Summary: Mrs X complained the Council failed to give her housing application the correct priority and failed to make reasonable adjustments for disabilities that family members had. We found the Council’s decisions on housing priority were in accordance with its policy, however, because the Council was not proactive in seeking suitable temporary accommodation for the family, they had to remain in their existing property until they were evicted. We recommended a remedy for the additional distress the Council’s fault caused.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council failed to give her housing application the appropriate priority and did not make reasonable adjustments for disabilities that her family have. She complains the Council did not find appropriate temporary accommodation for them and the family were left in their property until bailiffs came. Mrs X complains the family had to move to emergency housing and the situation caused distress and had a severe effect on the family’s mental health.

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. 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

4. I considered Mrs X’s complaint and the information she provided. I asked the Council for information and I considered its response to the complaint.
5. Mr X 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

The Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 & Housing Act 1996

6. When someone is eligible for assistance and they are either homeless (or threatened with homelessness), they may approach a council for help. A person is considered to be threatened with homelessness if they are likely to become homeless within 56 days or they have been served a valid notice seeking possession of their accommodation which expires within 56 days.
7. In these circumstances, a council needs to carry out an assessment and work with the person to create a Personalised Housing Plan (PHP).
8. When a person is threatened with homelessness, a council has a prevention duty. This requires councils to help the applicant to secure accommodation that is available for them to occupy.
9. When a Council is satisfied that someone is homeless (rather than just threatened with homelessness), it has a relief duty. It must take reasonable steps to help them secure accommodation that will be available for at least six months. The relief stage continues for 56 days after which a council must promptly decide whether to accept a main housing duty. It may be ended sooner in certain circumstances.
10. If homelessness is not successfully prevented or relieved, a council has a main housing duty to house the applicants under Section 193(2) of the Housing Act. This applies to people who are eligible, have a priority need for accommodation and are not homeless intentionally. Families with children meet priority need criteria.
11. Section 206 of the Housing Act states that when a council discharges its duty to accommodate someone, the accommodation must be suitable in relation to all members of the household who will occupy it.

The Equality Act 2010

12. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity. The Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Act. They must also have regard to the general duties aimed at eliminating discrimination under the Public Sector Equality Duty.

Homelessness Code of Guidance

13. The Code recommends that councils do not accept a main duty to house someone until the relief duty ends. This is so as not to detract from activities to prevent them becoming homeless.
14. In respect of possession proceedings, the Code states councils need to consider whether it is reasonable to expect an applicant to occupy their accommodation after receiving a notice of possession proceedings. It states it is not considered reasonable for an applicant to remain in occupation until eviction by a bailiff.

Appeal Rights

15. If a Council has accepted the main housing duty to house someone, they have the right to request a review and appeal about the suitability of any accommodation that is offered to fulfil that duty, whether it is temporary or permanent. We usually expect applicants to use their review and appeal rights in this respect, subject to any exceptional circumstances.

What Happened

Homelessness Duties

16. Mrs X first approached the council in late 2020. At this stage she was not threatened with homelessness within 56 days and no Section 21 notice had been served. Mrs X asked for advice because her landlord was considering selling the property they rented. She was referred to the Homelessness Prevention Team.
17. At that time Mrs X was already on the housing register in Band Four. She was eligible to bid for three-bedroom properties.
18. In January 2021 Mrs X told the Council her landlord had issued a notice under Section 21 of the Housing Act seeking possession of the property by 19 July 2021. As this was not within 56 days, the law would not define her family as ‘threatened with homelessness’ at that time.
19. On 2 February 2021 Mrs X provided a letter from a medical professional explaining her children’s needs and requested that she be allowed to bid for four‑bedroom properties.
20. As at 17 March the Council’s records show that Mrs X had not been contacted and the documents she sent had not been considered.
21. On 25 March 2021 Mrs X provided documents the council requested to validate the Section 21 Notice. An officer told Mrs X the Council could only take a homelessness application within 56 days of the notice expiry date (19 July 2021). They stated Mrs X should contact the Council again if she had not found alternative accommodation by the end of May. Mrs X explained that house viewings were causing mental health issues for her husband and children.
22. On 12 April 2022 the Council considered the medical information provided with her housing application. It wrote to Mrs X to say that it would not make any additional health award for her children. Mrs X appealed.
23. On 19 April 2021 the Council requested documents that Mrs X had already supplied in March. The Council stated it had not got them. Mrs X resent them and provided two additional documents.
24. On 23 April 2021 the Council carried out a telephone assessment. It accepted a prevention duty on 26 April 2021. This was 84 days before the landlord’s Section 21 notice sought possession of their accommodation. On 26 April the Council sent Mrs X a Personalised Housing Plan (PHP).
25. The PHP noted the council had a duty to try and prevent homelessness by assisting the family to stay in their home where possible or provide advice and assistance to find alternative accommodation. It stated it was not the councils duty to simply offer a home. It set out actions that both the Council and Mrs X needed to take.
26. At the end of May 2021 the Council received further medical information to support Mrs X’s housing application.
27. On 20 July 2021 the Council received further medical evidence from Mrs X to support the family’s request for a four-bedroom property.
28. On 26 July the Council considered the evidence from May and July. It agreed the family needed an additional bedroom. The evidence sent in May 2021 appears to have been most relevant. The Council updated its system to allow the family to bid for four-bedroom properties. It also placed the family in Band Three.
29. The Council accepted a relief duty on 28 September 2021.
30. The Council offered a two-bedroom flat to the family as temporary accommodation in November 2021. However, it says it recognised this may not be suitable due to the children’s health needs. The Council says the family choose to remain in the existing property rather than go to the unsuitable temporary accommodation.
31. The earliest the Council could have accepted a main duty to house the family is 23 November 2021 (56 days after it accepted a relief duty). The Council accepted a main duty to house the family on 7 December 2021.
32. On 10 December the Council updated the family’s housing priority to Band One, effective from 1 December. This was at the discretion of a team leader. The Council says it was primarily because the Council recognised the issues the family would likely have faced in temporary accommodation.
33. On 21 December bailiffs attended and gave the family an eviction letter. This was very upsetting for whole family, particularly the children. The family needed to vacate the property by 19 January.
34. The Council told us another two-bedroom flat was offered to the family as temporary accommodation on 18 January 2022. This was refused. On 19 January 2022 the Council offered a three-bedroom property which was accepted. The Council explained on 7 March the family moved to another three-bedroom property closer to their preferred area. The Council stated these were considered suitable properties taking account of the family’s health needs and what was available to the Council. The family are able to place bids to secure longer term accommodation.

What should have happened

Priority Band

35. I found no fault in the way the Council decided which housing priority band the family should be in. The Council’s housing allocation policy indicates that Band Three is appropriate when a household is threatened with homelessness and Band Two is applicable when the Council accept a main housing duty to a homeless household. The Council provided these bandings at the appropriate points. I note the Council agreed, as an exception, to grant Band One priority in late December. These were decisions the Council were entitled to make and they complied with the Council’s housing allocation policy.

Considering Medical Evidence

36. There is evidence that the medical information provided was properly considered when deciding what priority to give and what houses the family could bid for. However, there was some delay in considering medical information. Mrs X had submitted information seeking eligibility for four-bedroom properties. Medical Information submitted in early February 2021 was only considered in mid-April. This did not cause any injustice because the Council found it was not sufficient to warrant a change in priority. However, information received at the end of May was not considered until the end of July. This did change the Council’s view, so it delayed the change to the family’s eligibility for four-bedroom homes. It would be good practice to consider information within four weeks, so there was avoidable delay of around four weeks here. This was fault.

Temporary Accommodation

37. Once a council has accepted a main housing duty, it has a duty to provide accommodation. The law does not say what type of accommodation the authority should provide. But there is a legal duty for authorities to ensure the accommodation is “suitable” for the applicant and household members. In deciding whether accommodation is suitable, authorities must have regard to the public sector equality duty.
38. The Council accepted a duty to house the family on 7 December 2021. Although the Council says it offered two-bedroom temporary accommodation in November 2021 and January 2022, it acknowledged that the accommodation it had offered would not be suitable, given the disabilities of the children. The day of their eviction date Mrs X accepted three-bedroom temporary accommodation.
39. We found, because the Council did not provide temporary accommodation which was suitable (taking into account the family’s needs) this amounted to service failure.
40. In saying this I acknowledge the general difficulty in sourcing temporary accommodation. I also acknowledge the Council’s view that the family could have left the property for emergency, hotel accommodation or a placement elsewhere in the city. However, hotel accommodation would not appear to have been suitable given the known disability issues the family had. Also, the earliest it offered temporary accommodation was November 2021. The Council was aware, and accepted in July 2021 that the family needed a four‑bedroom property due to family members’ disabilities. Given the Council was alerted to the particular need the family had for larger temporary accommodation than usually available, the Council should have been more proactive sooner.
41. On balance, I found the combination of the delay in considering medical evidence between May and July and the delay in sourcing suitable temporary accommodation led to the family staying in their existing property until they were evicted. Mrs X explained that the eviction and course of events she complains of had a significant impact on her and her family’s health.
42. I could not say that the fault I found with the Council’s actions was solely responsible for the impact of the eviction on the family. However, it is likely this was responsible for some of the distress and that may have been mitigated had action been taken sooner. As a result, I consider a remedy is warranted.

Back to top

Agreed action

43. Within four weeks of my final decision:
44. To recognise the time and trouble Mrs X spent pursuing the matter, and the additional distress to the family, caused by the Council’s fault, the Council agreed to pay them £800.

Back to top

Final decision

45. I found there was fault by the Council. It has agreed to remedy the complaint as we recommended. As a result, I have completed my investigation and closed my file.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman