Summary: Miss D complains the Council placed her in unsuitable homelessness accommodation. I have found fault by the Council. Miss D remained in bed and breakfast style accommodation for 24 weeks over the allowed time limit and was subsequently in unsuitable temporary accommodation for seven months. The Council has agreed to pay financial redress for the time Miss D was deprived of suitable accommodation.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Miss D) says the Council failed to provide her with suitable temporary accommodation and left her in bed and breakfast (B&B) style accommodation for more than six weeks. She also complains the Council provided a poor level of service and failed to reply to her emails asking for assistance.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
3. 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 future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have exercised discretion and am considering events from April 2023 (when Miss D was placed in B&B style accommodation) to June 2025 (when the final stage complaint response was issued). I have decided to go back to April 2023 because the Council’s complaint response covered this timeframe and offered a flawed remedy for that period. If Miss D believes there is fault in events after June 2025 she would need to formally complain to the Council before bringing those new matters to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Miss D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. I shared my draft decision with both parties.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

2023

8. In April Miss D applied to the Council as homeless. She had a young child. On 27 April 2023 Miss D was placed in a hotel (which we refer to as B&B accommodation) by the Council. In May the Council moved Miss D to a further three hotels. On 7 June the Council placed Miss D in another B&B. During 2023 Miss D also became pregnant. Miss D told me that whilst staying in B&B accommodation she had no access to a kitchen to prepare food, as a result she could not afford the costs of prepared foods and at times could only afford to feed her child and go without a meal herself.
9. On 1 August the Council accepted a main housing duty towards Miss D. This meant the status of her accommodation changed to temporary accommodation. In September Miss D was moved to her sixth B&B accommodation. On 23 November the Council identified alternative accommodation for Miss D, an Officer checked if there were any medical restrictions, the contents of the homelessness application and the composition of the household and determined the property was suitable. On 27 November the Council placed Miss D in the self-contained property outside Ilford. It appears Miss D did not receive a formal offer letter for the accommodation explaining her review rights.

2024

10. On 1 May 2024 Miss D emailed the Council. She had been in temporary accommodation since November 2023 which was unsuitable for her needs. She was not near to her social support network and could not manage the buggy up the stairs. The Council says this was not passed onto the Statutory Advocacy and Reviews Team (Reviews Team) at the time. On 2 May a Housing Officer replied to Miss D, they were not in a position to move her at present and advised her to access local services.
11. On 2 August a Housing Officer emailed the Reviews Team that after discussion with a colleague Miss D’s May email should be treat as a suitability review request. On 2 August the Council wrote to Miss D acknowledging receipt of the suitability review request. The Council asked for some additional information and said Miss D should receive a decision within 56 days of the date she requested the review, if an extension to the timeframe was needed the Council would contact her. On 9 September Miss D’s representative told the Council they would supply the required review information by 24 September and asked for a copy of the homelessness file. On 18 September the Council sent the representative the homelessness file. On 20 September the representative asked for longer to provide evidence to the Reviews Team and to extend the deadline to 11 October. The Council agreed to the request.
12. On 11 October the representative sent the Council a detailed letter advising why Miss D considered her accommodation to be unsuitable, this included the location being too far from Miss D’s support network. The representative continued to submit evidence up to the end of November. At the start of December the Reviews Team asked the representative for photographs of the property and communal areas. These were supplied on 10 December. On 23 December the Council issued its suitability review decision. It found the property was not suitable for Miss D. It did not explain what would happen next. The Council says it added Miss D to the relative needs database in December.

2025

13. On 12 February 2025 Miss D complained to the Council. She had been left in B&B accommodation for eight months including whilst pregnant. She was now in a property that was unsuitable. She wanted to move back near her family. The Council replied on 11 March, it said as a result of the 2024 suitability review the Council had placed Miss D on the Relative Needs Database to be moved to suitable temporary accommodation. It said the rehousing process was “managed though an allocation order considering multiple priorities” for applicants. The Council apologised for the delay and said it had requested Miss D be moved “as soon as possible”. No reference was made to the B&B accommodation or a remedy offered.
14. On 17 March Miss D asked the Council to escalate her complaint. On 6 May 2025 Miss D was moved to a property in Ilford. She asked for a suitability review. The Council acknowledged the request on 14 May. The Council issued its final stage complaint response on 24 June. It apologised for the delay replying to Miss D. It said she had recently been offered alternative temporary accommodation. Miss D had remained in B&B accommodation for “five months and two weeks over the acceptable six week stay”. The Council offered to pay £750 redress. It also said she had remained in unsuitable temporary accommodation for five months and offered a further £500 redress.

Events after my investigation

15. In August the Council’s Reviews Officer decided the accommodation was suitable for Miss D.

What should have happened

The prevention duty

16. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help the applicants to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

The relief duty

17. 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

18. 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 (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

Duty to arrange interim accommodation (section 188)

19. 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. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
20. 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 and temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)

B&B accommodation

21. Wherever possible, Councils should avoid using bed and breakfast accommodation. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.33). Bed and breakfast (B&B) accommodation can only be used for households which include a pregnant woman or dependent child when no other accommodation is available and then for no more than six weeks. B&B is accommodation which is not self-contained, not owned by the council or a registered provider of social housing and where the toilet, washing, or cooking facilities are shared with other households. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.35)
22. The Council says it monitored all B&B placements through internal reporting and oversight processes including reviewing the duration of stays and identifying applicants approaching the six week threshold.

Types of accommodation and suitability review

23. There are two types of accommodation councils provide to certain homeless applicants: interim accommodation and temporary accommodation. Interim and temporary accommodation can be the same physical property. What changes is the legal duty under which a council provides it. This is important because there is a statutory right to review the suitability of temporary accommodation. This then carries a right of appeal to county court on a point of law. There is no statutory right to review the suitability of interim accommodation.
24. The Council has a Reviews Team which undertakes suitability of accommodation reviews. Where the Council accepts an applicant is in unsuitable interim or temporary accommodation, they are placed onto the relative needs database. This includes information about the applicant’s individual needs to allow the Council to allocate suitable accommodation to them. The Council assesses the applicant’s needs to determine the urgency of their move. The Council also sought to secure additional temporary accommodation in 2024 and 2025. This included contacting registered accommodation providers on a daily basis and approaching new accommodation suppliers.

Was there fault by the Council

25. The Council accepts it left Miss D in B&B accommodation over the statutory six week limit. She was in B&B accommodation for just over 30 weeks which is not acceptable. The Council says it was aware Miss D had a young child and was pregnant during this time but there was “exceptionally limited availability of appropriate housing”. It experienced unprecedented housing demand in 2023 which led to a “significant increase” in the number of families placed in B&B accommodation beyond the statutory six week limit. The Council also states it took active steps to address the wider issues with housing including ending the use of commercial hotel accommodation. The Ombudsman recognises a shortage of available accommodation means the Council is not always able to fulfil its duty to provide suitable interim and temporary accommodation. However it remains the case the Council has failed to meet its statutory duty despite its efforts, and this is a service failure which caused a significant injustice to Miss D.
26. The Council accepts there was fault in the handling of the 2024 suitability review request. It said an offer letter had not been issued to Miss D for her accommodation which should have set out her review rights and started the timeframe for submission of a request. There was also delay of three months before the review request was passed to the Reviews Team. Without that delay it is reasonable to say a decision that the temporary accommodation was unsuitable could have been issued by the end September, even allowing for the extended time it took to progress the review because of extensions requested by Miss D’s representatives. This means the time Miss D spent in unsuitable temporary accommodation increases to just over seven months.
27. The Council accepts it delayed issuing its main duty decision to Miss D in 2023. It was delayed by 40 days. It says this was due to the volume of cases (the Council received over 3,000 applications in 2023).
28. Miss D says the Council ignored her emails asking for assistance during 2023 to 2025. I asked the Council about this, and it said it strives to respond to applicants in a timely manner but recognises that it can “fall short of this”. I consider Miss D did not receive an acceptable level of service with her case.

Did the fault cause an injustice

29. The Council has paid Miss D £750 redress for the time spent in B&B accommodation. That is not sufficient and is not in line with our remedies guidance. Miss D was left in B&B accommodation for 24 weeks over the six week limit and I set out the redress needed below. Similarly the Council has offered redress to Miss D for the five months spent in unsuitable temporary accommodation after the review decision in December 2024. The delays by the Council meant Miss D was actually in unsuitable accommodation for just over seven months. Miss D also incurred additional costs because she was unable to prepare meals in B&B accommodation.

Back to top

Action

30. To remedy the injustice to Miss D the Council has agreed to my recommendations and will:

• Pay Miss D £125 per week for each week spent in B&B accommodation over the six week limit. That means £125 x 24 weeks which totals £3000. The Council should deduct the redress already paid (£750) and the sum now payable to Miss D is £2250.
• Pay Miss D £150 per month for the seven months in unsuitable temporary accommodation in 2024 to 2025. That totals £1050 and the Council should deduct the redress already paid (£500). The sum payable to Miss D is £550.
• Pay Miss D £250 for the additional costs she incurred for food when living in B&B accommodation and not having access to adequate cooking facilities.

31. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions within four weeks of this case closing.

Back to top

Decision

32. I find fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman