The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint which was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Ms X could not have complained to us sooner about her homeless application and temporary accommodation.
The complaint
Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to properly deal with a cross-authority referral when she made a homeless application to her former authority in 2012. She also says the temporary accommodation which she was housed in was unsuitable and in disrepair.
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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X was accepted as homeless by London Borough of Islington Council in 2012. She was housed in temporary accommodation outside the borough in the Borough of Waltham Forest. She says that she should have been considered under a cross-authority referral under the homeless legislation because she was fleeing domestic violence in the Islington area. She says she is now settled in the Waltham Forest area and does not wish to be rehoused in Islington.
Ms X challenged the Council’s refusal to be involved in her homeless application in 2013, with the aid of a local Housing Advice centre. She was considered under a Social Needs panel review in 2013 but the Council decided that it did not owe any duty to her, and she remained under Islington’s homeless duty. She complained to her Member of Parliament twice in the past 10 years and recently made a formal complaint to the Council which it rejected as being out of time.
Ms X made a housing application to the Council and was on its housing register until 2019 when she was removed following her failure to return annual review forms about her status. The Council says there is nothing to prevent her from re-applying but she remains under the responsibility of Islington Council for the homeless duty and for temporary accommodation.
We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint now. There is no evidence to suggest the PA could not have complained to us sooner when she made complaints with the aid of other parties.
Final decision
We will not exercise discretion to investigate this complaint which was received outside the normal 12-month period for investigating complaints. There is no evidence to suggest that Ms X could not have complained to us sooner about her homeless application and temporary accommodation
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman