Summary: Miss X complains the Council delayed deciding her mother’s homelessness application and placed her family in unsuitable accommodation. Miss X says this caused her and her family significant distress and caused them to live in unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for failing to explore whether Miss X’s mother was entitled to further support, and for delaying its decision about its housing duty. The Ombudsman also finds fault with the Council for failing to consider the suitability of the temporary accommodation it offered. The Council has agreed a financial remedy and service improvements.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s handling of the homelessness application for her family.
2. Miss X complains the Council did not suitably consider the family’s needs when asking them to leave their property.
3. Miss X also complains the Council did not suitably consider the family’s medical needs and circumstances when placing them in emergency accommodation.
4. Miss X complains about the delay caused by the Council in progressing the application, and for failing to communicate about the family’s next steps.
5. Miss X complains the Council has not given suitable regard to its responsibility towards their belongings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

6. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
7. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
8. 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

9. I have considered all the information Miss X provided. I have also asked the Council questions and requested information, and in turn have considered the Council’s response.
10. I considered comments from Miss X and the Council on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Homelessness legislation

11. When someone applies to a council for accommodation and it has reason to believe they may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, several duties arise.
12. Section 184 of the Housing Act 1996 (the Act) requires the housing authority to make inquiries to satisfy if an applicant is eligible for assistance and, if so, what duty it owes the applicant under the provisions of the Act.
13. Where a housing authority has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and in “priority need” it has a duty to provide interim accommodation under Section 188(1) of the Housing Act 1996..
14. The housing authority must complete an assessment of an eligible person to determine what housing duty it owes them. An assessment must include consideration of:

• The circumstances that caused the applicant to become homeless or threatened with homelessness.
• The housing needs of the applicant including what accommodation would be suitable for the applicant and any persons with whom the applicant resides or might reasonably be expected to reside.
• What support would be necessary for the applicant and any other relevant persons to be able to have and retain suitable accommodation.

15. Section 189B of the Housing Act 1996, known as the “relief duty” gives the housing authority a duty to all applicants who are both homeless and eligible for assistance. This duty requires the housing authority to take reasonable steps to help a person secure suitable accommodation that has a reasonable prospect of being available for at least six months.
16. If, at the end of the relief duty, a council is satisfied an applicant is unintentionally homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation. This is called the main duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)

The Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (Paragraph 14.16) says a local authority should not delay in completing inquiries as to what duty it will owe after the relief duty. Where the local authority has the information it requires to a make a decision, it should be possible to notify the applicant on or around day 57. In some instances, the local authority may need to complete significant further investigation, the local authority should complete this further investigation within a maximum of 15 working days after the 56 days have passed

17. Temporary accommodation is accommodation provided to homeless applicants as part of a council’s main homelessness duty.
18. 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 homelessness duty.  (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
19. Councils must assess whether accommodation is suitable for each household individually. Whether accommodation is suitable will depend on the relevant needs, requirements and circumstances of the homeless person and their household. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.4 & 17.9)

Homelessness Code of Guidance for Domestic Abuse

20. The reasonable steps that a housing authority might take to help an applicant to retain or secure safe accommodation might include provision of sanctuary scheme or other security measures, assistance to find alternative accommodation, or help to access legal remedies such as injunctions where these might be effective. Single people might also be assisted to access supported housing, or helped to gain more support from family and friends through the intervention of the housing authority.
21. Sanctuary schemes can prevent homelessness by enabling victims to remain safely in their home where it is their choice, and it is safe to do so. A sanctuary comprises enhanced security measures in the home which delay or prevent a perpetrator from gaining entry into and within a property, and allow time for the police to arrive. Use of sanctuary is not appropriate if the perpetrator lives at, or retains a legal right to enter the home, or if the victim continues to be at risk in the vicinity around the home.
22. When dealing with domestic violence and abuse within the home, where the authority is the landlord, housing authorities should consider the scope for evicting the perpetrator and allowing the victim to remain in their home. However, where there would be a probability of violence if the applicant continued to occupy their present accommodation, the housing authority must treat the applicant as homeless and should not expect them to remain in, or return to, the accommodation. In all cases involving violence the safety of the applicant and their household should be the primary consideration at all stages of decision making as to whether or not the applicant remains in their own home.

What happened

23. Miss X lived in a 3 bedroom family home with her mother, father and 2 siblings. The home had been provided to the family as part of previous social care support and was a temporary arrangement.
24. In January 2021, a domestic incident occurred between Miss X’s parents. The Council placed Miss X, her mother and her siblings into interim accommodation. Miss X’s father remained in the family home.
25. The Council said it had placed Miss X in interim accommodation based on its referral form and information from the Police. It said the bail conditions about the incident meant that Miss X, her mother and her siblings could not live in the family home.
26. The Council recognised that it needed to complete a homelessness assessment on Miss X’s mother. It recognised that she was in priority need due to the incident. In this time, Miss X and her family stayed in the accommodation provided to them by the Council.
27. The Council held a safeguarding meeting and agreed to complete separate referrals for both parents to access support.
28. The Council wrote to Miss X’s mother in November 2021, 11 months after it had placed them in interim accommodation. The Council told Miss X’s mother that it had completed its assessment and found it owed her a main housing duty. It set out that it would help her take reasonable steps to find somewhere else to live.
29. Miss X complained to the Council as she felt it had significantly delayed deciding her mother’s homelessness application. She felt that it was unfair that her and her family were placed in accommodation while her father remained in the family home. Miss X also complained the family had lost all their belongings which had remained in the family home as they were told they would only be in interim accommodation for a short period of time. Miss X also complained the accommodation they had been placed in was not suitable for them long term.
30. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint. It upheld that it had taken too long to decide Miss X’s mother’s homelessness application, but that this was because it was a complex case and there were also delays because of COVID-19.
31. The Council said that it had placed Miss X and her family in temporary accommodation based on information from the Police about the bail conditions relating to the domestic incident. This meant that Miss X’s father had remained in the property. The Council said it had tried to support Miss X with arranging an injunction against her father and suggested the family contact the police to obtain their belongings, but the family turned these options down.
32. The Council said it placed the family in the most suitable accommodation it had available at the time. The Council offered the family £300 in recognition of the delay in making the decision about Miss X’s mother’s homelessness application.
33. Miss X remained unhappy and bought her complaint to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

Domestic abuse and homelessness

34. The Council said it placed Miss X and her family in temporary accommodation based on information from the police. Miss X’s mother was told that she may not be able to be placed locally due to the incident that had occurred.
35. At the time of the incident, domestic abuse legislation said that where the authority was the landlord, Councils should consider the scope for evicting the perpetrator and allowing the victim to remain in the home. However, where there would be a probability of violence if the applicant continued to occupy their present accommodation, the housing authority must treat the applicant as homeless and should not expect them to remain in or return to the accommodation. In all cases involving violence, the safety of the applicant and their household should be the primary consideration at all stages of the decision making about whether the applicant remains in their own home.
36. I have seen no evidence from the Council of the discussions with the police where it was said Miss X and her family should not return to the home due to the bail conditions.
37. Legislation says that Council’s can take reasonable steps to help someone stay in their home, such as sanctuary measures and exclusion orders. By failing to explore whether Miss X’s mother could be supported, the Council has failed to consider whether Miss X’s mother and the family could be supported to return home. This was fault by the Council causing Miss X’s mother and the other family members injustice, as it was clear they wished to remain in their home.

Delay in homelessness decision

38. The Council wrote to Miss X’s mother 11 months after it agreed to undertake an assessment due to her being in priority need. It told Miss X’s mother that it had a housing duty towards her and that it would support her to find somewhere new to live. It issued her a personal housing plan.
39. Housing legislation says where the local authority has the information it needs to a make a decision, it should be possible to tell the applicant on or around day 57. Occasionally, the local authority may need to complete significant further investigation, the local authority should complete this further investigation within a maximum of 15 working days after the 56 days have passed.
40. The Council said the delay was because of the case being complex due to the types of tenancy on the family home, and multi-agency working. It also said there had been delays due to COVID-19. I accept that it is likely COVID-19 did cause unforeseen delays, however I have not seen evidence from the Council that it sought further advice and information from other agencies in this time. Therefore, the Council unnecessarily delayed completing the assessment and issuing its decision.
41. The assessment for whether the Council owed a housing duty should have taken no more than months which would include the first assessment time and the extra 15 working days if needed. However, in this case it took eleven months. I therefore find the Council delayed deciding if it owed a housing duty for eight months. The delay in issuing the decision meant that Miss X and her family lived in the accommodation for longer than they would have done had the assessment been completed in a timely manner.

Suitability of accommodation

42. Part of Miss X’s complaint is the temporary accommodation the family were placed in was not suitable for their needs because of medical conditions and educational placements.
43. The Council told Miss X the accommodation they were placed in was the only suitable accommodation it had available at the time.
44. In this case, I have seen no evidence from the Council of how it decided the accommodation for Miss X’s family was suitable, and how it considered the medical and educational needs.
45. Additionally, the delay in deciding the Council had a main housing duty to the family meant there was a delay in the family being entitled to a review of the accommodation provided in the discharge of the main duty. This means that Miss X and her family were delayed the right to review whether the accommodation they were in was suitable.
46. This was fault by the Council causing further injustice to Miss X and her family, as it means their needs were not fully considered and it is possible they were placed in unsuitable accommodation.

Access to belongings

47. Part of Miss X’s complaint is they were told to only take minimum belongings as they would only be in interim accommodation for a short period of time. They were then told they could not return to the family home where their belongings were. They lost most of their belongings as they could not recover them, and when they could most had been destroyed.
48. The Council said the family’s belongings were safe as they were at the family home. It recommended the family contact the police to escort them to the home to recover their belongings, however the family decided not to do this as they felt it would make the situation worse.
49. The Council must take reasonable steps to prevent the loss of a person’s property or mitigate damage when it has reason to believe there is danger the applicant’s personal property will be lost or damaged.
50. Miss X did not tell the Council that her property was at risk of being lost or damaged. From the Council’s view, the belongings were in the family home and therefore safe. It accepted that it would not be safe for Miss X and her family to try to get them themselves, and therefore recommended they contact the police.
51. I find no fault with the Council for how it decided not to act to protect the family’s belongings.

Back to top

Agreed action

52. Within 4 weeks of my final decision the Council has agreed to

• Write to Miss X and her mother and apologise for the fault identified.
• Pay Miss X’s mother £1200. This is calculated at £150 per month for the eight month delay caused by the Council.
• The Council should also pay Miss X’s mother £300 in recognition of the uncertainty about whether the family should have received more support to stay in their home.
• The Council should pay Miss X £200 in recognition of the time and trouble caused to her by pursuing this complaint.

53. Within 12 weeks of the final decision the Council has agreed to

• Review how it decides what support should be provided to those fleeing domestic violence who wish to stay in their home.
• Review how can make service improvements to ensure that homelessness assessments are completed in a timely manner.
• Review how it documents its decision-making process when considering the suitability of interim and temporary accommodation.

Back to top

Final decision

54. I have now completed my investigation. I find fault with the Council for failing to explore further support for Miss X to stay in her home. I also intend to find fault with the Council for delaying its decision on the homelessness assessment, and for failing to consider whether the temporary accommodation it provided was suitable.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman