City council shuts down review into unfinished homelessness compensation case

This story was written by the local democracy reporting service (LDRS), a BBC-funded scheme to improve the coverage of issues relating to local democracy. The Leicester Gazette has been a partner in the scheme since March 2024, and so receives some stories as part of it.

Learn more

Leicester City Council has voted not to escalate concerns over its refusal to fully compensate a homeless man, following a heated debate in which councillors demanded a review of the decision.

The council’s choice not to pay £3,525 in compensation after leaving the man and his family in unsuitable accommodation for almost 10 months beyond the legal limit was scrutinised by the Overview Select Committee on Monday 2 February.

Councillors from the Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Green parties joined forces to “call in” the decision, challenging the council’s refusal to pay the full amount recommended by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO). However, they were ultimately outvoted, and the call-in was withdrawn.

During the debate, councillors opposing the decision said it was deeply troubling that the council was willing to pay compensation to large companies, but not to vulnerable individuals who cannot afford legal representation. Such individuals include the man, referred to as Mr X in council documents.

Green party councillor Patrick Kitterick for Castle, argued for the refusal to be escalated.

He said: “Good God, we are living in a Donald Trump world. If you are like Mr X, you will get rolled over by this council.”

Be part of the story

Join our free mailing list to get local news and tips in your inbox every week.

Subscribe for free

Email sent! Check your inbox to complete your signup.

__No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. Want to support our work?__Click here for membership .

Leicester City Council has agreed to pay £500 to acknowledge the “distress and uncertainty caused” to Mr X, but is withholding the remaining amount recommended by the ombudsman.

Deputy city mayor Elly Cutts said the situation arose during a period of intense national housing pressure and argued it was unfair to punish the council for factors beyond its control.

Councillor Nigel Porter, Lib Dem for Aylestone, said: “£3,525 is tiny compared with what the council spends. It is the council’s responsibility to put this right, not to hide behind excuses.

“If we follow the council’s logic, no one would ever be compensated for anything. That argument would have no basis in any court of law, and it should not stand in this council either.”

The council also said it was reluctant to pay the full amount due to concerns that it could prompt further compensation claims.

Deputy city mayor Elly Cutkelvin said: “Exposing us to paying thousands of pounds in compensation may set us back in tackling the wider problem.”

Council officers said progress was being made to address housing need, pointing to £45 million invested in 253 temporary accommodation units.

Labour members were urged to refer the matter to full council with recommendations to comply with the ombudsman’s request. But after what the chair called a “vigorous and robust” conversation, seven councillors voted in favour of removing the call-in, with five voting against.

Although the issue will not go before full council at this stage, councillors acknowledged that further government involvement could result in the matter being revisited in the future.

If you enjoyed this article and want more great local journalism, here’s how to get it.

We publish investigations, news features and human interest stories that go beyond the headlines. Our journalism is fact-based and rigorous, and we prize good writing over clickbait and sensationalism.

Our readers get all our stories directly in their inbox every Monday morning via our free weekly newsletter. Use that button below to sign up for free.

__No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. Want to support our work?__Click here for membership .

Subscribe for free