Homelessness internal reviews: What’s the point?

Some time ago on this blog, I said that I would be carrying out research on the use of the internal reviews process in Wales by homeless applicants.  Since then, I have been beavering away, trying to solicit responses and (eventually) getting responses through FoI requests.  The research concerns the period between July and December 2025.  Respondents were asked a range of questions about the internal review procedure, its use, outcomes, and what they thought about it.  I now have 19 responses from local authorities.  It is worth saying something about them because nobody else has collected these statistics (#grrr) and it is really important that we don’t create rights which are not used (for whatever reason).  I happen to believe in internal review in the sense that it it is better than judicial review because it is closer to applicants who can challenge the authority on a wider range of factual matters; and (as we have found in previous research) internal may have more of a radiating impact on administration than judicial review.

In fact, I have so much to say that this post is a summary of a document which you can read, if you are interested (it’s 2000 words – a lengthier read than usual).  You can find it here: Blog post (I will update it if any more responses come in).

My summary goes like this:

Why this is important

The internal reviews process is a key part of homelessness decision-making.  Lots of applicants in Wales receive negative decisions which can be the subject of a review request; even where a decision may not be “negative”, an applicant may be dissatisfied – most notably, this is the case with the question of the suitability of accommodation offered to applicants (remember the temporary accommodation issue, for example).  Let me give a couple of examples from the most recent government statistics (July-September 2025): there were 13,050 formal applications for homelessness assistance; 2,568 households were found to be eligible but not homeless or threatened with homelessness; roughly 900 households found to be intentionally homeless and in priority need refused an offer of suitable accommodation.  In short, there are a large number of negative decisions.

Wales has gone further than England in making nearly every decision and non-decision in homelessness applications subject to the internal review process.  In other words, there is a policy preference for this kind of internal auditing process triggered by applicants over the more cumbersome and costly judicial review process.  We know that the legislation has spawned massive numbers of court cases over the years and there has been considerable “juridification” of decision-making (broadly that word just means that decisions are governed by lots of law).

Administrative justice is served best by getting decisions right the first time.  Internal review facilitates that.  Internal review is also the gateway to the county court and an appeal.

Summary of responses

• Most reviews are conducted by a single officer – that is a good thing.  Unlike England, all bar one of respondents conducted reviews in-house.
• Legal representation is rare – that is worrying given that points not raised on review are generally outside grounds of appeal
• Just seven out of 19 respondents indicated that they had received more than 16 review requests between July and December 2026
• Suitability of accommodation appears to be the most common area for review
• There is a suggestion that the safeguard procedure where there is a deficiency or irregularity in the original decision may be rarely used
• Not all review requests are successful (of course) but, of 14 respondents, there were just two county court appeals (in one local authority area) of which neither proceeded to full judgment
• Respondents were generally positive about the value of the review process

I will leave you with the following, which comes from a larger user which was able to provide exact numbers in response to an FoI request: lawyers were used in less than 5% of applications; overall success rate was 22%; this was the area with two county court appeals.

The overriding concern is that, despite good intentions and legal duties/requirements, administrative justice is not being served in homelessness decision-making in Wales.  I suspect that review officers will agree with that opinion, particularly those that see the review process as a quality check on decision-making.  The most enthusiastic respondent noted “We carry out case reflections on any decision over turned and learn from the decision”.  That is precisely the point of the internal review process – it has, or should have, radiating effects improving the quality of administration and decision-making.

What does this mean?

I am so bored of making the same points over and over again (since 1996 or thereabouts, so this is the 30th anniversary of the first survey), but here we go, in the hope that somebody – anybody – will listen and do something about it:

1. We need proper statistics of the use of internal review process.  Why is it that apparently similar places, with the same numbers of applicants, have different experiences of the use of the review process? (I was told once that the reason why we don’t have them is that Ministry of Justice is responsible for this area.  Is that true?  I have doubts.)
2. Internal review, if used well, has the potential to have a massive effect on applicants housing options/chances as well as improve local authority decision-making.  This is important because of the radiating effects of review requests on other decisions.  There is a question about whether it is being used well, and, I think, what criteria we are applying to make that assessment.
3. We need to understand why so few potentially dissatisfied applicants use the internal review process in Wales.  Basically, if applicants aren’t using it, the potential positives in the previous paragraph are irrelevant.
4. Should we be concerned about the lack of use of the appeals process after an unsuccessful review?  Or, a slightly different question: Given that many reviews are unsuccessful, why are there so few appeals? (See past posts on the legal advice issue)
5. A new and broad point but … Wales has made a positive decision in favour of internal review.  What is it doing to facilitate its use?
6. While reviews can be conducted by lay people, and conducted really well, there is a case to be made for the importance of legal representation in the review process both for applicants and decision-makers/local authority officers.  Who is making that case?

The overriding point, though is this: what is the point of housing rights if they are not exercised?