The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Ms X complained about the homelessness support the Council provided after she became homeless. We have upheld her complaint the Council delayed completing a suitability review and left her in unsuitable accommodation for too long. The Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.
The complaint
Ms X complained about the homelessness support she received from the Council after she fled domestic abuse. She said the Council had moved her between five different properties since becoming homeless. She said the most recent property was not suitable for her needs therefore she asked for a suitability review. She said the Council had delayed in completing that review.
Ms X said her physical and mental health had deteriorated because of the most recent temporary accommodation. Ms X wants the Council to provide her suitable accommodation close to her support network.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), 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
Ms X contacted the Council at the start of December 2024, after she received notice that she had to move to different temporary accommodation within 24 hours. She asked the Council to urgently review that decision. She said she had been left feeling unsupported. She contacted the Council further in January 2025, providing additional information to support her review request.
The Council completed a suitability review of the temporary accommodation. However, that took ten weeks instead of the eight weeks specified in law. That review determined Ms X’s accommodation was unsuitable. It then took a further seven weeks to rehouse her in suitable accommodation.
If we were to investigate Ms X’s complaint, it is likely we would find fault with the Council for the delays set out in paragraph seven. These delays would have caused Ms X a significant injustice as it meant she was living in unsuitable accommodation for nine weeks longer than necessary. That has caused her avoidable distress.
We therefore asked the Council to consider resolving this complaint early by providing a remedy to Ms X for the injustice caused. To its credit, the Council agreed and within four weeks of my final decision it will: write to Ms X and apologise for the avoidable distress caused by the delay in completing the review and moving her into suitable accommodation; and pay Ms X a symbolic payment of £700 to remedy the injustice caused. This payment is at the higher end of our Guidance on Remedies reflecting the significant impact the unsuitable accommodation had on Ms X.
Final decision
We have decided not to investigate Ms X’s complaint as the Council has agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman