Summary: Mr X complains the Council was at fault in the way it dealt with his homelessness application and placed him and his family in unsuitable bed and breakfast accommodation. We found fault because the Council kept Mr X and his family in bed and breakfast accommodation for more than six weeks. This fault caused an injustice to Mr X and family as they had limited privacy and suffered the discomfort and inconvenience of having to share facilities with other families. We have recommended a suitable remedy in this case.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall refer to as Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his homelessness application. Mr X says he was placed in Bed and Breakfast (B&B) accommodation for more than six weeks which caused distress to him and his family. Mr X says the B&B’s were unsuitable and the Council failed to inspect them to ensure they were properly maintained.
2. Mr X says the Council made him an unsuitable offer of interim accommodation and delayed in dealing with his review request of its decision to cease a housing duty towards him.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated Mr X’s complaints about the Council’s handling of his homelessness application, the B&B accommodation and the Council’s handling of his review request. The final part of this decision statement explains my reasons for not considering Mr X’s concerns about the suitability of the Council’s offer of accommodation to him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have read the papers submitted by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him. I considered the Council’s response to the complaint and the supporting documents it provided. I have explained my draft decision to Mr X and the Council and considered the comments received.

Back to top

What I found

8. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. The threshold for taking an application is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular council department. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
9. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
10. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of his or her household. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
11. Councils should avoid using bed and breakfast accommodation. It should only be used as a last resort in an emergency and then for the shortest time possible. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.24 and from 3 April 2018 17.30)
12. Bed and breakfast (B&B) accommodation can only be used for households which include a pregnant woman or dependent child when no other accommodation is available and then for no more than six weeks. B&B is accommodation which is not self-contained, not owned by the Council or a registered provider of social housing and where the toilet, washing, or cooking facilities are shared with other households. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 and from 3 April 2018 Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.32)
13. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:

• their eligibility for assistance
• what duty (if any) is owed to them if they are found to be homeless or threatened with homelessness
• the steps they are to take in their personalised housing plan at the prevention duty stage
• giving notice to bring the prevention duty to an end
• the steps they are to take in their personalised housing plan at the relief duty stage
• giving notice to bring the relief duty to an end
• giving notice in cases of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate
• to notify their case to another authority when the Council considers the conditions for referral are met
• whether the conditions are met for the referral of their case to another housing authority
• the conditions for referral to another authority are not met so the notifying housing authority owes the main housing duty
• the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.

14. The review must be carried out by someone who was not involved in the original decision and who is more senior to the original decision maker. The reviewing officer needs to consider any information relevant to the period before the decision was made (even if only obtained afterwards) as well as any new relevant information the Council has obtained since the decision. (The Homelessness (Review Procedure etc.) Regulations 2018, Homelessness Code of Guidance Chapter 19)
15. Councils must complete reviews of the following decisions within eight weeks of the date of the review request:

• eligibility for assistance
• not in priority need
• intentionally homeless
• suitability of accommodation
• notice being given of deliberate and unreasonable refusal to cooperate and the effect of the notice is to bring the relief duty to an end.

These periods can be extended if the applicant agrees in writing.

16. The council must advise the applicant of their right to appeal to the county court on a point of law, and of the period in which to appeal. Applicants can also appeal if the Council takes more than the prescribed time to complete the review. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202, 203 and 204)

17. Applicants may ask a council to provide accommodation pending the outcome of a review. Councils have a power, but not a duty, to accommodate certain applicants and members of their household. (Housing Act 1996, sections 188(3), 199A(6), 200(5))

Key facts of the case

18. Mr X approached the Council for help with housing his family in May 2018. Mr X’s family included Mrs X and three young children. The Council carried out a housing assessment and accepted the prevention duty towards Mr X. The Council set out reasonable steps for the Council and Mr X to take to prevent homelessness including Mr X finding work as he was not employed. Mr X found work and the Council considered he had reasonable prospects of securing alternative accommodation in the private sector so gave advice and assistance to do this.
19. The case officer carried out a home visit in June 2018 and considered it not possible to prevent Mr X and his family becoming homeless by staying in the accommodation. The Council says efforts to prevent Mr X becoming homeless were unsuccessful. Mr X was given a warrant for possession by his landlord and attended the Council on 31 August 2018. The Council accepted the relief duty towards Mr X and offered interim accommodation at a B&B.
20. Mr and Mrs X and family moved into two rooms at the B&B. Mr X complained to the Council about the accommodation. Mr X alleged the Council had failed to carry out any inspections of the B&B. Mr X raised concerns about the health & safety of the family there. He reported unsafe conditions, the children becoming ill, his eldest child late for school and being tired. Mr X said the whole family was suffering due to being in the B&B. Mr X made complaints about other residents at the B&B. Mr X alleged his children fell off the beds as the B&B owner did not provide cots for them. Once provided there were issues with the cots and poor condition of the cot mattress they were given. Mr X raised concerns about heating and hot water and a lack of food for breakfast.
21. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaints about standards at the B&B and officers visited the premises. The Council confirmed it received no other complaints about actions of other residents and identified no hazards when inspecting Mr X’s rooms. The Council found the communal areas in good working condition. It said the heating was in good working order and the radiators in Mr X’s rooms were working. The Council said it had a good working relationship with the B&B provider who ran several establishments all considered fit for purpose.
22. The Council says it inspects all new B&B’s before placing clients there. It will check the relevant certificates and will carry out spot inspections to check the B&B is in good working order.
23. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s responses and went to stage 2 and then 3 of the Council’s complaints procedure. The Council responded to all the concerns Mr X raised.
24. The Council has commented further on Mr X’s complaints and said he advised the B&B provider on arrival he would use his own bedding. So, the B&B provider removed the existing bedding. The B&B provider gave Mr X an extra cot as requested. The Council says the cot mattress Mr X referred to and took photographs of was in use in another part of the building waiting for disposal by the B&B provider. It was not for Mr X’s use.
25. The Council says with regards to food a B&B provider will supply tea or coffee, cereal, bread, milk and eggs depending on clients’ needs. The B&B provider provides breakfast for everyone on the B&B. It says no other residents reported that breakfast was insufficient.
26. The Council says it was aware Mr X and family were in B&B accommodation for longer than six weeks. It says it was unable to offer self-contained accommodation after six weeks due to not having any suitable alternative accommodation available.
27. During the family’s stay at the B&B the manager complained to the Council about Mr X alleging unacceptable conduct from him. The manager issued a final warning letter to Mr X and the interim duty ceased on 16 November 2018.
28. The Council says once a client is evicted from a B&B due to abuse it would normally discharge its housing duty. But in this case, it decided to accept a duty to rehouse Mr X and his family. So, Housing Services accepted a main housing duty to Mr X and offered him alternative accommodation under s.193 (2) of the Housing Act 1996. This was two-bed roomed self-contained accommodation. Mr X refused the offer the same day, so the Council ended its main housing duty. The Housing case officer sent an official referral to Social Services for Mr X’s family as a potential child in need in its area.
29. Mr X submitted a review request for the suitability of the accommodation offered under s.193 (2) and the Council’s decision to end the main housing duty.
30. The Council’s Social Services received the referral about Mr X and his family. Mr X claimed to have nowhere to stay and said he refused the offer of a property. The Duty Social worker encouraged Mr X not to refuse the offer due to the limited resources and shortage of housing in London. But Mr X still refused the offer of housing saying it was unsuitable. Mr X said he was looking for accommodation with more space, three bedrooms in a quiet and secure place. Social Services accommodated Mr X and family in a different B&B while carrying out social services assessments.
31. The Council logged Mr X’s review request on 14 December with the review decision due on 8 February 2019. Mr X submitted additional information and photographs to the Council of the B&B accommodation. The review officer established Mr X was offered accommodation by the Council as a main housing duty offer.
32. On 25 February 2019, the Council told Mr X the original review officer had left so reallocated the case to another review officer. The Council asked Mr X to extend the deadline for a decision to 25 March 2019. Mr X was unhappy but following further contact with the review officer agreed an extension to 18 March 2019.
33. The review officer emailed a letter to Mr X advising the Council was minded to uphold its decision to cease a housing duty towards him. Mr X responded and the Council considered his comments. The Council issued a final letter on 20 March 2019 saying it was ceasing a housing duty towards Mr X. The Council says it delayed in issuing the letter for a few days due to the need for a Head of Service officer to sign the letter. The Council says it has changed its procedures to allow the Review Manager to sign the letters to prevent such delays in the future.
34. Social Services offered Mr X another two-bedroomed property in Luton during the social services assessment. Mr X refused the offer. The assessment found no childcare concerns about Mr X and family. So, Social Services gave Mr X notice to find his own private rented accommodation. Mr X and family left the B&B to go to and live with family members in another borough. The Council advised Mr X to approach that borough for support. Mr X declined and presented to Social Services at the Council again. The Council has accommodated Mr X in B&B accommodation again while reviewing the previous assessments.

My assessment

35. The documents provided by the Council show it followed its duties towards Mr X during the prevention and relief duty stages when he approached it as homeless. The Council then placed Mr X and his family in B&B accommodation when he became homeless. The Council can use B&B accommodation for Mr X and his family if there is no other suitable accommodation available. But it should not be for any longer than six weeks. After that time the Council should move Mr X and his family to self-contained accommodation.
36. Mr X and his family were in B&B accommodation for 11 weeks until the Council ceased its housing duty towards them. Mr and Mrs X and family have been in B&B accommodation for five weeks longer than they should have been.
37. So, the Council was at fault in failing to move Mr X and family into self-contained accommodation when they had been in shared accommodation for six weeks. The Ombudsman is mindful the Council was experiencing significant difficulties in accommodating families due to the shortage of suitable accommodation available. But the Council did not comply with its statutory duty. The law is clear that families must not be accommodated in B&B accommodation for longer than six weeks.
38. As a result, Mr X and his family have been caused an injustice. This is due to being deprived of self-contained accommodation for five weeks. They had limited privacy and suffered the discomfort and inconvenience of having to share facilities with other occupants.
39. The documents show the Council investigated Mr X’s complaints about standards and conditions at the B&B accommodation. The Council confirmed it considered the standards at the accommodation were satisfactory and found no hazards in Mr X’s rooms. The Council’s responses to Mr X’s complaints are detailed and thorough so I do not consider any further investigation into Mr X’s complaints will add anything further or achieve a different outcome for him.
40. Once the Council ceased it main housing duty after Mr X refused an offer of accommodation Mr X and family were placed in B&B accommodation by the Council’s Social Services awaiting assessments. I acknowledge Mr X was unhappy about the Council using such accommodation again. But Mr X will need to complain to the Council about this and any actions taken by Social Services to assess his family’s needs through the statutory social services complaint’s procedure. Once Mr X has completed that complaints procedure, he may make a further complaint to the Ombudsman about the way Social Services dealt with him once the Council’s housing duty ceased.
41. Mr X requested a review of the Council’s decision about the suitability of the accommodation it offered him under s.193(2) and the decision to end the main housing duty. The documents show that the Council logged the review in December 2018, so it had until 8 February 2019 to carry out the review. The Council completed the review by 18 March 2019 so did not complete it within eight weeks.
42. This is fault by the Council. But I do not consider it has caused Mr X any significant injustice. This is because Mr X was aware of the delay and agreed an extension of time for the Council to respond. The review also upheld the Council’s original decision to cease the housing duty and Mr X and his family were being accommodated by the Council while it carried out the review. So, I do not intend to seek a separate remedy for the delay caused by the Council in dealing with Mr X’s review request.

Agreed action

43. To remedy the injustice to Mr X and his family caused by the fault I have identified in paragraph 37, the Council has agreed within one month of the date of my final decision to:
• Apologise to Mr X and makes him a payment of £500 to acknowledge the distress and inconvenience caused to him by failing to move Mr X and his family from B&B accommodation after six weeks. So, they were living in unsuitable accommodation for five weeks.
• Review its policy for placing clients in B&B accommodation and explain what action it is taking to ensure that families are not placed in B&B accommodation for longer than six weeks according to the law.

Back to top

Final decision

44. I am completing my investigation. The Council was at fault in failing to move Mr X and family to self-contained accommodation after six weeks of being at a B&B.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

45. I have not investigated Mr X’s complaints about the suitability of accommodation offered by the Council under s.193(2). This is because Mr X has a right of appeal to the courts if does not agree with the Council’s decision to regard the property as suitable. As Paragraph five explains the Ombudsman can exercise discretion if it is considered not reasonable to expect a complainant to go to court. But consider it is reasonable in this case to expect Mr X to go to the courts if he disagrees with the Council’s decision. This is because the courts can consider the facts of the case and whether Council’s offer is a suitable one.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman