The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainants home was unsuitable for a guest to stay in, under the Homes for Ukraine scheme. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision.
The complaint
The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains about how the Council reached its decision that his home was unsuitable for a guest to stay in under the Homes for Ukraine scheme. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s conclusion that there is insufficient space and privacy for the guest because he is in a relationship with the guest and will therefore be cohabiting.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
In March 2022, the Government launched the Homes for Ukraine Scheme, which allows Ukrainians fleeing the war in their country, with no family ties to the UK, to enter the UK and stay with a named sponsor in their home.
Under the scheme, councils are required to carry out several checks. These include a check that the sponsors accommodation is suitable. Government guidance says that councils have full discretion on the approach they take to these accommodation checks and the judgments they make during these visits.
Mr X applied to be a sponsor under the scheme. The Council visited Mr X’s property to carry out its inspection. It recorded that he lived in a small one bedroomed flat which was cluttered. During the inspection, records show, that Mr X told the inspector that he planned to stay on the sofa and allow his guest to sleep in his bedroom. The Council concluded that the accommodate was not appropriate and subsequently wrote to Mr X to inform him. It asked Mr X to provide contact details for the guest so it could arrange alternative accommodation, but he did not respond.
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault. The Council has discretion in how it carries out inspections and the conclusions it reaches. It has documented the reasons for its decision and explained its reasons to Mr X. In the absence of fault, the Ombudsman cannot question the merits of the decision reached by the Council. Since making its decision, the Council has also taken steps, in line with guidance, to attempt to contact the guest to make alternative living arrangements.
Mr X argues that the property is not unsuitable, as he and the guest are in a relationship, and that guidance allows for cohabiting partners to share a room. However, the scheme is in place for Ukrainians with no family ties to enter the country, and the section of the guidance that Mr X refers to relates to two Ukrainian guests cohabiting and not a sponsor and guest and therefore is not relevant to the Council’s decision. There is a separate scheme called the Ukraine Family Scheme which allows Ukrainians fleeing the war to stay with family members, including unmarried partners.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman