Summary: Ms B complained the Council failed to properly deal with the property disrepair issues she raised about her temporary accommodation. She also says the Council wrongly assessed her bedroom need, it failed to correctly assess her medical evidence and it failed to properly deal with her complaint. We find the Council was at fault for its complaint handling and it delayed dealing with the property disrepair issues. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

The complaint

1. Ms B complained the Council failed to properly deal with the property disrepair issues she raised about her temporary accommodation.
2. She also says the Council wrongly assessed her bedroom need, it failed to correctly assess her medical evidence and it failed to properly deal with her complaint.
3. She says the matter has caused distress and upset. She also says her belongings have been damaged because of the property disrepair issues.

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. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

6. I considered information Ms B submitted with her complaint. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered information it sent it response.
7. Ms B and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Temporary accommodation

8. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities sets out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
9. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need it has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation. This is called the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
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 Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)

The Council’s housing allocation policy

11. The Council runs a choice based letting scheme. This means households may bid for properties they feel are suitable for their needs. The Council will offer the property to the bidder with the highest priority points first.
12. Homeless households will be placed in Band B.
13. The Council will allow one bedroom for:

• Every adult couple.
• A single person aged 16 or over.
• Any two children of the same sex under the age of 16.
• Any two children regardless of sex under the age of 10.
• Any other child under the age of 16.

The Council’s complaints policy

14. The Council aims to respond within 15 working days at stage one. If the complainant is not happy with the Council’s stage one response, they can ask for the complaint to be escalated to stage two. The Council aims to respond to complaints at stage two within 15 working days.

What happened

15. Ms B and her family are homeless. The Council accepted a main housing duty towards them in 2019. They have been living in temporary accommodation since.
16. The accommodation Ms B lived is in owned the Council but managed by a housing charity (Charity B).
17. Ms B contacted the Council in October 2020 and said she was unhappy about living in temporary accommodation. She said there was damp in the bedroom, which she had reported to Charity B, and it was looking to deal with it. She said the property was too small because she needed four bedrooms rather than three due the ages of her four children.
18. The Council replied and said under its housing allocation policy, children under the age of 16 of the same sex are expected to share a bedroom. Therefore, she qualified for three bedrooms. It said if she had medical information to show why her children could not share a bedroom, she should send it and its medical assessor would review it.
19. Ms B emailed the Council in November and said it was unreasonable for her teenage daughter to share with her toddler. She also said there was anti-social behaviour taking place where she lived.
20. The Council emailed Charity B and asked it to contact Ms B about the anti-social behaviour issues. Charity B responded and said it had spoken to Ms B and was following up on the issues.
21. The Council asked Ms B again to send any up-to-date medical information so its medical assessor could review her bedroom need.
22. Ms B provided the Council with her medical information on 3 December.
23. The medical assessor reviewed Ms B’s medical information and said while more space would help, there was insufficient information to justify a fourth bedroom. They said they would review the matter again with more information such as contemporaneous psychiatric reports.
24. The Council emailed Ms B and updated her on the medical assessor’s conclusions. Ms B said she did not have any other information to provide, and she was unhappy with the length of time she had been in temporary accommodation.
25. Ms B complained to the Council on 29 January 2021. She said it was unacceptable she was only entitled to three bedrooms. She said living in temporary accommodation was making her anxious. She also mentioned several property disrepair issues, including a roof leak that not been resolved.
26. The Council responded to Ms B’s complaint on 4 May. It said Ms B’s bedroom entitlement was in line with its housing allocations policy, and she would be eligible for four bedrooms in January 2022 when her daughter turned 16. It also said if she considered her temporary accommodation was unsuitable, she could request a review within 21 days.
27. Ms B responded and said the Council had not addressed the key issues in her complaint. She sent a further email on 16 May with several disrepair issues with her temporary accommodation.
28. The Council emailed Charity B on 11 June and asked for an update on the issues Ms B reported. Charity B responded and said it met with Ms B to investigate the repairs. It said it had repaired some of the issues on the same day, and it was looking to visit again on 16 June to resolve the remaining issues.
29. The Council clarified its response to Ms B’s complaint on 16 June. It said Charity B was dealing with the disrepair issues. It also said while it understood why she wanted to move to a permanent property, it had to allocate properties in line with its allocation policy. It said she had the right to progress her complaint to stage two.
30. Charity B emailed the Council on 26 June and said it had completed majority of the outstanding repair jobs. It said the only outstanding job was repairing the roof tiles, and under the terms of the lease that was the Council’s responsibility.
31. The Council’s property service department contacted Charity B and asked for Ms B’s telephone number so it could establish the roof issues.
32. Ms B emailed the Council on 5 July and said she remained unhappy and wanted to progress her complaint to stage two.
33. An officer from the Council’s property service department repaired the roof tiles on 16 July. The Council agreed to monitor the situation.
34. Ms B emailed the Council on 20 August and asked for an update on her complaint. She also said she spent money replacing her bedding because of the leak from the roof.
35. The Council replied on 23 August and apologised for the delay. It asked for proof of her expenses regarding the damaged bedding. It said she could ask for a review of her temporary accommodation if she thought it was unsuitable. It also asked her why she wanted her complaint escalated to stage two.
36. Ms B replied and said the property was unsuitable due to the size, anti-social behaviour and damp and mould. She sent a further email the following day and asked to move to alternative temporary accommodation.
37. Ms B chased for a response to her complaint on 23 September.
38. Ms B reported further issues with her roof on 5 October. The building surveyor from the Council visited on 7 October and said the matter was complex and he would need to erect scaffolding to investigate the issues further.
39. The Council spoke to Ms B and said there was an opportunity to move her to alternative temporary accommodation with four bedrooms. It said it had to complete work on the property, so it could take several weeks. Ms B was happy with the solution.
40. The Council erected the scaffolding in November.
41. Ms B moved to her new alternative temporary accommodation in December.

Back to top

Analysis

42. When Ms B first contacted the Council, her four children were under the age of 16. Therefore, under the Council’s housing allocation policy, she was only entitled to three bedrooms. As the Council acted in accordance with its policy, I find no fault in how it assessed Ms B’s bedroom need.
43. The medical assessor considered Ms B’s medical information and decided there was insufficient evidence to justify a fourth bedroom. Although Ms B disagrees with this, it was down to the medical assessor’s professional judgement, and I do not find fault.
44. The Council significantly delayed responding to Ms B’s complaint. It should have responded to her complaint at stage one by 19 February, but it did not respond until nearly three months later on 4 May. The Council has also failed to respond at all to Ms B’s complaint at stage two. This has caused Ms B an injustice as it caused her frustration, and she was put to time and trouble in chasing a response and then contacting the Ombudsman.
45. Ms B told the Council about the property disrepair issues in her complaint on 29 January. She also said the roof leak had not been resolved. The Council should have discussed these issues with Charity B. When it responded to Ms B’s complaint, it failed to address the property disrepair aspect of her complaint. This is fault, which caused Ms B an injustice as she had to repeat the issues and wait longer for them to be addressed. Although Charity B manages the property, the Council is responsible for ensuring homeless households have suitable accommodation.
46. Ms B repeated the issues on 16 May, and I am satisfied after this point the Council took appropriate action in liaising with Charity B to ensure the works were completed. When Ms B told the Council the roof was leaking again, it acted quickly by liaising with its building surveyor.
47. Ms B explained why the property was unsuitable in her email of 23 August. She also asked for the Council to move her to alternative accommodation in an email the following day. The Council should have treated this as a suitability review request and progressed it in line with statutory timescales. Its failure to do so was fault.
48. However, it is not clear this has caused Ms B a significant injustice. The Council says the accommodation was considered suitable due to the location and the size. It also says majority of the disrepair issues had been addressed, and it was monitoring the roof situation. Therefore, it is unlikely it would have decided the property was unsuitable if it had completed a review. I note the Council eventually resolved Ms B’s issues by moving her to alternative temporary accommodation.
49. The Council asked Ms B how much it would cost for her to replace her damaged bedding from the roof leak in its email of 23 August. Ms B did not provide it, and so I find no fault in the Council not considering it further.
50. The Council and Ms B have discussed this matter more recently. It has confirmed it is willing to pay her £700 to replace her damaged bedding. This is a suitable way to resolve this part of Ms B’s complaint.
51. Ms B says she wants to move to a permanent property. The Council has explained to her that it runs a choice based letting system, and so it cannot allocate properties out of turn. Ms B will need to continue to bid on properties to better secure her chance of moving to a permanent property.

Back to top

Agreed action

52. To address the injustice caused by fault, by 29 June 2022 the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Ms B.
• Pay Ms B £300 for her time and trouble and frustration.
• Pay Ms B £700 which reflects the cost of replacing her damaged bedding.

53. By 27 July 2022:

• Issue written reminders to relevant staff to ensure they adhere to the timescales set out in the complaints procedure. They should keep complainants updated if there are going to be delays.

Back to top

Final decision

54. There was fault by the Council, which caused Ms B an injustice The Council has agreed to my recommendations and so I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman