Summary: Ms B complained about the Council’s actions when she made a homelessness application. She said that as a result of the failings she spent longer than she should living in unsuitable accommodation. There was fault which caused injustice to Ms B. The Council will apologise and make a payment to her.

The complaint

1. I call the complainant Ms B. She complained about the Council’s actions when she made a homelessness application. She says the Council:
• Wrongly accepted a prevention duty rather than a relief duty when she first approached the Council;
• Delayed in providing interim accommodation while it considered her application;
• Made unsuitable offers of accommodation which did not take into account her disability;
• Failed to help with furniture and equipment when she moved into her new property which was empty and unfurnished;
• Failed to pay one week’s rent in advance to the housing association landlord as promised;
• Failed to process her claim for dual payments of housing benefit;
• Failed to respond to her complaint about these matters, originally made in May 2020, or her subsequent chasing.

As a result Ms B lived in accommodation that did not meet her needs for longer than she should.

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. I considered the complaint and documents provided by Ms B and her representative 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 for their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of the key law and guidance

5. 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.
6. An applicant must be treated as homeless, regardless of the availability and legal rights to occupy accommodation, if it is not reasonable for them to continue to occupy the accommodation. (Housing Act 1996 section 175(3))
7. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help them to ensure 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. I will refer to this as the prevention duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
8. 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. I will refer to this as the relief duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
9. 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)
10. 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 them. I will refer to this as the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
11. 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)
12. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the following decisions:
• their eligibility for assistance;
• what duty (if any) is owed to them if they are found to be homeless or threatened with homelessness;
• the steps they are to take in their personalised housing plan at the prevention duty stage;
• the steps they are to take in their personalised housing plan at the relief duty stage; and
• the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.

Summary of events

13. Ms B has various health issues which means she has restricted mobility and is considered to be disabled in accordance with the relevant legislation. For part of this process she had the support of a representative.
14. In early June 2019 Ms B's representative sent to the Council a homelessness application on the grounds that it was unreasonable for her to continue to occupy the property in which she was living. This was because of her restricted mobility and the layout of the property. Just over a week later Ms B went to the Council offices and an appointment was made for a further meeting at the end of the month. At that meeting the Council accepted it had the prevention duty to Ms B.
15. The application was discussed with the Council’s medical adviser at the beginning of July who said that although the property was not ideal it was tolerable and recommended first floor accommodation, as a maximum, or accommodation with a lift. He said shared or B&B accommodation was suitable.
16. In the middle of July the representative submitted more medical information. And the Council visited Ms B at home at the end of the month. The officer concluded the accommodation was not suitable for Ms B.
17. In August Ms B and her representative said the Council advised them that any interim accommodation would be B&B. The Council did not refer to this in the information provided. There was to be an assessment by an occupational therapist at the beginning of September so Miss B’s representative asked for that to go ahead to inform what should happen next. Also at the beginning of September the Council accepted it had the relief duty to Ms B.
18. The Council received the occupational therapy assessment towards the end of September. It referred this to the medical adviser in the middle of October and they recommended ground floor or accommodation with a lift and for a level-access shower with seat.
19. The Council accepted it had the full housing duty to Ms B at the end of October but failed to send the decision to either Ms B or her representative until the beginning of December.
20. In the middle of December the Council invited Ms B to view a property. Just before the viewing Ms B found that it was a second floor property without a lift. After that her representative wrote to the Council advising they were considering legal action.
21. In later January Ms B placed a bid on a property. The landlord was going to offer the property but withdrew it when it realised the extent of Ms B’s needs. Shortly afterwards Ms B bid on another property. And at the beginning of March she signed a permanent tenancy.

Analysis

Duty to Ms B and interim accommodation

22. The Council said it should have accepted it had the relief duty to Ms B at the end of July after the home visit. There is also an argument that the information submitted in the middle of the month was also sufficient to trigger that decision.
23. The duty to arrange interim accommodation during the relief stage is triggered as soon as the authority has reason to believe that an applicant may be eligible, homeless and in priority need. This is a low threshold. It is an absolute duty and the authority cannot postpone it due to a lack of available resources.
24. The Council has referred to court cases where it has been held to be lawful for a Council to decide that an applicant is homeless because it is not reasonable for them to remain in their current accommodation indefinitely, but to leave them in residence for the short term. It considered how long Ms B had already lived at the property was relevant. And also there had been a request to delay an offer to allow the occupational therapy assessment to proceed. So it considered it was reasonable to wait for the Council’s medical adviser to provide advice on the new evidence. But it does accept the length of time between receiving the occupational therapy report and requesting accommodation was excessive.
25. The only accommodation the Council offered was the one I refer to in paragraph 20 above which was evidently unsuitable. The property Ms B eventually moved to was through her bidding. There was, therefore, a failure by the Council to offer suitable interim accommodation and that meant Ms B lived in the unsuitable accommodation for seven months longer than she should. The Council has agreed to to provide a financial remedy in-line with our guidance on remedies.
26. The Council also failed to send the main housing duty letter to Ms B and her representative. This further fault did not increase significantly the injustice to Ms B.

Furniture

27. Ms B complained the Council failed to help with furniture and equipment when she moved into the new property which was empty and unfurnished.
28. The Council commented it had no record of receiving a request for assistance. That it would not be normal to provide such assistance and that information about the local welfare assistance scheme was on the Council’s website. There was no fault here.

Advance payment of rent and claim for dual payment of benefits

29. There is no evidence that Ms B asked the Council for assistance with this so there was no fault by the Council.

Complaint handling

30. Ms B’s representative complained in May 2020. The Council overlooked that correspondence and did not act on the further chasing emails. The Council accepted it was at fault here and apologised.

Agreed action

31. The Council will apologise to Ms B for the failings found. It will also pay her £1050 for the period she was living in unsuitable accommodation and a further £200 for the failings and injustice to her. It should so within a month of this decision.

Back to top

Final decision

32. There was fault which caused injustice to Ms B.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman