Summary: Miss X complained the Council provided her with unsuitable accommodation and failed to resolve her reports of infestations and disrepair. We do not find fault with how the Council responded to Miss X’s reports. We find the Council at fault for failing to provide Miss X with its view of suitability on one of the properties it provided and her right to have this reviewed. We recommend the Council apologise to Miss X and act to prevent recurrence.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about accommodation the Council provided her with. Miss X says these were not in a habitable condition and the Council failed to properly respond to her complaints of infestations and disrepair.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

2. I have investigated the complaint as set out above, covering the period from June 2021 until June 2022.
3. I have not investigated issues Miss X had with properties prior to June 2021. This is because Miss X did not contact the Ombudsman until June 2022. Any events that took place more than 12 months prior to this have been raised late and I have seen no reason why Miss X could not have contacted us sooner.
4. I have not investigated how the Council has responded to issues Miss X has raised with the property she moved into in June 2022. This is because these issues have occurred since Miss X contacted us. If Miss X wants to complain about issues that have arisen since she referred her complaint to the Ombudsman, she will need to raise these with the Council directly and give it an opportunity to respond.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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)
6. 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)
7. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
8. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))
9. 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

10. I spoke to Miss X about her complaint and considered information she provided. I also considered information received from the Council.
11. Miss 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 main homelessness duty

12. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need it has a duty to secure suitable accommodation for them. But there is no duty on councils to provide a permanent or secure assured tenancy. The accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty is called temporary accommodation.

Suitability of accommodation

13. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 2016 and (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
14. Matters the Council must consider when assessing the suitability of accommodation include:
• the standards of the accommodation;
• the distance of the accommodation from the “home” district. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2012)

Review rights

15. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the decision of their homelessness application. Applicants may also request a review of the suitability of temporary accommodation provided once the Council has accepted the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 202)

What happened

Property 1

16. The Council accepted a main homelessness duty for Miss X and placed her in temporary accommodation. From before June 2021 Miss X was living in Property 1.
17. Between June 2021 and August 2021, Miss X emailed the Council around 35 times to complain about Property 1 and ask to be relocated. The key issues Miss X raised in that time were:
• She was having problems with her boiler.
• Her kitchen smelled and the window did not close properly.
• There was a mouse infestation.
• Her electric had cut out.
• The property was in a poor condition.
• She was experiencing problems with her neighbours who she believed to be using their property for sex work, with frequent visitors and generally intimidating behaviour.
18. In response to these emails, the Council:
• Reported the issue with Miss X’s neighbours to its property managing agents who agreed to investigate and issue them with a warning about their behaviour.
• Contacted its property managing agents for an update on the condition of Miss X’s accommodation and requested an inspection of the issues raised.
19. On 12 August, as it had not been able to resolve Miss X’s issues, the Council’s property managing agents decided to move Miss X to a new property, Property 2, in a different area. The Council has said its property managing agents made this decision without its input and it was not aware of this until Miss X moved on 12 August. Because of this, Miss X was not sent an offer letter setting out the Council’s view on the suitability of the property and her review rights before she moved as she usually would have been.

Property 2

20. Once it was made aware of Miss X’s move, the Council liaised with its property managing agents. The property managing agent explained the property was a self-contained, ground floor studio flat to suit Miss X’s needs and it was professionally cleaned before Miss X’s move.
21. The Council sent Miss X a tenancy agreement letter on 23 September. However, this did not give the Council’s view on suitability or explain Miss X’s right to request a review of this.
22. Between the date of Miss X’s move and May 2022, Miss X sent the Council around 190 emails detailing issues she had with Property 2. The key issues Miss X raised in that time were:
• She believed the property was unsuitable as it was outside of her usual local area, it was too small, and it was not close enough to the shops.
• The condition of the property was a risk to both her physical and mental health.
• The bathroom was in a state of disrepair, there was rubbish left outside her flat, the heating and hot water did not work, there was a hole in a wall, the fire door was broken, there was mould in the property, the cooker had stopped working.
• There was an ant and slug infestation in the flat.
• Her flat was too close to the landlord of the property, and she had experienced issues with him which included sexual harassment and taking her letters.
• She was having issues with neighbours taking her packages, threats of violence, and their children playing outside her flat.
23. In response to Miss X’s emails, the Council asked its property managing agents to inspect Miss X’s property and deal with any disrepair or infestation. The Council’s records show the property managing agents made several attempts to arrange inspections, but Miss X frequently refused to grant access to the property. Initial repairs were completed on 1 December 2021, but Miss X continued to report the same disrepair issues mentioned above.
24. On 5 May 2022, Miss X submitted a complaint to the Council. Miss X said the Council had failed to respond to her reports of infestation and disrepair.
25. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint on 27 May. It explained the property managing agents had now advised them the issues of disrepair and infestation were resolved. It explained Miss X could contact it if she experienced any similar issues.
26. Between 27 May and 7 June Miss X sent the Council around another 18 emails. Miss X explained she was still having the issues with her neighbour and did not agree the repairs had been completed. Miss X told the Council it had not resolved her complaint and asked it to review this.
27. Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman on 7 June.

Property 3

28. The Council’s property managing agents agreed to inspect Property 2 again on 9 June, but Miss X responded to reiterate she was unhappy with her landlord. On 10 June the property managing agent offered Miss X temporary accommodation at Property 3, in her desired area.
29. The Council wrote to Miss X that same day with an offer letter explaining it believed this was a suitable property for her. It went onto say if Miss X did not feel the property was suitable, she had the right to ask for this to be reviewed within 21 days.
30. Miss X viewed the property and accepted the offer on 16 June.
31. On 29 July the Council wrote to Miss X with its final response to her complaint. The Council explained it had received Miss X’s reports of disrepair and infestation and had passed these to its property managing agents to remedy. The Council explained its records show Miss X was in regular contact with the Council and its property managing agents who took the relevant action to address Miss X’s concerns, so it did not agree she had been ignored. The Council said Miss X had requested to be moved back into her preferred area in resolution of her complaint and the Council had now done this.
32. In response to a draft of this decision, Miss X said:
• She did not complain to us sooner as she had to talk to a lot of people to seek advice and was also experiencing family issues.
• She was only allocated Property 2 because the Council failed to keep proper oversight of its property managing agents, and it did not agree to move her to Property 3 until she threatened to contact the Ombudsman.
• The Council did not give proper consideration to her requests when deciding on which property to move her to.
• She is now having issues in Property 3.

Analysis

Suitability of Property 2 and Property 3

33. The Council has said its property managing agents made the decision to move Miss X to Property 2 and so it did not have oversight of this. As a consequence, the Council did not write to Miss X giving its view of suitability or explaining her right to request a review. This is fault and caused uncertainty for Miss X, which is injustice.
34. That said, the Council has explained how it retrospectively considered the suitability of Property 2 once it was aware of the move. While the property was in a different area, it was geographically close by and appeared to meet Miss X’s needs for a self-contained, one-bedroom, ground floor property. I do not find fault with the Council’s decision-making here.
35. However, Miss X began making complaints about the suitability of Property 2 almost immediately after moving into it, and within 21 days. The Council ought to have taken this as an opportunity to review the property’s suitability further but failed to do so. This is fault and would have caused further uncertainty for Miss X which is injustice.
36. When Miss X moved into Property 3, the Council wrote to her with its offer setting out how it had decided the accommodation offered was suitable. It also explained Miss X had the right to request a review of the accommodation within 21 days of the Council making the offer. I do not find fault with the Council’s actions here and Miss X then accepted the offer made to her.

The Council’s response to complaints about Property 1 and Property 2

37. The Council’s records suggest it responded promptly to Miss X’s reports of disrepair and infestation at Property 1 and Property 2. It stayed in constant contact with its property managing agents to try and get matters resolved for Miss X and sought to move her when it became clear this was not achievable. The Council’s actions were in line with its responsibilities and I do not find fault here.
38. While the Council did not respond to all of Miss X’s emails individually, it appears to have attempted to address all the points and issues she raised. I do not find fault here.

Back to top

Agreed action

39. To remedy the injustice identified above, I recommend the Council, within one month of the date of our final decision:
• Apologise to Miss X for the fault identified above.
• Pay Miss X £100 to recognise the injustice identified above.
• Remind its property managing agents of the importance of liaising with the Council prior to moving tenants so it can fulfil its duty to provide a view on an accommodation’s suitability and the tenant’s right to request a review.
40. The Council has agreed to these recommendations and should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

41. I find fault with the Council for failing to provide Miss X with its view of the suitability of Property 2 and her review rights. I do not find fault with the Council for how it assessed suitability of Property 2 or Property 3 or how it responded to Miss X’s reports of disrepair and infestation.
42. The Council has accepted my recommendations and I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman