A father who gave up his life abroad at short notice to look after his children was denied his housing rights by Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council, a Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman investigation has found.

The man had been living and working abroad when the courts removed his children from the care of his ex-partner in December 2012. He returned to the UK to look after them and was placed in an unaffordable flat by the council. He and his family have been living there ever since, and have been given no opportunity to appeal.

The Ombudsman’s investigation found the council’s actions denied the father his rights as a homeless person whom the council had a legal duty to help. The council’s records show that when the father applied as homeless, it decided it owed him the full homeless duty. It should have sent the father a notice explaining this, but instead arranged a six-month private let without explaining the consequences if he signed for the property.

Had the council acted properly, the flat would have been temporary accommodation, and would have remained so till it made an offer of accommodation under its allocation scheme or settled accommodation under its homelessness duty. Until the council made a final decision on his homelessness application, it had a duty to provide the father and his family with interim accommodation.

Michael King, Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman said:

“The council failed to discuss the ramifications of accepting the property to the family when it arranged the private let. The council should have either explained that by accepting the flat the council would no longer have a duty towards them, or it should have offered the flat as temporary accommodation, with all the review rights that entails.

“Instead, the council effectively acted as a gatekeeper, did not give the family a homelessness decision and denied them their review rights.

“Had the council acted properly in this case, it would not have had to pay a significant sum to the private landlord to make up the difference in the rent.

“I would now urge the council to consider my report and accept its findings.”

The father made a homeless application at the end of 2012 and the council found the family a three-bedroom, privately rented flat. The father explained to the council he could not afford the £850 a month rent, but signed a six-month tenancy.

Over the next few years the rent was raised in increments to £1,025 a month, and because of the benefits cap the family’s housing benefit was reduced in the same period. In 2017 and 2018, the family received notices seeking possession because of rent arrears.

The council offered the family one room in a hostel with shared bathroom and kitchen facilities. The father declined the offer.

The council has paid more than £10,000 to the landlord to cover the family’s housing benefit shortfall, but the family still lives in the unaffordable flat.

The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman’s role is to remedy injustice and share learning from investigations to help improve public, and adult social care, services. In this case the council has been asked to apologise to the father and place him top of the list for each eligible property he bids for until he makes a successful bid.

The council should also pay the father £4,500 for failing to deal with his homelessness and housing applications correctly and the delay in rehousing his family to settled, affordable accommodation, and the stressful possession proceedings. The payment will also cover the arrears of £500 he still had after the council made discretionary housing payments and the time, trouble and distress the council caused him.

The Ombudsman has the power to make recommendations to improve a council’s processes for the wider public.

In this case, the council should tell people in its allocations scheme and housing register review decisions letters about their right to complain to the Ombudsman.

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman has today published its response to a Review of the way it uses clinical advice in NHS-related casework.

The Review Steering Group, chaired by Sir Alex Allan KCB, PHSO non-executive board member, with independent advice from former Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, considered responses to a public consultation before reporting and making recommendations. Both Sir Liam’s and the Review team’s reports have been published today alongside the Ombudsman’s response.

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, Rob Behrens said:

We use clinical advice as a key source of evidence to inform our thinking in around three-quarters of our health investigations. It is therefore crucial we commission and use it correctly and that those involved in a complaint understand and have confidence in the way it has informed our decisions.

 

‘We will implement the vast majority of the Review’s recommendations to enhance confidence and trust that we have commissioned, used and reported clinical advice correctly.’

The Ombudsman will implement changes that will provide greater assurance to those who use our service that we have used clinical advice correctly and greater transparency of our service for complainants and those we investigate.

Clinical advisers will be more integrated in the casework process, interacting more regularly with caseworkers to ensure requests for advice are framed correctly and their advice has been accurately reflected in final decisions. Those using our service will have clearer information about why we are using clinical advice, the credentials of those providing it and earlier opportunities to see the content of that advice.

Sir Alex Allan KCB said:

I am immensely grateful to all those who made submissions to the Review and to Sir Liam for identifying improvements to the way in which the Ombudsman uses clinical advice to resolve complaints about the NHS.

‘The Ombudsman’s role in providing redress to people who have suffered injustice and helping to drive improvements in public service is hugely important. I am pleased that the Ombudsman will be implementing the great majority of the Review’s recommendations. Some are to be implemented immediately; others, as the Review suggested, need piloting first. I believe these are important changes which will help the Ombudsman to further improve its service.’

Sir Liam Donaldson said:

As independent adviser to the Clinical Advice Review, I made a number of proposals to improve the robustness and transparency of the Ombudsman’s use of clinical advice. In particular, I sought to increase the depth of understanding of why and how some patients’ care fails and to ensure that patients and families can have trust in the quality and independence of the resulting assessment and investigation. Also, I wanted to see a much stronger voice for patients and families reflected within the procedures and behavioural norms of the organisation.

‘I welcome that the Ombudsman will now be implementing the majority of these proposals. This is a significant set of measures that will require changes to culture as well as process. That is not easy to get right immediately. The Ombudsman is right to implement them in a phased and measured way to make sure that beneficial change is sustainable and long-lasting.’

The Clinical Review reports are available here.

El Defensor del Pueblo (e.f.), Francisco Fernández Marugán, ha iniciado una actuación de oficio ante el Ministerio de Defensa para conocer las medidas previstas para proteger a las víctimas de acoso que denuncian su situación dentro de las Fuerzas Armadas.

La Institución ha abierto esta actuación tras conocer el caso de una cabo que, después de denunciar el acoso de un superior, ha sido expulsada del ejército por pérdida de condiciones psicofísicas.

En opinión de Fernández Marugán, los avances producidos para la plena incorporación de la mujer al Ejército “son innegables” pero “casos como éste muestran la necesidad de adoptar medidas complementarias que impidan que la víctima del acoso sufra tal deterioro psicológico tras la denuncia que acabe de baja forzosa”.

El Defensor ha mostrado reiteradamente su preocupación por los obstáculos a los que se enfrentan a diario las mujeres que prestan servicio en las Fuerzas Armadas y ha pedido tolerancia cero con el acoso sexual y laboral.

Así, el año pasado inició una actuación de oficio ante el Ministerio de Defensa para conocer la eficacia del protocolo de actuación frente al acoso sexual y por razón de sexo en las Fuerzas Armadas. Además, recomendó mejorar la protección de las víctimas de acoso en la tramitación de los expedientes sancionadores.

The Ombudsman, Maria Lúcia Amaral, received a reply from the Minister of Justice, Francisca Van Dunen, to the  recommendation made to the Government to amend the law on the retention of data generated in the context of the provision of electronic communications services.

"I will follow with concern the issues raised by your recommendation, and also note that in view of the legislative calendar, the complexity associated with a legislative amendment initiative to the regime provided for in Law no. 32/2008, of July 17, whose competence belongs to the Assembly of the Republic (...) I fear it is not possible for the Government to be able to present a proposal to the Parliament with this aspiration, "says the Minister of Justice in her reply to the Ombudsman.

Law 32/2008 transposed into national law a European directive (Directive 2006/24 / EC) declared invalid in 2014 by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). In the ECJ's view, reaffirmed two years later, in the determination of the data retention obligation - traffic data, location data and other related data concerning citizens' electronic communications, with the exception of their content - the Directive violated fundamental rights enshrined in Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in so far as, when taken as a whole, such data are likely to allow very precise conclusions to be drawn about the private life of individuals.

As soon as the directive is declared invalid by the CJEU in 2014, it is as if it had never existed. However, in Portugal this decision had no effect on the national transposition law, imposing on electronic communications service providers the maintenance of all electronic communications data for all citizens for one year.

Furthermore, following the two judgments of the CJEU on this matter, the National Data Protection Commission - an entity that the law establishes should be the control of the conditions of retention of data in Portugal - decided to "disengage" the law in situations that submitted for consideration.

The Ombudsman's recommendation, in order to bring the law into conformity with the requirements deriving from the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and remedy the lack of supervision currently in place in Portugal, follows a complaint lodged by a rights association digital images.