The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Miss X complains the Council has unreasonably ended its prevention of homelessness duty in her case by failing to consider her medical evidence properly. We will not investigate this matter because Miss X has statutory appeal rights she can use to challenge the Council’s decision.
The complaint
The complainant, who I shall call Miss X, says the Council unreasonably ignored her unsuitable accommodation and her medical factors when deciding to end its housing duty to prevent her homelessness.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if, for example, we decide it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) The law says we normally cannot 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 the information Miss X provided with her complaint.
My assessment
The Housing Act 1996 (“the Act”) says that where someone is homeless and eligible for assistance, councils have a legal duty to try and relieve their homelessness.
The Act also gives homeless applicants a right of review about councils’ main decisions on their homelessness application to the Council under s202 of the Act. This includes decisions about the suitability of accommodation and about ending the housing duty in their case. If an applicant wants to dispute a negative review decision, they can ultimately appeal to the county court on a point of law.
Miss X applied for housing assistance saying that her property was unsuitable for several reasons including medical factors and overcrowding.
The Council accepted a duty to prevent her from becoming homeless and investigated the matter. However, it recently advised her it had ended its housing duty as it investigated but considered her property suitable for her housing needs. The Council’s decision letter advised her of her appeal rights, We will not investigate. This is because Miss X has a statutory right of review of the Council’s decision to end its duty and it is reasonable to expect her to use this. If the Council upholds its decision after Miss X requests a review, then ultimately she can appeal to the county court on a point of law. Unlike the courts we have no powers to overturn council homelessness decisions or make rulings on points of law so it is reasonable to expect her to do this.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to end its prevention of homelessness duty. This is because Miss X has statutory appeal rights ultimately to the county court (if the Council upholds its review decision).
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman