Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Ms X’s housing. The Council has offered an adequate remedy for its failure to offer an appointment about Ms X’s options in late 2023. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s general position on how it responds when a temporary accommodation provider wants the property back. Ms X could reasonably take court action if she wants compensation for alleged health damage. Other parts of the complaint should complete the Council’s complaint procedure before we will consider them.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s handling of her homelessness and her social housing application. She says the Council’s alleged faults have caused stress and uncertainty and damaged her family’s health.

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’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X and her family are homeless. They have been living in Council-arranged temporary accommodation for some years. The owner of Ms X’s accommodation gave notice they wanted the property back. Ms X went through the Council’s complaint procedure between November 2023 and January 2024, complaining the Council had not offered new accommodation and she feared having to remain where she was until bailiffs would come to evict her.
8. The Council accepted it had not offered Ms X an appointment to consider her next steps in detail, as it should have done. In January 2024 the Council apologised for that. It undertook to arrange the appointment. We could not reasonably achieve more than that now, in terms of the appointment. So I shall not investigate that part of the complaint.
9. The Council’s complaint response in January 2024 set out its position in general terms when a provider of temporary accommodation takes a property back. It said due to the shortage of temporary accommodation it was better for people to remain in their property even during court proceedings, rather than having to go into shared accommodation or accommodation a long way from Redbridge. The Council said in any event it would move people in Ms X’s position before bailiffs evict them. In the circumstances, I see no fault in the Council’s general position. I appreciate the uncertainty is unwelcome to Ms X. However, temporary accommodation moves can often happen at short notice.
10. Ms X’s complaint to us is also about more recent events, after the Council’s response to her complaint. In particular, she complained the Council still had not moved the family after a court granted an eviction warrant. The eviction was due to take place eight weeks after Ms X first complained to us. This point has not completed the Council’s complaint procedure, so the restriction in paragraph 4 applies. I appreciate that this point is related to the matter Ms X previously complained to the Council about. Nevertheless, it concerns new events. It is reasonable for Ms X to complain to the Council about this before we consider it. It is fair for the Council to have an opportunity to deal with this new complaint first. Also, the Council is best placed to take any necessary practical steps in the first instance.
11. Ms X wanted her complaint to us to result in the Council giving her long-term accommodation. We cannot achieve that. If Ms X’s temporary accommodation is no longer available, the appropriate remedy is for the Council to give new temporary accommodation. It would not be proportionate for us to ask the Council to give Ms X long-term social housing out of turn. The demand for social housing far outstrips supply and the waiting time can be many years, even for people owed the main housing duty like Ms X.
12. Ms X’s complaint to us is also about the Council’s alleged failure to reply to her request for it to review a decision about her priority on the Council’s housing register. I have not seen any evidence of a complaint about that completing the Council’s complaint procedure either. It is reasonable for this matter to go through the Council’s complaint procedure first. The Council, not the Ombudsman, is in a position to decide any outstanding review request.
13. Ms X says the uncertainty of their housing situation has damaged her and her family’s health. She would like compensation. This point is really a claim of personal injury. The courts can consider that, so the restriction in paragraph 2 applies to this point. The possible cost of court action does not in itself automatically mean the Ombudsman should investigate instead. Liability and compensation for personal injury are not straightforward legally. It is more appropriate for the courts than the Ombudsman to decide this. So it would be reasonable for Ms X to go to court for a decision on this point.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. The Council offered an adequate remedy for its failure to offer an appointment in late 2023. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s general position on how it responds when a temporary accommodation provider wants the property back. Ms X could reasonably take court action if she wants compensation for alleged health damage. Other parts of the complaint should complete the Council’s complaint procedure before we will consider them.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman