The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman has taken the unusual step of issuing a further report against South Kesteven District Council for it refusing to pay a remedy to a man who asked for homelessness support.

The Ombudsman found that the council failed to properly consider whether it had a duty to provide the man with accommodation while it processed his homelessness application in early 2024. Despite the man telling the council he had been admitted to hospital and that medical staff believed his housing situation was affecting his health, the council did not demonstrate that it considered the correct legal tests when deciding whether it should offer him interim accommodation.

The law sets a deliberately low bar for councils to provide accommodation whilst considering whether to provide long term housing to an individual. Councils only need to have reason to believe someone may be homeless, eligible and vulnerable. The Ombudsman found evidence South Kesteven consistently applied a much stricter test and also failed to revisit its decision when it received new information about the man’s health conditions and welfare.

In its original report, published in August 2025, the Ombudsman made a number of recommendations to the council. The council has since complied with only two of them and has refused to: apologise to the man, pay him a combined financial remedy of £1,175 for the distress caused and remind its homelessness staff of the correct legal test for interim accommodation

Amerdeep Clarke, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman said:

“The duty to provide interim accommodation exists precisely to protect people in situations like the one this man found himself in. The threshold is deliberately low, and councils must apply it correctly.

“The council has told us the correct test was applied but was not recorded properly due to an error in writing rather than consideration. The public have a right to expect public bodies to keep accurate records about them. Accurate record keeping is central to good administrative practice and transparent decision making.

“In this case, not only did South Kesteven District Council leave a vulnerable man sleeping rough when it should have housed him, it has now refused to properly remedy that injustice.

“We do not issue further reports lightly and I would urge the council to reconsider its position and comply with our recommendations.”

La resolución insta a valorar la forma legal de compensar por su labor a la asociación local que se encarga de manera altruista del cuidado de las colonias felinas

La justicia de Aragón, Concepción Gimeno, ha emitido una sugerencia dirigida al Ayuntamiento de Valle de Hecho para que tenga en cuenta las previsiones legales en materia de bienestar animal, tanto en la planificación como en la actuación administrativa.

La sugerencia continúa instando a valorar la forma legal de compensar a la asociación local encargada del cuidado de las colonias felinas, así como el establecimiento de un marco estable de colaboración por su labor.

La resolución se produce tras la recepción de una queja presentada por la mencionada asociación en la que se exponía el supuesto incumplimiento de la legislación en materia de protección animal y sobre el acceso a la información pública. Además, en la queja se explica que la asociación gestiona las colonias felinas del municipio desde 2020 de manera altruista.

En su análisis, la institución recuerda que tanto la normativa autonómica como la estatal establecen obligaciones para las entidades locales en materia de bienestar animal, incluyendo la recogida de animales abandonados, el control de colonias felinas mediante el método CER (captura, esterilización y retorno) y la colaboración con asociaciones.

Asimismo, el Justicia de Aragón subraya el derecho de las asociaciones a acceder a información pública municipal, como los presupuestos, recordando que ya existe una sugerencia previa del Defensor del Pueblo en este sentido.

The decision in brief: Under certain circumstances, a court hearing may be held behind closed doors. Pursuant to Section 3 of Chapter 5 of the Code of Judicial Procedure (SFS 1942:740), the presiding judge may also admit persons who are not serving in or officers of the court if there are special reasons for doing so.

In the case in question, which dealt with offences including rape, an adult defendant’s mother and sister were admitted to a hearing behind closed doors in the court of appeal. The case documents do not state why their presence was permitted. The injured party, who was not in attendance at the court of appeal, found it humiliating that the defendant’s family were able to watch videos of her examination in the district court.

The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman notes that there is seldom reason to maintain secrecy with regard to persons whose presence has been consented to by the person that secrecy is intended to protect. According to the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman, when she or he has not consented to the presence of others, their presence must be presumed to be of benefit to the proceedings if special reasons are to be deemed to exist. Furthermore, there may be reason to balance the interests of secrecy and admitting others to the hearing.

The Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman holds that, in the case in question, it is debatable whether such reasons existed to warrant the presence of others. That said, as this is ultimately a matter of judgement, the court of appeal’s action in this regard is not cause for criticism. However, the Chief Parliamentary Ombudsman is of the opinion that the court of appeal deserves criticism for deficient documentation of grounds for the decision.

Luna alerta de que ofrecer plazas por teléfono y darlas por aceptadas sin constancia documental provoca inseguridad jurídica y puede causar perjuicios económicos 

El síndic de Greuges de la Comunitat Valenciana, Angel Luna, ha recomendado que cualquier oferta, aceptación o renuncia a recursos del sistema de dependencia quede documentada por escrito y debidamente incorporada al expediente, tras detectar incidencias en un caso en el que una mujer en situación de dependencia ha estado más de nueve meses sin cobrar la ayuda económica que le permitía recibir cuidados en su entorno familiar.

Según la resolución, no consta en su expediente una aceptación expresa y formal de la plaza residencial —extremo que la familia niega— y sí figura la renuncia presentada por escrito pocos días después, sin que la mujer llegara a ingresar en el centro. Por ello, el Síndic solicita restablecer la prestación con efectos retroactivos.

Pese a ello, la Conselleria no revisó la decisión ni reactivó la prestación. El Síndic considera especialmente relevante que, una vez recibida la renuncia y sin haberse producido el ingreso, la Administración no diera marcha atrás para dejar sin efecto la resolución adoptada y restablecer la ayuda económica previamente reconocida. Esta situación obligó a la familia a iniciar de nuevo los trámites y a permanecer durante meses sin percibir la prestación.

La resolución evidencia deficiencias en un sistema que permite adoptar decisiones relevantes sin respaldo documental suficiente. En este sentido, el Síndic advierte de que la práctica de ofertar plazas por vía telefónica y considerar aceptadas dichas ofertas sin confirmación escrita genera inseguridad jurídica y puede derivar en perjuicios económicos como el analizado.

Asimismo, el Síndic solicita la revisión del caso concreto, la retroacción de las actuaciones al momento de la renuncia y el reconocimiento del derecho a percibir la prestación desde que fue retirada.

Consulta nuestra resolución.