Summary: Miss F complained on behalf of Mr B that the Council failed to assess his housing needs and deal with disrepair. We found fault as Mr B had been living in unsuitable accommodation. The Council has made a payment to remedy the injustice this caused.

The complaint

1. Miss F complained on behalf of Mr B that the Council failed to assess his housing needs and deal with disrepair. As a result he has been living in temporary accommodation which is not suitable due to his disabilities. This has affected his daily living and caused him distress.

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. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), as amended)
4. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
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

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke to Miss F about the complaint and considered the information she sent, the Council’s response to my enquiries and relevant law and guidance.
7. Miss F 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

Relevant law and guidance

The main housing duty (section 193)

8. Prior to 2018, if a council was satisfied someone was eligible, homeless, in priority need and unintentionally homeless it owed them the main housing duty. Generally the council carries out this duty by arranging temporary accommodation until it makes a suitable offer of social housing or private rented accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)

Suitability of accommodation

9. 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)
10. 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)

What happened

11. I have set out the key events; this is not meant to detail everything that happened.
12. Mr B has health conditions which cause physical disability. In 2006 the Council accepted Mr B’s application as homeless. In 2010 he moved into Property X as temporary accommodation. In 2022 there was a leak which caused damage to the ceiling.
13. Mr B’s relative, Miss F, complained to the Council in October 2023 on his behalf that Property X was in a poor condition following the leak. She said it was damp and not fit to live in. She also said Mr B could not walk very well and was finding it hard to get upstairs.
14. A council surveyor visited on 17 October and found the leak had been repaired but the ceiling had not been made good. Repairs were needed but Mr B would need to move out whilst they were happening.
15. From 6 November, the Council paid for Mr B to stay in a hotel. When the repairs were complete, Mr B went back to Property X on 27 November. But Miss F says it remained unsuitable and she paid for him to stay in a hotel that night. The Council then funded the hotel.
16. An occupational therapist visited on 28 November. She found that Mr B was unable to access Property X as the step was too high. In addition he could not access the rooms with his wheelchair so had to use crutches and a commode and had to shuffle up the stairs. The OT found Property X was not suitable for Mr B and recommended an application to sheltered housing near Miss F.
17. A medical advisor told the Council on 13 December 2023 that Mr B was reliant on a wheelchair as using crutches was unsafe. She said Mr B required a wheelchair accessible property. As a result, Property X was unsuitable.
18. The Council responded to Miss F’s complaint on 20 December 2023. It said the medical advice meant Property X was no longer suitable. It would transfer Mr B to suitable alternative accommodation once a property became available. In the meantime, Mr B should continue to bid for permanent accommodation whilst the Council sourced alternative accommodation.
19. Miss F complained to the Council again in February 2024 as no suitable alternative accommodation had been found. She also reported broken lighting and a broken smoke alarm. The Council has sent evidence that these repairs were completed by the end of April 2024.
20. The Council replied to Miss F’s complaint on 9 April. It accepted the property was not suitable and offered to pay Mr B £2,650 to remedy the distress that caused. Miss F accepted this offer on 12 April though she remained dissatisfied.
21. Miss F made a further complaint to the Council in October 2024 as Mr B remained in unsuitable accommodation. The Council’s response of 14 November 2024 said Mr B could continue to bid for properties and it would ask for him to be assessed for sheltered housing.
22. In January 2025, the Council carried out a suitability assessment which determined Mr B required a ground floor, wheelchair accessible property. It found he was eligible for sheltered housing.
23. The Council offered new temporary accommodation in April 2025 but Miss F did not consider it to be suitable due to its location.

My findings

24. The Council has been aware since 28 November 2023 that Property X is unsuitable for Mr B. The Council’s complaint response of December 2023 said it would look for alternative temporary accommodation but I have seen no evidence of the efforts the Council has made.
25. The Ombudsman recognises that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. But nonetheless, the law says a person should not be in unsuitable accommodation. On the evidence I have seen, Mr B has been in unsuitable accommodation since December 2023. This is service failure.
26. There was disrepair but I find the Council made repairs so I do not find fault.
27. Mr B was assessed as eligible for sheltered housing on 28 January 2025 but I have seen no evidence the Council has sought sheltered housing for him.
28. In Property X, Mr B is unable to get upstairs and is only able to access the kitchen and bathroom using crutches, which the medical advisor said was unsafe. This is an injustice.
29. When we have evidence of fault causing injustice, we will seek a remedy for that injustice which aims to put the complainant back in the position they would have been in if nothing had gone wrong. When this is not possible, we will normally consider asking for a symbolic payment to acknowledge the avoidable distress caused. But our remedies are not intended to be punitive and we do not award compensation in the way that a court might.
30. Our guidance on remedies says where a complainant has been deprived of suitable accommodation, we may recommend financial redress in the range of £150 to £350 a month. We assess each case on its merits and consider the impact the fault had on the complainant.
31. I have taken into account that Mr B is a vulnerable adult due to his disability, his access to his property is restricted and he is at risk due to being unable to use his wheelchair. My view is that a remedy of £200 per month is appropriate.
32. In response to my draft decision, the Council said it had discharged its housing duty to Mr B on 8 April 2025 as he had left Property X and declined offers of other temporary accommodation. In July 2025 it had made a remedy payment to Mr B of £3,500, following its complaint response of April 2024.
33. This payment remedies the injustice caused of being in unsuitable accommodation from December 2023 to March 2025 and is in line with what we would have recommended. I therefore make no further recommendations.

Back to top

Decision

34. There was fault. The actions the Council has already taken remedy the injustice caused. I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman