Summary: Miss X says the Council has placed her in unsuitable temporary accommodation and failed to carry out a review of its suitability. She also says it failed to respond to her complaints about this. The Ombudsman has found fault by the Council. He recommended apologises for the delay in doing so and offered her £250 in recognition of the distress and avoidable time and trouble caused to her. The Council agreed.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Miss X, says the Council has placed her in unsuitable temporary accommodation. She says the Council promised to carry out a review of the suitability of her temporary accommodation but has not done so. Miss X says she is unable to sleep properly in her current accommodation and this has caused her mental health to deteriorate.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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

4. As part of my investigation I discussed the complaint with Miss X and considered the information she provided. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its response and documents it provided. I set out my initial view in a draft decision statement and invited Miss X and the Council to comment.

Back to top

What I found

5. 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)
6. There are no review or appeal rights for an applicant to challenge the suitability of interim accommodation. If the Council accepts a housing duty, the applicant will have appeal or review rights to challenge the suitability of any accommodation offered to fulfil that duty. This applies to both temporary and permanent accommodation.

Key events

7. Miss X is diagnosed with clinical anxiety and depression for which she has been prescribed antidepressants. She has also been diagnosed with fibromyalgia and neck, shoulder and lower torso pain.
8. In January 2019 Miss X made a homelessness application to the Council as she was asked to leave her accommodation.
9. In March 2019 the Council concluded Miss X was not in priority need and ended the relief duty towards her. At Miss X’s request, the Council conducted a review but upheld its original decision.
10. Miss X then instructed a solicitor to help her challenge the Council’s decision. The Council withdrew its decision and agreed to do a fresh review.
11. In August the Council placed Miss X in accommodation while it considered her review. The accommodation consisted of a room in a hotel with shared facilities.
12. Miss X says the accommodation is unsuitable. She feels unsafe and scared to stay there because the hotel houses alcoholics and drug users. She says noise from other residents stops her sleeping and so she often stays with friends. She says the accommodation is having a profoundly negative impact on her mental health.
13. On 11 September Miss X was admitted to hospital as she was considered to be at danger of suicide.
14. The Council wrote to Miss X on 13 November telling her that her its review had concluded she was in priority need owing to the new medical evidence provided by her.
15. The letter also said the Council would re-assess the suitability of her temporary accommodation with a view to offering her alternative temporary accommodation. For this reason neither Miss X nor her solicitor submitted a formal request for a review.
16. On 28 November 2019 Miss X’s solicitors asked the Council for an update on the suitability re-assessment. The Council replied on 5 February 2020. It acknowledged there had been an administrative error which had delayed the re-assessment and said it would soon make a decision on suitability.
17. Miss X made another complaint to the Council on 12 January 2020. She explained the impact her current temporary accommodation was having on her mental health. She was now taking a higher dose of anti-depressants and was at risk of suicide having been to hospital with suicidal thoughts. Miss X was also receiving professional help for her depression.
18. On 28 January Miss X provided the Council with a letter from her therapist which supported her view of the negative effects of the temporary accommodation on her mental health. The therapist supported a move to alternative accommodation.
19. On 29 January 2020 the Council told Miss X it had accepted a main homelessness duty to her.
20. On 13 March 2020 the Council advised Miss X she could bid for suitable accommodation. It explained she had been placed in priority band three and could bid for one-bedroom accommodation. The Council also told her she could appeal if she disagreed with its decision.
21. In response to my enquiries the Council has confirmed Miss X had not requested a formal review of the suitability of her temporary accommodation. However, it has now contacted her and is currently carrying out a review at her request.

Analysis

22. The Council accepted Miss X was in priority need from 13 November 2019 but did into advise her of her review rights. That was fault. Instead the Council said it would reassess the suitability of her accommodation but failed to do so, despite being aware of the impact of the accommodation on Miss X’s mental health. That was also fault.
23. In late November 2019 Miss X’s solicitor complained there had been no reassessment. Because of an administrative error, the Council did not respond until early February 2020. This was fault and caused Miss X further distress as she did know if the Council was assessing the suitability of her temporary accommodation.
24. Further the lack of response to her solicitor led Miss X to submit another complaint in January 2020. There is no evidence the Council responded to that complaint which was also fault.
25. The Council had a duty under the Housing Act to ensure the suitability of Miss X’s temporary accommodation. Although it had clear evidence of the impact the temporary accommodation was having on Miss X’s mental wellbeing, the Council took no action. It also failed to tell Miss X she had a right to ask for a review of the suitability. Its failure to do either was fault.
26. I note that in response to my enquiries the Council contacted Miss X and advised her of her review rights regarding her temporary accommodation. Miss X requested a review and the Council considered it but conclude the accommodation was suitable.

Agreed action

27. I consider the faults I have identified caused Miss X injustice. She was put to the avoidable time and trouble of pursuing complaints to the Council and the Ombudsman. The failure to address her concerns has also exacerbated her current mental health concerns. I therefore recommended the Council apologised to Miss X in writing and offered her £250 in recognition of the injustice I have identified. The Council agreed. It should make payment of the agreed some and send its letter of apology within four weeks of my decision.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I have ended my investigation of this complaint as the Council has agreed to my recommendations which address the injustice caused to Miss X by the fault I identified.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman