You are right, and I believe we need homelessness defined and then responsibility allocated. I outlined an approach in February Tynwald as follows:
" I think personally there is a perfectly adequate definition (of homelessness in) in the social security capital budgeting emergency loans arrangements which were brought in inJuly 2022. So for instance, in that piece of secondary legislation in July 2022:
(1D) A person is homeless if he has no accommodation available for his occupation, in the Island or elsewhere, which he – (a) is entitled to occupy by virtue of an interest in it or by virtue of an order of a court; (b) has an express or implied licence to occupy; or (c) occupies as a residence by virtue of any enactment or rule of law giving him the right to remain in occupation or restricting the right of another person to recover possession.
(1E) A person is also homeless if he has accommodation but – (a) he cannot secure entry to it; or (b) it consists of a moveable structure, vehicle or vessel designed or adapted for human habitation and there is no place where he is entitled or permitted both to place it and to reside in it.
(1F) A person shall not be treated as having accommodation unless it is accommodation which it would be reasonable for him to continue to occupy.
So that definition that was already worked up for Mrs Maltby by legislative drafters will form the basis of drafting instructions for the whole of the forthcoming Housing and Communities Bill, as far as I am concerned, at this stage."
The DoI might need to be responsible, or it could be a Housing Association or similar. No local authority seems to want to take this responsibility.