Summary: Miss X complains the Council placed her in unsuitable accommodation and delayed carrying out a suitability review. Miss X says this meant her and her child were kept in unsuitable accommodation. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for failing to secure suitable accommodation and for delaying Miss X’s assessment and homelessness decision. The Council has agreed to pay Miss X a financial remedy.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council placed her in unsuitable accommodation and delayed carrying out her suitability review. This meant she and her children were in unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future 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 Miss X’s complaint and information she provided. I also considered information from the Council.
5. I considered comments from Miss X and the Council on a draft of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

Homelessness

6. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)

The relief duty

7. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

The main housing duty

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.

Duty to arrange interim accommodation (section 188)

9. A council must secure interim accommodation for an applicant and their household if it has reason to believe the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need, including people with dependent children. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)

Suitability of accommodation

10. 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 housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
11. Homelessness temporary accommodation must be legally suitable. (Housing Act 1996, section 206) Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability. (Housing Act 1996, section 202) If the Council’s review decides the accommodation is unsuitable, the Council must provide suitable accommodation. If the review decides the accommodation is suitable, the applicant has the right to appeal to the county court on a point of law. (Housing Act 1996, section 204)
12. The duty to provide suitable accommodation is immediate, non-deferrable, and unqualified. (Elkundi, R (On the Application Of) v Birmingham City Council [2022] EWCA Civ 601)
13. 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; and
• the proximity and accessibility to local services, amenities and transport. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2012)

LGSCO Unsuitable Temporary Accommodation: Guide for Practitioners (May 2023)

14. We do not consider that simply adding an applicant to a ‘Transfer List’ and waiting for a suitable property to become available is sufficient for a council to demonstrate how it is meeting its duty to provide suitable temporary accommodation. This is in line with the court’s decision that putting applicants who are owed the section 193(2) duty, and who are in unsuitable accommodation, on a waiting list for temporary accommodation is not a lawful means of fulfilling the unqualified and immediate duty to secure suitable accommodation for their occupation.” (Elkundi & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Birmingham City Council [2021] EWHC 1024 (Admin) 308)
15. We recognise that a list or database is useful. However, we may be critical of councils who prioritise applicants for rehousing by time spent on such a list without regard to the specifics of their case. Furthermore, any such list should take care to distinguish between those in accommodation that is unsuitable now and applicants whom the council considers will need to move in the short or medium term.

What happened

16. Miss X approached the Council to make a homelessness application in December 2022. At the time, Miss X was pregnant.
17. The Council accepted that Miss X may be in priority need and offered her interim accommodation. She accepted the interim accommodation in January 2023, but also wrote to the Council to express that it was unsuitable for her.
18. The Council told Miss X that she did not have a right to request a review of interim accommodation, and that if she felt it was unsuitable, she could pursue a judicial review.
19. In March 2023, the Council moved Miss X to new accommodation. The Council did not tell Miss X if this was interim or temporary accommodation, and it did not give her a decision on her homelessness application.
20. On 2nd May 2023, Mrs X wrote to the Council. She said she was about to give birth and the accommodation could not fit the items needed to care for the baby. The Council sent Miss X’s contact to another team, but did not respond to Miss X.
21. In June 2023, Miss X again contacted the Council and expressed the accommodation would not meet the needs of her and her baby.
22. The Council responded and told Miss X it had placed her on a transfer list and that it would be in contact when suitable accommodation became available.
23. Miss X complained to the Council in August 2023. She said the accommodation did not meet the needs of her and her baby because she could not fit the items needed to care for the baby in the room.
24. The Council’s stage 2 response says it had placed Miss X on the transfer list and it would carry out a suitability assessment with a view to placing her in suitable accommodation when it became available.
25. Miss X remained unhappy and bought her complaint to the Ombudsman.
26. During the Ombudsman’s investigation, the Council contacted Mrs X and carried out a suitability assessment. In December 2023, it issued a decision letter to Miss X accepting the main housing duty and told her it had found suitable accommodation for her.
27. Miss X moved into the new accommodation on 29th January 2024.

Analysis

28. Miss X approached the Council as homeless in December 2022. The Council accepted Miss X may be in priority need and placed her in interim accommodation while it carried out an assessment.
29. The Council had 56 days to carry out an assessment and issue Miss X with a decision about whether it owed her a main housing duty. Therefore, it should have issued the decision in February 2023. It did not issue this decision until 7th December 2023. This was fault, causing a delay in the assessment, decision and Miss X’s appeal rights to request a suitability review.
30. Miss X repeatedly contacted the Council in May and June to express the accommodation could not meet her and her baby’s needs. The Council failed to respond to Miss X in May, and in June told her she had been put on the transfer list.
31. Miss X repeatedly communicated with the Council that she felt the accommodation was unsuitable. The Council’s actions in placing her on a transfer list in June 2023 show it accepted the accommodation was unsuitable. Therefore, any further requests for review would not be accepted as the Council had already decided the accommodation was unsuitable.
32. It would be reasonable to say if the Council had responded to Miss X when she first raised the concerns about the accommodation in May 2023, that it would decided the accommodation was unsuitable then.
33. As a result, Miss X was unreasonably left in unsuitable accommodation from May 2023 when she first raised the issued and the Council failed to respond, until January 2024 when it provided suitable accommodation. This was fault by the Council. The Council should therefore remedy Miss X for the time spent in unsuitable accommodation.
34. The Council should also remedy Miss X for the distress caused by the delay in completing her assessment and issuing a decision. This was at a time that Miss X was already vulnerable having just given birth.

Further considerations.

35. The Ombudsman published a public report against the Council in March 2023. This highlighted several areas that needed improvement within the Council’s homelessness department. Some of the actions taken by the Council in response to the public report come after Miss X had made her application in this case, and so her case would not have benefitted from the improved way of managing new homelessness applications. However, I do note the public report found several faults with poor communication and management of homelessness applications as well as suitability of accommodation. I would have expected to see the improvements for this in practice for Miss X’s case. I am concerned that with Miss X, the Council were still repeating some of the faults found in the public report.
36. However, I also note that we recently issued a decision against the Council in February 2024 which addressed the outstanding issues with meeting statutory deadlines and documenting decisions about suitability of accommodation. As the Council has agreed recently to carry out further service improvements, I am not recommending further service improvement remedies in Miss X’s case.

Back to top

Agreed action

37. Within 4 weeks the Council has agreed to

• Apologise for the delay in assessment and for not carrying out the suitability review.
• Pay for Miss X £1800. This is calculated at £200 per month for the nine months she was in unsuitable accommodation between May 2023 and January 2024.
• Pay Miss X £300 for the distress of delaying her application, decision and appeal rights.

38. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

39. I have completed my investigation. I find fault with the Council for delaying Miss X’s homelessness decision, and for failing to arrange suitable accommodation once it identified her accommodation was unsuitable.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman