Summary: Ms Q has complained about the suitability of her temporary Council accommodation and has requested an accommodation transfer and a refund of her service charges. She says the matters are impacting adversely on her wellbeing. However, the Ombudsman will not investigate this matter as Ms Q has a legal right of an internal review by the Council. As regards to Ms Q’s transfer request, the Council has applied its allocations policy and the Ombudsman has not identified fault in this respect.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms Q, is making a complaint about the condition of her temporary accommodation which is provided by the Council.
2. Further, Ms Q says she has been incorrectly billed for her service charge and the Council is at fault for not correctly considering her transfer request for alternative accommodation.
3. Ms Q has also said the Council is not providing the services it should be and these matters collectively are impacting negatively on her wellbeing. As a desired outcome, she wants her billed service charge to be reviewed and to be transferred to more suitable accommodation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word 'fault' to refer to these. 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).
6. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended).
7. 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).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I have reviewed Ms Q’s complaint to the Ombudsman and Council. I have also reviewed the responses of the Council, its policies and applicable legislation. I now invite Ms to comment on a draft of my decision before reaching a final view.

Back to top

What I found

Background and relevant law

9. Section 184 of the Housing Act 1996 (the Act) requires a council to take a homelessness application and make enquiries if it has “reason to believe” someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness. The threshold for taking an application is low. ‘Reason to believe’ and ‘may be’ are lower tests than being satisfied someone actually is homeless or threatened with homelessness.
10. If a council is satisfied someone is eligible, homeless, in priority need and unintentionally homeless then it owes them the ‘main housing duty’. Generally, councils carry out this duty by arranging temporary accommodation until it makes a suitable offer of permanent housing, as per Section 193 of the Act.
11. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation it arranges for homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of his or her household. Section 206 of the Act says this duty applies equally to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main housing duty.
12. Under Section 202 of the Act, applicants for housing have a right to request an internal review of most council homelessness decisions. This includes the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after acceptance of the main housing duty. Where a local authority remains subject to a continuing duty to provide accommodation, the accommodation will have to be suitable for all this time. Where there exists a statutory right of review, we consider we should not pursue complaints about that issue. This is because this is the process Parliament and the legislature established to consider such matters.
13. A statutory right will exist until 21 days from the date the authority decided the accommodation was suitable. This may have been indicated in the original offer letter. If the accommodation is found not to be suitable after this date, the applicant will have to either ask for a fresh decision on its suitability or ask for an extra non-statutory review. If a decision is made on either of these bases, it will be reviewable. If the authority refuses to make a fresh decision or carry out a non-statutory review, this may be challengeable by judicial review.

What happened

14. In June 2018, Ms Q made a homeless application for Council housing which the Council registered the same month. The Council then provided Ms Q temporary accommodation under a homelessness duty to Ms Q which is continuing.
15. In March 2019, the Council carried out an assessment of Ms Q’s circumstances to decide her priority for social housing. Ms Q was placed in Band 3, meaning the Council deemed her not be a person who should be prioritised for an offer of temporary accommodation in Greater London.
16. In March 2020, Ms Q made a complaint to the Council about disrepair at her temporary accommodation. Further, she said that she wanted to be transferred to different and more suitable accommodation within her area. Later, Ms Q complained her service charge as billed by the Council needed a review. This is because she felt she was not receiving her services for reasons of the disrepair.
17. In July 2020, the Council issued its final response to Ms Q. The Council said the issues had been resolved, though it accepted there had been delays in resolving the property disrepair matters. It also told Ms Q the disrepair matters did not affect Ms Q’s liability to pay the property service charge. As regards to Ms Q’s transfer request for new accommodation, the Council referred to its housing allocations assessment with Ms Q in 2019. However, it concluded she did have enough priority for a transfer within Greater London.
18. In November 2020, Ms Q raised an additional matter since registering her initial complaint with the Ombudsman. She says the bathroom of her temporary accommodation has mould which is making it difficult to use. Ms Q says she has been complaining to the Council about this matter to no success.

Assessment

Suitability of accommodation

19. As the Council has accepted the main housing duty, Ms Q has review and appeal rights about the suitability of her accommodation that is offered to fulfil that duty. Normally we would not investigate complaints about decisions where these review and appeal rights apply. I have seen no evidence Ms Q has exercised her right for a statutory review in accordance with Section 202 of the Act. On this basis and with consideration to the said appeal rights, I see no reason to exercise discretion in favour of Ms Q. The condition I describe in paragraph 7 applies and I will not investigate this part of Ms Q’s complaint.

Service charge

20. I note Ms Q does not feel her service charge is payable because of her alleged unsuitable accommodation. However, that is properly a matter which must be considered by way of a statutory review, as set out in paragraph 19. For the reasons given, I do not propose to investigate the substantive matter about the suitability of Ms Q’s accommodation. I cannot therefore remedy any alleged financial losses associated with any fault by the Council in this regard.

Transfer request

21. I recognise that Ms Q no longer wishes to remain in her temporary accommodation for reasons of its condition and has requested a transfer within Greater London. However, the Council applied its allocations policy to Ms Q’s circumstances and determined that she does not have enough priority for a transfer within Greater London. Having looked at the Housing Allocation Policy, I cannot determine any fault connected with this. As the law says I cannot question the merits of a decision in the absence of fault, I have no authority to make an alternative recommendation.

Back to top

Final decision

22. I will not investigate Ms Q’s complaint about the suitability of her temporary accommodation or service charge payments. This is because she has a legal right of review. With respect to Ms Q’s transfer request, I have not identified any fault and I cannot by law question the merits of the Council’s decision in the absence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman