The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: There was no fault by the Council when making decisions on housing and homeless applications. The Council considered all the information on the housing register application form and homeless form when making a decision. There is no evidence of fault.
The complaint
The complainant, who I shall call Miss X, complains the Council has not made enquiries and decided if it has a duty under homeless legislation once it became aware she had no tenancy agreement and so may be homeless.
Miss X also complains the Council has not considered all the addresses she has stayed at (as she could not include them on the form), when making a decision on whether she has been resident in the Council’s area for 6 years. Miss X says that her and her children are homeless and having to stay in one room in her mothers flat.
What I have investigated I have investigated that part of Miss X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with her housing and homeless applications. The final section of this statement contains my reasons for not investigating the rest of the complaint.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended) 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) We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended) 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)
How I considered this complaint
I read the papers put in by Miss X and discussed the complaint with her.
I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
Miss X and the organisation had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
2021 Housing application Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14)) Councils must tell applicants in writing of the following decisions and give reasons: that the applicant is not eligible for an allocation; that the applicant is not a qualifying person; a decision not to award the applicant reasonable preference because of their unacceptable behaviour.
The Council must also tell the applicant of the right to request a review of these decisions. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(9)) Key facts Miss X applied to join the Council’s housing register on 30 May 2021. The Council decided on 28 June 2021 that she could not join the housing register as she did not meet the criteria for 6 years residency in the borough.
Miss X appealed against the decision on 26 July 2021. The Council’s response said that Miss X told them she was living between two addresses but did not have a rental agreement at either. One of these addresses was not in the Council’s area so Miss X was not continuously resident.
The Councils residency criteria says that an applicant must have lived in the Council’s area continuously for six years. The Council says that Miss X has not and there were not exceptional circumstances which would make her exempt from the criteria.
My analysis Miss X complains the Council has not considered all the addresses she has stayed at (as she could not include them on the form) when making a decision on whether she has been resident in the Council’s area for 6 years.
Miss X alleges that she was advised not to note all places on the 2021 application where she had stayed, as the Council could not process the number of addresses she had stayed at. Miss X also says that she was advised to put her mothers address on the application, but she was actually staying at different caravans in the Council’s area due to being unable to stay at her mother’s flat.
The Council has responded to say there is no evidence to support Miss X’s allegations. I have looked at the housing application dated 30 May 2021. This application includes 20 previous addresses from 2019 and lists her current address as the caravan she was living at, which was not in the Council’s area. The application form shows Miss X moving between the caravan and her mothers address since 2019.
I can see no evidence on fault on this point. The housing application form shows over 20 previous addresses and so I consider the Council could consider all the information Miss X gave. The Council reviewed and upheld its decision, considering the same evidence and Miss X’s explanation of why she had moved addresses so frequently.
Given the information supplied on the application from, Miss X does not meet the 6 year residency criteria as she has lived out of the area for some of that time. The Council has said if a homeless application is accepted, then she will be able to join the housing register. But, at this time, this is not the case.
Homeless application If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. The threshold for taking an application is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular council department. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5) After completing inquiries, the council must give the applicant a decision in writing. If it is an adverse decision, the letter must fully explain the reasons. All letters must include information about the right to request a review and the timescale for doing so. (Housing Act 1996, section 184, from 3 April 2018 Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.32 and 18.33) Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions: their eligibility for assistance what duty (if any) is owed to them if they are found to be homeless or threatened with homelessness Councils must complete the review within eight weeks of receiving the review request. This period can be extended but only if the applicant agrees in writing. If the applicant wishes to challenge the review decision, or if a council takes more than eight weeks to complete the review, they may appeal on a point of law to the County Court (Housing Act 1996, sections 202 and 204) Miss X complains the Council has not made enquiries and decided if it has a duty under homeless legislation once it became aware she had no tenancy agreement and so may be homeless.
Miss X has made several housing and six homeless applications to the Council. In 2019 her homeless applications were refused as she was over the financial threshold due to money from the sale of a house.
The Council has said Miss X made six homeless applications from 2018 to 2022. The Council has considered each of these and made a decision. Miss X had a right to a review of the decision in each case.
I cannot upheld Miss X’s complaint on this point. She has made 6 homeless applications, the last of which the Council is still considering. So, I cannot say the Council has not made enquiries under homeless legislation as it has considered multiple applications from Miss X.
Final decision
I have completed my investigation of this complaint. This complaint is not upheld, as there is no evidence of fault.
Parts of the complaint I did not investigate I have not investigated the outcome of Miss X’s housing and homeless applications. I can investigate whether the Council has taken all the information into account, but not the rights and wrongs of the final decision taken on each application. Miss X could ask for a review of the decisions and then had a right appeal to the court if she wanted to challenge the decisions further. As she had an alternative remedy to challenge the Council’s decisions, I do not intend to exercise discretion to investigate, especially as Miss X has explained that she has a barrister and is waiting to hear about court proceedings.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman