Summary: Ms B complains about the way the Council dealt with her housing situation. There was some fault by the Council in its handling of Ms B’s homelessness application but it has not caused her significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Ms B complains about the way the Council has dealt with her housing situation. She says the Council:
• placed her in a succession of unsuitable properties when providing temporary accommodation;
• has not resolved long standing issues about disrepair and the lack of a walk-in shower at her current accommodation;
• did not respond to the complaint she made in October 2018;
• has either not responded to her request for a review of its decision that she does not have a priority need, or did not properly advise of her right to request a review.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
3. 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)
4. If we are satisfied with a council’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

5. I considered the complaint and documents provided by Ms B and spoke to her. I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information. I sent a draft of this statement to Ms B and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. When a person applies to a council for accommodation and it has reason to believe they may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, a number of duties arise, including:

• to make enquiries;
• to secure suitable accommodation for certain applicants pending the outcome of the enquiries;
• to notify the applicant of the decision in writing and the right to request a review of the decision.

Interim accommodation

7. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)

Examples of applicants in priority need are:

• people with dependent children;
• pregnant women;
• people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability or old age.

Assessments and personal housing plans

8. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. 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 prevention duty

9. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help them 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

10. Councils must take reasonable steps to secure 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)

Rights to review

11. After completing inquiries, the council must give the applicant a decision in writing. If it is an adverse decision, the letter must fully explain the reasons. All letters must include information about the right to request a review and the timescale for doing so. (Housing Act 1996, section 184, from 3 April 2018 Homelessness Code of Guidance 18.32 and 18.33)

Suitability of accommodation

12. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of his or her household. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
13. Councils should avoid using bed and breakfast accommodation. It should only be used as a last resort in an emergency and then for the shortest time possible. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.24 and from 3 April 2018 17.30)

What happened

14. Ms B had a secure tenancy with another local authority (Council X) but was evicted in November 2017. She approached the Council in December. A file note shows she was considered not to be threatened with homelessness and signposted to local authorities in London as that was where she said she wanted to live.
15. She approached the Council again in April 2018. The Council decided Ms B was threatened with homeless as the hostel where she was living had said it was going to evict her. It accepted it had a prevention duty to her and drew up a personal housing plan. This said that it would:
• Contact the hostel where she was living to find out why she was being evicted;
• Contact Council X to find out about the arrears and whether there was a payment plan in place and whether she was eligible to join their social housing register;
• Provide a list of housing associations in Birmingham for Ms B to contact to try to arrange accommodation before she was evicted;
• When Ms B became homeless it would make a referral to Council X for temporary accommodation.
16. Later in April Ms B was evicted from the hostel and approached the Council. The Council said Council X still owed her a duty to provide temporary accommodation.
17. Ms B went back to the Council the next day. A housing charity had provided accommodation for one night but she now had nowhere to go. The Council contacted Council X. It established Council X considered it had discharged its duties to Ms B as she had been evicted from the temporary accommodation it had provided. The Council provided accommodation in a hotel. After one night the hotel refused to accommodate Ms B for another night and the Council moved her to another hotel. The Council also accepted it owed Ms B a relief duty to take reasonable steps to help her secure accommodation that would be available for at least six months. It explained its duties to Ms B in a letter.
18. After ten days, at the end of April, the Council moved Ms B to a different hotel. Over the next two weeks Ms B went to the Council offices four times complaining that the temporary accommodation was not suitable for her. This was because her various health issues meant a shared bathroom was not suitable for her. She also reported not feeling safe at the accommodation due to the behaviour of other residents. The Council’s position was there was no other temporary accommodation available. Towards the end of May the Council received complaints from the hotel about Ms B’s behaviour and so moved her to another hotel. Ms B immediately complained about the condition and state of repair of the property, the location and that it was too noisy.
19. Ms B wanted to move back to the hotel chain she had initially been placed in. The Council explained to her that the hotel chain had said they would not accept her at any of their locations and there were no other better alternatives than where she had been placed.
20. Ms B continued to contact the Council over the end of May and into June complaining about the temporary accommodation in the current hotel and requesting a move back to the chain hotel. The Council reiterated its position.
21. In June the Council wrote to Ms B explaining she could no longer visit the Council offices because of her behaviour and could only be in touch over the telephone. The Council also offered Ms B temporary accommodation in a self-contained flat. Ms B refused the accommodation so the Council discharged its interim housing duty to her and said she must leave her current accommodation immediately.
22. Ms B continued to contact the Council to request temporary accommodation and at the end of June a housing charity contact the Council on her behalf. In its response at the beginning of July the Council said it was looking for interim accommodation for her. It also wrote to Ms B again saying it had a prevention duty to her and again enclosing a copy of the personal housing plan that had been drawn up in April.
23. The next day the Council offered Ms B further self-contained temporary accommodation which she accepted. A week later in the middle of July the Council decided Ms B was not in priority need so it did not owe her the full housing duty and it was satisfied it could end its relief duty to her. It explained the reasons for its decision in a letter to her which also explained how she could challenge the decision.
24. Ms B continued to complain to the Council about the standard of the accommodation and the need for the provision of a shower. The Council responded explaining, in brief, the history. The housing charity contacted the Council again for an update which the Council provided. At the end of August the Council served notice on Ms B to leave the temporary accommodation by 28 September. Just before the deadline Ms B submitted medical evidence. Her GP said that Ms B reported she was unable to use the bath and therefore needed a shower in the temporary accommodation. He said that her skin irritation and dryness may be due to her inability to wash properly.
25. Over October Ms B contacted the Council many times to request a move to alternative accommodation and reporting rats in the property. Ms B had not appealed against the Council’s decision that it had no housing duty to her as she was not in priority need. So at the beginning of November the Council started the process to evict Ms B from the property. At the beginning of December the Council offered Ms B accommodation in a hotel she had previously been accommodated in. Ms B refused it.
26. There was further contact from Ms B over January and February 2019 asking for different accommodation. The Council reiterated its position.
27. At the beginning of March Ms B’s MP contacted the Council asking about Ms B’s case. The Council said Ms B had left the last temporary accommodation. The next day the Council checked and found that Ms B was still living there so arranged a possession hearing at court for late March. Ms B did not attend the hearing. The Council is now going back to court to gain possession of the property.

Analysis

Prevention decision

28. When Ms B approached the Council in April 2018 she had accommodation. The Council accepted it had a prevention duty and drew up a personal housing plan (PHP). There was no fault in that action.

Relief decision

29. When Ms B became homeless and went back to the Council it initially referred her back to Council X. I can see no basis for this decision. As part of the PHP it has said it would contact Council X but I have seen nothing to show it had done so. And when it did it was clear that Council X did not consider it had any duty to Ms B.
30. But the Council then did quickly accept it did have a relief duty to Ms B and provided temporary accommodation.

Temporary accommodation

31. Ms B had to move to different B&B accommodation and she complained about the suitability of the accommodation provided. The Council did not consider there was any better alternative it could offer. Ms B did not provide any evidence to show why the accommodation was not suitable for her and I do not, therefore, consider there was any fault by the Council in its decision that the accommodation was suitable.
32. The Council then offered Ms B accommodation in a self-contained flat. She refused the accommodation and the Council decided it no longer had a duty to provide temporary accommodation. It did so because it considered Ms B had not provided good enough reasons for not accepting the self-contained flat the Council had offered. I do not consider there is any fault in that decision; the Council explained its reasons in writing to Ms B.

The second prevention letter

33. The Council wrote to Ms B at the beginning of July saying it had accepted a prevention duty to her. The Council has said this was a mistake and it should have sent a letter saying it accepted a relief duty. It also sent the same PHP has had been produced in April. This was now outdated as Ms B’s circumstances had changed.
34. But the Council did offer further temporary accommodation which she accepted. So although there was fault in the letter sent to Ms B and in the failure to review the PHP I do not consider this adversely affected Ms B.

The decision on Ms B’s homelessness application

35. In July the Council decided Ms B was homeless but she was not in priority need. The letter explained how Ms B could challenge the decision but she did not do so. This meant the Council no longer had any duty to her to provide accommodation. I will not consider the Council’s decision that Ms B was not in priority need as the correct way for her to challenge that was by making an appeal.

The continued provision of temporary accommodation

36. Since that point Ms B has continued to live in the temporary accommodation. She has regularly requested a move to different accommodation and has provided some medical evidence. The Council started possession proceedings but has not gained possession of the property. Whether there has been any fault in the Council’s action since its decision that it did not owe a housing duty to Ms B over a year ago has not caused her any injustice. She has been able to continue living in the accommodation which, if the Council had acted more swiftly, she would have had to leave. Therefore I am not going to look at these events in any further detail.

Summary

37. There has been some faults by the Council. It wrongly referred Ms B back to Council X, it wrongly sent a prevention duty letter rather than a relief duty letter and did not review the personal housing plan. But I do not consider these faults have caused any significant injustice to Ms B. For most of the period the Council has provided temporary accommodation. The only period when it was not provided was after Ms B refused self-contained temporary accommodation and I do not consider there was fault in that decision.

Back to top

Final decision

38. There was some fault by the Council in its handling of Ms B’s homelessness application but it has not caused her significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman