this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application and homeless situation. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation. The Council does not have a homeless duty to Miss X so it cannot discharge this duty.
The complaint
Miss X complained about the Council removing her from the housing register and withdrawing a discretionary offer to her under a reciprocal agreement with another Council. She also says the Council has discharged its homelessness duty towards her leaving her at risk of violence in the area where she used to live.
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 how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended) We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended) 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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered the information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss X says the Council offered a vacancy which she has been recommended to another applicant in December 2022 following her original complaint to us in that year (case ref 22 000 582). She did not complain to us about this until February 2024 which his outside the normal 12-month period for receiving complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Miss X could not have complained to us sooner.
In 2023 Miss X was removed from the housing register by the Council. This was in response to our previous investigation findings that Miss X should not have been place don the register as she is resident of a neighbouring council and only placed in temporary accommodation in her current council’s area by that council. Although she was eligible for an offer under a reciprocal agreement the council’s hold, she should not have been eligible to bid on the housing register.
Miss X appointed a solicitor who asked the Council to review its decision and its decision to discharge its homelessness duty to her. The Council held a meeting with Miss X and it concluded that she should be removed from the register because she was ineligible. It also says that it cannot review any decisions about Miss X’s homeless status because the neighbouring council has the homeless duty to her and she was placed in the current authority’s area in temporary accommodation arranged by her own authority.
She would need to make any review of her homeless decision by the neighbouring authority to that body and appeal against the outcome should it be negative. We cannot expect a council to review a case for which it has no responsibility or case records.
The Council says Miss X has commenced legal proceedings against the Council for compensation. We have no jurisdiction to investigate matters which are or have been subject to court proceedings.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s assessment of Miss X’s housing application and homeless situation. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation. The Council does not have a homeless duty to Miss X so it cannot discharge this duty.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman