Summary: Miss X complains about the way the Council handled her homelessness case causing her to live in unsuitable accommodation with her children. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council as it kept Miss X in unsuitable property for too long and did not review her personalised housing plan. The Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X and provide guidance to staff to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Miss X, complains about the way the Council handled her homelessness case, namely;
• It took too long to offer her interim accommodation after her landlord sought to remove her from her privately rented property.
• The Council did not provide help to store her personal possessions.
• Provided her with unsuitable interim accommodation with shared facilities at a bed and breakfast.
• The Council delayed in offering alternative temporary accommodation after deciding the current temporary accommodation was unsuitable.
• Failed to repair the boiler in the temporary accommodation the Council moved Miss X to.

Back to top

What I have investigated

2. I have investigated the above points. I have set out at the end of this statement the parts of the complaint I have not investigated and the reasons for this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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. As part of this investigation:
• I considered the complaint made by Miss X and the Council’s responses.
• I made enquiries to the Council and considered the information it provided in response.
• I considered the Homelessness Code of Guidance 2018, the Housing Act 1996, the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 and the Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003.
• I sent a draft of this decision to Miss X and the Council and considered comments I received in response.

Back to top

What I found

Homelessness application

6. The Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 says if a council is satisfied an applicant is eligible for assistance and threatened with homelessness, it must assess the applicant’s case.
7. The council’s assessment of the applicant’s case must include the following:
• Details of the circumstances that caused the applicant to become homeless or threatened with homelessness.
• The housing needs of the applicant.
• Whether any support is needed for the applicant to retain suitable accommodation.
8. The council must notify the applicant in writing of the result of the assessment. and must try to agree with the applicant the steps the applicant and the council should take to prevent the applicant from becoming homeless. The council should record this in a personalised housing plan (PHP).
9. The Homelessness Code of Guidance says councils must keep assessments and PHP’s under review and will wish to establish timescales for reviewing plans.
10. If a Council has reasons to believe a person may be homeless, eligible for assistance, in priority need it must provide them interim accommodation. A person may be in priority need is they have dependent children.
11. The Housing Act 1996 says a council has a duty to take reasonable steps to prevent the loss of a person’s property, or to mitigate damage, when it has reason to believe:
• there is danger the applicant’s personal property will be lost or damaged;
• the danger arises because the applicant is unable to protect it or deal with it; and
• no other suitable arrangements have been made.
12. This duty applies when the council is, or has been, subject to the interim duty to accommodate an applicant.

Suitability of accommodation

13. The Homelessness Code of Guidance 2018 says council must ensure all accommodation provided to applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided once an applicant is owed the main housing duty.
14. The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2003 says bed and breakfast accommodation is not suitable for households with a dependent child or pregnant woman. Where no other accommodation is available the council may place the family in bed and breakfast accommodation as a last resort and only for a maximum of six weeks.
15. The Order defines bed and breakfast as accommodation which is not self-contained and where the household shares a toilet, cooking or bathroom facilities with other households.
16. The Homelessness Code of Guidance 2018 says the Secretary of State considers a council should notify the applicant of the effect of the 2003 Order. In particular, that the council will be unable to continue to secure bed and breakfast accommodation for such applicants any longer than 6 weeks, after which the council must secure alternative, suitable accommodation.

What happened

17. Miss X lives with her two young children. She suffers with a severe lung condition meaning she struggles to climb stairs.
18. Miss X rented accommodation from a private landlord. In early 2019 she received a section 21 notice asking her to leave the property. Miss X contacted the Council for help who told her the notice was invalid. The Council told Miss X about her rights to challenge this notice.
19. In late May 2019 Miss X contacted the Council for homelessness assistance as she had received a possession order from the court, requiring her to give up possession of her property by 29 May 2019. The Council assessed Miss X on 3 June and completed a PHP with her. On the same day the Council provided accommodation for Miss X at Property A while it considered whether it owed her a full housing duty. This was a room in a shared house. Miss X had to share toilet and kitchen facilities with other households.
20. Shortly after moving in Miss X contacted the Council to raise concerns about the condition of Property A. She said the communal areas were dirty including blood on the communal door handles and floors, mouldy work surfaces and the fridge being faulty. Miss X also raised issues about the security of the building.
21. The Council passed Miss X’s concerns to the building manager to respond to and told her it would complete a medical assessment for her. Miss X also asked the Council to tell her how long she would be in the bed and breakfast accommodation.
22. Over the next few weeks Miss X sent emails to the Council asking if there was an update with her housing. The Council told Miss X in early July 2019 it had completed a medical assessment and the medical adviser decided Property A was suitable. The Council told Miss X it was looking for alternative accommodation.
23. Miss X remained at Property A and on 20 August 2019 the Council wrote to Miss X confirming it owed her the main housing duty following its consideration of her homelessness application.
24. On 26 August 2019 the Council offered Miss X temporary accommodation at Property B. This was a self-contained flat on the second floor. Miss X accepted the property but requested a review of the suitability. Miss X said she cannot manage the four flights of stairs to access the property and provided a letter from her doctor.
25. On 28 August 2019 Miss X complained to the Council about its decision to place her into Property A for a long time and its decision to offer Property B.
26. The Council sent Miss X’s medical information to its medical advisers who recommended Miss X could be housed on the ground or first floor maximum where there is no lift access.
27. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint on 10 September 2019 and agreed Property B was not suitable. The Council said it would look to move Miss X into alternative suitable accommodation. Miss X was not satisfied with the response to her complaint so asked for the Council to move it to stage two. The Council responded in late October 2019 and again said it would be moving Miss X into alternative accommodation. The Council also apologised for a lack of response to previous email communication from Miss X.
28. The Council offered Miss X temporary accommodation at Property C on 1 November 2019. Miss X rejected this as the property was on the sixth floor. She was concerned about using a lift to access Property C as if this broke down she could not climb the stairs. She also had concerns about the condition of the Property C.
29. In early November 2019, Miss X asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage three. She said her lung condition has worsened due to living at Property B. She raised concerns the Council had tried to place her in three unsuitable properties since she approached it for homelessness assistance. Miss X also said she has removed her possessions from storage as she can no longer afford to keep them there.
30. On 4 November 2019 Miss X asked for a review into the suitability of Property C which the Council had offered her. She also contacted the agents of Property B to say the boiler was not working. The agents contacted the gas company who attended on 6 and 7 November 2019 and fitted a new part to the boiler. They advised Miss X she could purchase fan heaters up to £50 in the meantime and be refunded by the gas engineer when they attend.
31. Miss X contacted the agents again at the end of November 2019 saying the boiler was not working properly. A gas engineer attended Property B and found the boiler to be working. Miss X called the gas company at the beginning of December 2019 to report a further fault with the boiler. The gas company sent an engineer to Property B the same day. The engineer found new parts needed ordering and attended the next day to fit these.
32. The Council provided its response to Miss X’s complaint at stage three. The Council said:
• It considered the offers of accommodation it made were suitable but is carrying out a review of the suitability of Property C.
• The Council has no record of Miss X asking for information relating to storage of possessions or financial assistance.
• It carried out an inspection of Property A to make sure it met the necessary standard.
33. Miss X remained dissatisfied and complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis – Time taken to offer Miss X accommodation

34. Miss X initially approached the Council in January 2019. The Council did not provide accommodation or register a homelessness application. However, it told her the notice she received to leave her property was invalid and how to defend it. This was a reasonable response from the Council.
35. When Miss X approached the Council again at the end of May 2019, it arranged to assess her at the beginning of June 2019. The Council identified at this meeting Miss X was at risk of homelessness, eligible for assistance and in property need. It provided emergency accommodation to Miss X, at Property A, on the same day as she did not wish to remain in the privately rented property her landlord was evicting her from. I do not consider the Council took too long to provide Miss X accommodation once it had reason to believe she was homeless, eligible for assistance and in priority need.
36. The Council also carried out a PHP with Miss X at the meeting on 3 June 2018 where it agreed a list of actions both it and Miss X would complete to help her find accommodation. I can see no evidence the Council reviewed this plan and in correspondence sent to Miss X the review date for the plan was left blank. This is fault. Under the Homelessness Code of Guidance 2018 councils must keep PHP’s under review.
37. If the Council had reviewed Miss X’s plan it may have been able to look at further steps to help Miss X secure suitable accommodation.

Analysis – Miss X’s personal possessions

38. The law says councils must protect the personal possessions of homeless applicants if they are at risk of loss or damage or no other suitable arrangements have been made. Councils are only under an obligation to protect the personal possessions of applicants believed to be homeless, eligible and in priority need and charge a fee for storage costs.
39. It seems Miss X arranged to place her possessions in storage but wanted to remove these as she could no longer afford to pay the charges. The Council said Miss X did not raise the issue of storing her possessions with it but could ask for financial assistance through a discretionary payment fund to help with the charges.
40. On balance I am unable to say whether there has been fault here. I do not have evidence to show Miss X asked the Council about storing her possessions when she moved into Property A. However, it may have been helpful for the Council to record on its assessment any information about Miss X’s possessions.

Analysis – Suitability of Property A

41. The law says bed and breakfast accommodation is not suitable for families. However, the Council can use bed and breakfast accommodation as a last resort but only for a maximum of six weeks. The six-week limit does not excuse councils from making continued attempts to find suitable accommodation during this period.
42. The Council was at fault as it kept Miss X in bed and breakfast accommodation for 12 weeks. The Council should have moved Miss X into alternative accommodation after six weeks of living in Property A. From the evidence available the Council also did not tell Miss X that it should only keep her in this accommodation for a maximum of six weeks. This was despite Miss X emailing the Council asking for this information.
43. As I have found fault I now must consider whether this caused any injustice to Miss X. The obvious injustice was Miss X remained in an unsuitable property, Property A, for longer than she should have. Miss X raised concerns about this property and asked the Council to move her.
44. The Council also did not tell Miss X of the timeframe she should have remained in Property A. This is also fault. I am not satisfied Miss X knew the Council should have kept her in this property for a maximum of six weeks.
45. In working out a remedy to this injustice, I have considered Miss X spent 6 weeks in unsuitable bed and breakfast accommodation. Our guidance on remedies recommends a financial payment for each week spent in bed and breakfast accommodation after the six week maximum. I consider an award of £125 per week to be suitable.

Analysis – Suitability of Property B

46. As stated at the end of this statement I have not investigated the Council’s decision to offer Miss X Property B as she exercised appeal rights to challenge the suitability.
47. From the evidence available the Council decided Property B was not suitable for Miss X after its medical adviser decided Miss X could only have properties up to the first floor where there was no lift access. The Council told Miss X on 10 September 2019 it considered Property B unsuitable but did not make her an offer of alternative accommodation until 1 November 2019. I consider the delay in offering Miss X alternative accommodation is fault.
48. In response to my enquiries the Council did not provide any reasons for the delay in making an alternative offer of accommodation to Miss X. As a result, Miss X continued to live in accommodation which the Council’s medical adviser deemed unsuitable based on her medical condition and having to climb stairs to access the property.
49. I consider it would have been reasonable for the Council to find alternative temporary accommodation within a few weeks. On this basis I consider Miss X remained in Property B for a month before the Council made her an offer it considered suitable at Property C. Our guidance on remedies recommends a financial payment for distress, hardship and inconvenience that can arise where a council has not provided suitable accommodation. I consider £250 to be appropriate. In coming to this figure, I have considered the reasons Property B was not suitable and the likely distress this caused Miss X having to climb the stairs.

Analysis – Repairs to the boiler in Property B

50. I have not found fault in how the repairs to the boiler in Property B were handled. From the evidence seen, after Miss X raised this issue a gas engineer attended the property shortly after to fix the problem. Miss X was also given the option to purchase fan heaters and receive a refund for the two days between reporting the issue and the gas engineer attending her property.
51. I acknowledge Miss X reported issues with the boiler again later in November 2019. However, from the evidence available a gas engineer attended shortly after and concluded new parts needed to be ordered, which were installed the following day.

Agreed action

52. Within one month of my final decision, to Council has agreed to carry out the following and provide evidence to the Ombudsman it has done so:
• Apologise to Miss X for keeping her in bed and breakfast accommodation for 6 weeks longer than the maximum allowed.
• Pay Miss X £750 for the time spent in bed and breakfast accommodation. This amounts to £125 for each week she remained in bed and breakfast accommodation for longer than the six week maximum.
• Pay Miss X £250 for the delay in making her an offer of further temporary accommodation after deciding Property B was unsuitable.
• Apologise for not keeping Miss X’s PHP under review.
• Provide guidance to staff to ensure families placed in bed and breakfast accommodation are advised about the six week timeframe and after which the council must secure alternative, suitable accommodation.
• Provide guidance to staff to ensure a review date is recorded on all PHP’s so the applicant and Council know when the plan should be reviewed.

Back to top

Final decision

53. I have completed my investigation and found fault by the Council which caused Miss X injustice. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice caused.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

54. I have not investigated Miss X’s complaints about the Council’s offer of accommodation at Property B as Miss X had statutory review rights to challenge this offer. Miss X decided to request a review of the suitability of Property B and the Council decided it was unsuitable for her.
55. I have not investigated the Council’s decision to offer Miss X accommodation at Property C and its decision to end the housing duty it owed her for refusing this offer. This is because Miss X also has statutory review rights to challenge these decisions which she exercised.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman