Ombudsman and council at loggerheads over failure to take homelessness application

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has criticised Oadby and Wigston Borough Council over its refusal to accept it had done anything wrong when it failed to take a homelessness application from a victim of domestic violence.

However, a report prepared for a meeting of the full council next week (4 June) says officers at Oadby and Wigston and an external lawyer were of the view that the Ombudsman’s investigator had “misdirected herself as to the law”.

The LGO said the background to the case was that the woman had been living in another council area when she approached Oadby and Wigston for help to house herself and her children.

“Despite the woman having lived and worked in Oadby and Wigston’s area, and telling officers she was at risk of domestic violence if she stayed in the other area, the council did not take a homelessness application from her,” the Ombudsman said.

“Instead Oadby and Wigston placed the responsibility on the other authority to assess and accommodate the family. The woman and her children had to stay in unsuitable bed and breakfast accommodation in the other authority’s area until the council decided it would take their application and house them after all.”

The LGO’s investigation found fault with the way Oadby and Wigston dealt with the family, and concluded that its reasoning for not taking a homelessness application was flawed.

Oadby and Wigston insisted the blame lay with the other council and had not yet accepted it had any responsibility for the injustice caused to the family, the Ombudsman said.

The family has since moved to privately rented accommodation.

The Ombudsman has recommended that Oadby and Wigston should:

• apologise to the mother;
• pay her £500 to recognise the injustice caused;
• provide training to its housing staff “to ensure they can identify when a homelessness application should be taken”; and
• publish a notice in a local newspaper on two separate occasions setting out the finding of fault.

The council has not yet accepted the Ombudsman’s recommendations.

Michael King, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, said: “It is important for councils to be aware of their homelessness obligations and properly assess when they have a duty towards people. When vulnerable families are involved, it is particularly vital. It is not enough to pass the responsibility onto other councils simply because the person has applied to two separate councils for help.

“I have made some very simple, practical recommendations to help improve the council’s services for other homeless people and I would urge the council to review my report and accept the improvements I have asked it to make.”

A spokesman for Oadby and Wigston said it would not be commenting until the Ombudsman’s report had been considered by the meeting of full council on 4 June.

However, the report prepared for that meeting says that officers had considered the report of the Ombudsman in detail and it was the view of the Head of Law & Democracy, the Housing Services Manager and an external lawyer engaged on behalf of the council to review its response(s) to the Ombudsman, “that the investigator acting on behalf of the Ombudsman has misdirected herself as to the law”.

The report says: “It is Officers’ view that where the homeless application is as a result of a referral from another authority (Authority A) there is no requirement in law for the receiving authority (Authority B) to take a further homeless application from the person being referred as the initial application made to Authority A is deemed to be treated as if it were made direct to Authority B if the referral is accepted.

“Officers have raised their opinion on two separate occasions with the investigator who has declined to amend her findings.”

The report sets out that councillors will need to reach a determination on which of the alternative recommendations in the report they wish to adopt, namely:

1. That the report of the Ombudsman is noted and that Members agree to the recommendations as set out in the Ombudsman’s report: or
2. That the report of the Ombudsman is noted and that Members determine to take no action on the recommendations as set out in the Ombudsman’s report; or
3. That the report of the Ombudsman is noted and Members instruct the Head of Law & Democracy / Monitoring Officer to take investigate legal action to have the findings of the Ombudsman set aside.

The Ombudsman has no power to force a council to accept the recommendations that it has made.