Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the suitability of temporary accommodation. This is because it was reasonable to expect the complainant to use her appeal rights.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms X, has complained that the Council has placed her in unsuitable accommodation after it accepted that it owed her a housing duty.

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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered Ms X’s complaint and the correspondence from the Council. I invited Ms X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. 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. If a council has reason to believe someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. The threshold for taking an application is low.
5. If a council is satisfied someone is eligible, homeless, in priority need and unintentionally homeless it will owe them the main homelessness duty. If a person disagrees with the suitability of the accommodation offered following the Council’s acceptance of the main housing duty, there is a statutory right to a review under section 202 of the Housing Act 1996.

What happened

6. Ms X made a homelessness application to the Council in 2017. The Council considered the application and accepted that it owed Ms X the main housing duty. The Council arranged suitable accommodation to discharge its duty.
7. In 2019, Ms X was served an eviction notice. As she had lived in the property for less than two years the Council still owed her a housing duty. In October 2019, the Council offered Ms X temporary accommodation which she moved in to. Ms X complained the property was not suitable for her or her son and requested a review.
8. The Council carried out a review and decided the property is suitable. The review decision letter was sent to Ms X in September 2019. The letter advised Ms X that she had the right to appeal to the county court within 21 days if she believed the decision was wrong.

Assessment

9. I will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the suitability of her temporary accommodation. This is because Ms X used her right to a review, and it would be reasonable to have expected her to use her appeal rights if she disagreed with the outcome.
10. Ms X says the property is unsuitable and raised concerns about the impact on her health and her son’s safety. The Council carried out a review and considered the concerns raised by Ms X. It also considered factors such as the location of the property, the nearby transport and affordability before deciding the property is suitable. I understand Ms X disagrees with the outcome of the review, but the Ombudsman is not an appeal body and does not have the power to overrule the Council’s review decision. The county court had the power to confirm, quash or change the Council’s review decision and we would normally expect someone to use their right of appeal provided by the law.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because Ms X had a separate appeal right if she disagreed with the Council’s review decision about the suitability of her temporary accommodation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman