss X. But the delay and failure to pursue the referrals with councils A and D causes uncertainty to Miss X as to what the outcome would have been. The Council should remedy this injustice.
33. In response to Miss X’s complaint the Council acknowledged delays in its communication with her. There is also no evidence to show the Council notified Miss X that it had made the referral to council A, that council A had not responded or explained the process to her before it replied to her complaint. This was fault which caused distress and uncertainty to Miss X as she was unaware of the action the Council was taking. Miss X has also said the poor communication caused her to feel as if she was in limbo. I am mindful the Council apologised to Miss X for the delays in responding to her emails. But the failure to clearly explain the action the Council was taking caused uncertainty to Miss X which the Council should remedy.
34. The Council also acknowledged and apologised to Miss X for the delay in responding to her responding to her complaint. This is a sufficient and proportionate remedy for the uncertainty caused by the delay in responding to the complaint.

Temporary accommodation

35. As explained at paragraph 6, I have not investigated the suitability of Miss X’s temporary accommodation when it was offered to her as she had the right to seek a review of its suitability. But the Council has an ongoing duty to provide suitable temporary accommodation and it should keep the suitability under review. So, it should have carried out a suitability assessment when Miss X raised she and her child were now finding the journey to school to be too long to continue. This would have also provided a further decision that Miss X could review.
36. The Council has said Miss X could move her child to another school and would have known the length of the journey to and from school at the outset. The Council cannot know if moving schools was a viable option without properly considering the suitability of the property in light of Miss X’s child’s specific needs. I accept Miss X would have known the length of the journey when the Council offered the property to her. But she may not have known the effect of the journey on her child at that point and this was potentially a new circumstance. So, on balance, the Council’s failure to assess the suitability in response to Miss X’s concerns was fault. It is not proportionate to recommend the Council now carries out a review of the suitability of Miss X’s temporary accommodation as I understand Miss X does not want a suitability review.

Back to top

Agreed action

37. That the Council will:
1. Send a written apology to Miss X for the uncertainty caused by taking insufficient action to pursue Section 213 referrals to other councils, failing to inform Miss X of the action it was taking and failing to offer a suitability assessment of her current temporary accommodation. 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 symbolic payment of £400 to Miss X to acknowledge the uncertainty caused by the faults identified above.
3. By training or other means, remind officers that they should promptly review an applicants’ housing options following a council’s failure to respond to, or refusal to accept, a Section 213 reciprocal agreement to determine if the council should approach other councils.
38. The Council should take the above action within four weeks of my final decision. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

I have completed my investigation and upheld Miss X’s complaint.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman