Summary: Mr A complained that the Council has not moved him and his family although it has accepted he is in unsuitable accommodation. We found the Council is at fault and this delay has caused Mr A an injustice. We have recommended a financial remedy, which the Council has agreed to.

The complaint

1. Mr A says the Council has placed him in a home with steps to the front and back doors, knowing he has a disability which makes it difficult for him to access the property. Mr A says the property has no parking nearby adding to how impractical it is for him. He says living in this property has caused his health to deteriorate.
2. Mr A is seeking a move to a property which is suitable for his needs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
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 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)
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

What I have and have not investigated

6. Mr A says the Council housed him in his current property in 2017, and he agreed to this as he thought he would be rehoused within two years. This is more than 12 months from Mr A’s complaint to us. I have not seen any good reason to investigate matters from 2017.
7. However, there are good reasons to apply our discretion and go back further than 12 months from Mr A’s complaint to this office.
8. Mr A received the Council’s final response to his complaint in December 2022; however, the Council told him to complain to the Housing Ombudsman, not to us. This incorrect advice delayed his contact with us. 12 months from that December 2022 would mean everything which happened from December 2021 can reasonably be considered.
9. Looking at the Council’s stage two response to Mr A, it is clear the Council accepted he was in unsuitable accommodation from July 2021. Given the circumstances, including a language barrier which meant Mr A did not have the same access to information as someone else might, I consider it appropriate to apply discretion to look at the issue from July 2021.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Mr A and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Mr A and the Council now have an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The Law and guidance

12. 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.
13. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to make accommodation available.
14. 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 Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
15. 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. (Housing Act 1996, section 204)
16. Where an applicant remains in temporary accommodation that is known to be unsuitable, this can amount to a breach of the Council’s statutory duty to provide suitable accommodation. It is not enough for a Council to demonstrate that alternative accommodation was scarce; the duty to provide suitable accommodation remains.

What happened

In 2017, as in discharge of its housing duties under Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996, the Council provided Mr A with temporary accommodation. Mr A was aware at the time this was unsuitable for him. However at the time his knowledge of English was limited and the Council did not make clear he had a right of appeal about the suitability.

17. In July 2021, the Council accepted Mr A’s property was not suitable for his needs. It did not move him from that property, and he remains there now. The Council has said it has no suitable properties it can move Mr A and his family to.
18. In the same month Mr A successfully applied to be on the Council’s housing register. This meant he could bid for properties that were available including Housing Association properties. Because of his medical needs Mr A had Band 2 medical priority.
19. In 2023 Mr A complained to the Council his home was causing him further medical issues. The Council helped him with his bidding for properties. Mr A has made over 70 bids for properties. It told us -
• In March 2024 he refused to bid for two Housing Association properties where he would have come first in the bidding and would have been offered the properties. His reason was he did not want to leave council accommodation;
• he declined a property as there was no off road parking;
• he refused suitable properties, then asked to be offered unsuitable properties in the same areas; and
• has applied for right to buy on the unsuitable Council property he is living in.

Analysis and Findings

20. Mr A has told the Council he was not confident in his English and required help to ensure he understood its communications with him. The Council accept it did not provide this when it housed him.
21. Mr A was at a clear disadvantage as his access to information about his rights has been limited and this has not been helped by the Council. It is also evident that he was particularly vulnerable due to his disability.
22. It is accepted that from at least July 2021, the Council accepted Mr A’s property is unsuitable for his needs.
23. The Council says if it had offered the March 2024 property under its Section 192(2) duties it would have ended its homelessness duties then. But it did not do this, so the duty continues.
24. There is a duty on the Council to provide suitable accommodation, and this duty cannot be delayed or deferred. Failure to move Mr A from the point of the Council’s knowledge his property is unsuitable is fault.
25. However, we must also consider Mr A’s actions. He has refused to bid on suitable housing association properties and now is wanting to buy the unsuitable property he is living in. So his own actions mean he is contributing to the length of time he is living in unsuitable accommodation.
26. In these circumstances I consider the Council is at fault for allowing Mr A to live in unsuitable accommodation from July 2021 (the start of my investigation) to March 2024, when could have moved to more suitable accommodation.
27. The injustice to Mr A is the time spent in unsuitable accommodation for the 32 months between July 2012 and March 2024.
28. Our guidance on remedies says where a person has been deprived of suitable accommodation, our recommendation for financial redress is likely to be in the range of £150 to £350 a month. We may recommend a higher figure if the circumstances warrant this.
29. We assess each case on its merits and consider the injustice caused to the individual and their household.
30. Given the severity of Mr A’s disability, and the unavoidable impact of stairs to the property, a remedy towards the higher end of our bracket is appropriate here. I have recommended the Council pay £300 for each month from July 2021 to March 2024 in recognition of the injustice to Mr A.
31. We also recommend the Council look at its procedures to avoid repeating the fault identified.
32. For the avoidance of doubt the Council still has its Section 192(2) duties towards Mr A and his family, which will be discharged if Mr A moves to a suitable property, unreasonably refuses an offer of a property, or buys his current property.

Back to top

Agreed Action

33. Within one month of the decision, the Council should:
• Apologise to Mr A for failing to properly address the fact he has lived in a property unsuitable for his needs for such a prolonged period. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Make a payment of £9,600 to Mr A in recognition of the injustice caused to him over 32 months, from July 2021 to March 2024.
34. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

35. I find fault causing injustice and have recommended the Council take action to remedy the injustice identified.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman