The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to end its relief duty towards Mr X. It was reasonable for Mr X to use his right of appeal to the county court.
The complaint
Mr X complained the Council ended its homelessness relief duty. He said this meant he remained homeless. He wanted the Council to reinstate its duty and continue supporting him to obtain social housing.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X became homeless. The Council accepted it owed Mr X the relief duty and provided him with a personal housing plan. It notified him in September 2024 it had decided he was not in priority need, and explained this meant it was ending its relief duty. It explained he could request a review of that decision.
Mr X did not request a review of the Council’s decision. Had he done so, any negative decision by the Council would have explained his right to appeal the matter to the county court on a point of law.
Where a statutory right of appeal exists, we normally expect people to use it. We are not an appeal body. Legal aid is available, and the courts have the power to overturn a council’s decision, which we cannot in the absence of fault in the process it followed. There is not a reason in this case that Mr X could not use his right of appeal, and we will not consider the matter instead.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to use his statutory right of appeal to the county court.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman