Summary: Ms X complains the Council did not make her a suitable offer of accommodation while she was in temporary accommodation. The Council was not at fault for failing to offer Ms X suitable accommodation. There was some fault with how the Council communicated with Ms X and the time taken to respond to Ms X’s complaint. This did not cause Ms X any significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council:
1. Did not make her an offer of suitable housing.
2. Did not store her possessions or assist her with storage fees for her possessions.
3. Did not properly respond to her communications about her housing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. As part of this investigation, I considered the information provided by Ms X and the Council. I made enquires with the Council and considered the information received in response.
6. I sent a draft of this decision to Ms X and the Council and considered comments received in response.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

7. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
8. 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)
9. 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)
10. Councils must consider the location of accommodation when they consider if it is suitable for the applicant and members of their household. If a council places an applicant outside its district, it must consider, among other matters:
• the distance of the accommodation from the “home” district;
• the significance of any disruption to the education of members of the applicant’s household;
• the proximity and accessibility to local services, amenities and transport. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2012)
11. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of the suitability of accommodation offered 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.
12. Where the council owes or has owed certain housing duties to an applicant, it must protect the applicant’s personal property if there is a risk it may be lost or damaged. A council may make a reasonable charge for storage and reserve the right to dispose of the property if it loses contact with the applicant. (Housing Act 1996, section 211, Homelessness Code of Guidance chapter 20)

What happened

13. Ms X lived in temporary accommodation provided by the Council after it decided it to owe her a homelessness duty. This meant the Council had a duty to provide Ms X with suitable accommodation.
14. Following a previous complaint to the Ombudsman in 2020, the Council agreed to make Ms X a direct offer of suitable accommodation.
15. In May 2020 the Council offered Ms X Property A. This was a permanent offer of housing with a housing association. Ms X was unable to accept the property as she was in hospital at the time and could not view the property.
16. In August 2020, the Council re-offered Ms X Property A. Ms X raised concerns about the rent and being able to afford to pay this. Ms X also said she was bed bound after coming out of hospital with back issues.
17. In November 2020, the Council made Ms X a further offer of permanent accommodation at Property B. This was a one bedroom bungalow. Ms X refused this offer on the basis it was too far from her place of work and the bedroom was not ventilated enough.
18. The Council made Ms X a further offer of permanent accommodation with a housing association in April 2021, however this was later withdrawn by the housing association.
19. The Council said it did not seek to enforce any of these offers of accommodation even though it felt they were suitable. The Council said this was a result of the Covid 19 pandemic and the housing service being under immense pressure due to staff absence.
20. In December 2021, the Council made Ms X an offer of further temporary accommodation at Property C, as the provider who owned Ms X’s current temporary accommodation wanted this back from the Council.
21. In late December 2021 and early January 2022, Ms X tried to contact the Council by telephone and sent several emails to the Council about the offer of Property C. On 4 January 2021, the Council emailed Ms X to chase up whether Ms X accepted the offer of Property C. The Council gave her a deadline until 4pm an 5 January 2022 to confirm whether she accepted Property C. The Council informed Ms X about her rights to review the offer of Property C.
22. On 5 January 2022, Ms X emailed the Council. Ms X said she was not rejecting the property but questioned the suitability of Property C on the grounds of its location and distance to her place of work. Ms X asked the Council to confirm how it found this property suitable. On 11 January 2022, Ms X chased up a response from the Council. Ms X said she visited Property C with the agent but was unhappy with its condition as there was a mattress infested with bedbugs, therefore she did not accept the keys to Property C.
23. On 17 January 2022, the Council emailed Ms X and set a final deadline of 18 January 2022 for her to accept Property C. The Council said if Ms X did not respond it would treat this as a refusal.
24. On 21 January 2022, Ms X sent several emails to the Council making a formal complaint. Ms X said:
• The Council had not offered her suitable accommodation since her last complaint to the Ombudsman.
• The Council offered Ms X Property C which had bedbugs.
• She had paid for storage costs of her possessions since 2018 and is in debt because of this. Ms X provided the Council with a statement showing the storage costs she had paid.
25. The Council acknowledged Ms X’s complaint on 1 February 2022. On 18 February 2022 the Council wrote to Ms X and explained it had ended its duty to house her as she refused Property C. The Council explained it considered Property C was a suitable distance from her work place. The Council gave Ms X 28 days’ notice to leave her current accommodation.
26. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaint on 13 April 2022. The Council:
• Apologised for times when it missed communication with Ms X. It said there had been lots of emails from Ms X.
• Considered the duty to protect Ms X’s belongings had not arisen as it was satisfied Ms X had put her belongings in storage.
• Said it made Ms X multiple offers of suitable accommodation which Ms X refused. The Council said as a result it has discharged its duty to house Ms X.
27. Ms X moved out of her accommodation and requested a review of the Council’s decision to end its duty to house her. The Council completed the review in June 2022 and upheld its decision to end its duty to house Ms X.

Analysis

28. Ms X complained the Council did not make her an offer of suitable accommodation. From May 2020, the Council made Ms X several offers of permanent accommodation. All of which were the correct size for Ms X’s household.
29. In relation to Property A, Ms X was not in a position to accept this as she was in hospital, however the Council re-offered her this several months later. In relation to Property B Ms X argued the property was too far from her place of work and she could not accept it on medical grounds. The Council satisfied itself Ms X could travel to work from Property B and asked for medical evidence to show Property B was unsuitable. I am satisfied the Council made Ms X suitable offers of permanent accommodation between May 2020 and November 2021.
30. The Council said it did not seek to enforce these offers due to the staffing pressures it was under during the Covid 19 pandemic. Ultimately it would have been up to the Council to decide whether to enforce an offer or not.
31. In December 2021, the Council offered Ms X further temporary accommodation, Property C, as the provider who owned Ms X’s accommodation wanted it back. Ms X did not accept this accommodation and raised concerns about the cleanliness of the property and distance to her workplace. There were times where Ms X contacted the Council and asked for a call back and did not receive this. There also were times when the Council did not respond to emails from Ms X. The Council, in its complaint response, recognised it missed communication from Ms X and apologised. I am satisfied this remedies any injustice caused to Ms X for the missed communication.
32. While Ms X did raise concerns about Property C, she did not request a review of its suitability. The Council did tell Ms X clearly in emails about her right to request a review of Property C, the consequences of refusing the offer, and the options to accept and ask for a review. I am satisfied Ms X could have asked for a review of the suitability of Property C and had been given the necessary information to do so.
33. Ms X also complained the Council did not store her possessions and she accrued debt in storing them. Ms X told the Council, in January 2022, she had accrued debt in storage fees, however she sent the Council an invoice for these costs which just showed what she had paid. The Council was of the view Ms X had paid the storage fees so there was no risk her personal property would be damaged or lost. I am satisfied the Council was not at fault here.
34. There was a delay by the Council in responding to Ms X complaint. The Council has acknowledged this in its response to my enquiries. The Council explained the delay was due to extreme pressures on the housing department and staff shortages. The Council said it has recruited more staff within the housing team to address this. While this was fault I am satisfied the delay has not caused Ms X any significant injustice. I am also satisfied the Council has taken steps to address this issue.

Back to top

Final decision

35. I have completed my investigation and found Council was not at fault for failing to offer Ms X suitable accommodation. There was some minor fault by the Council with its communication to Ms X and a delay in providing the complaint response, however this has not caused Ms X any significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman