Summary: Mr X complained that the Council attempted to provide him with accommodation that was not fit for purpose. He said the Council’s approach to re-housing him from unsuitable accommodation has caused him and his wife anxiety. I do not find the Council at fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that the Council tried to house him in unsuitable accommodation, causing he and his wife anxiety.
2. He says that the Council’s poor approach to rehousing him has meant that he and his wife have stayed in unsuitable accommodation, causing them distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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 spoke to Mr X.
6. I reviewed the information on file and researched the relevant law, guidance and policy.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant Law

The main housing duty or the duty to house under section 193(A) of the Housing Act 1996.

8. If an eligible person is homeless unintentionally, and has a priority need for housing, a housing authority has a duty to ensure that suitable accommodation is available for an applicant and their household, until that duty is brought to an end, usually through the offer of a settled home.
9. Someone could be said to have a priority need for a number of reasons, including being vulnerable as a result of old age, mental illness, or physical disability or other special reason.
10. However, this duty ends, if a person has been informed of the consequences of refusing an offer of accommodation (and of his right to request a review of the suitability of that accommodation) but refuses that offer, even though the authority is satisfied it was suitable for him and has notified him that it considers it has discharged its duty.
11. There is no strict time limit within which the authority must start to comply with its section 193 duty to secure accommodation, but the duty cannot be deferred.

What is suitable accommodation?

12. When a housing authority discharges its duty to provide accommodation, it must be suitable in relation to the applicant and all members of his household. Consideration of whether the accommodation is suitable requires an assessment of all aspects of the accommodation in light of the relevant needs, requirements and circumstances of the person and their household.
13. Housing authorities will need to consider carefully the suitability of accommodation for households with particular medical and/or physical needs. Physical access to and around the home, space, bathroom and kitchen facilities, access to a garden and modifications to assist people with sensory loss as well as mobility needs are all factors which might need to be taken into account.
14. Account will need to be taken of any social considerations relating to the applicant and their household that might affect the suitability of accommodation, including any risk of violence, racial or other harassment in a particular locality. 

(Homelessness code of guidance for local authorities, October 2021.)

Right to request a review of suitability

15. Applicants have the right to request a review of accommodation offered without bringing the main housing duty to an end.
16. They can request a review regardless of whether they accept the accommodation or not.
17. Where there is a right of review, and/or a complaints procedure within the housing authority, the Ombudsman would expect an applicant to pursue their rights through these arrangements before making a complaint.

What happened

18. Mr X has a number of medical issues. His health problems cause him difficulty in his day-to-day life. In May 2021 the Council accepted that he was living in unsuitable accommodation.
19. It made an offer of alternative accommodation in June 2021, Property 1. While the Council initially viewed the property as being suitable, Mr X’s occupational health therapist identified issues with the property and it recognised it was not suitable.
20. In July 2021 the Council offered Mr X (and his wife, Mrs X), another property, Property 2.
21. A visit was arranged in August 2021. Mr and Mrs X decided to visit the property before the arranged visit time. Upon their arrival at Property 2, they became concerned about what appeared them to be some illegal activity in or around that property. They said they were also verbally abused by a tenant at the flats. Mr X says he and Mrs X were very worried for their safety and have suffered negative mental side effects that impact on their daily well-being. Mr X said he was also worried because Property 2 is located near to his current accommodation.
22. They attended the arranged visit to Property 2 with a Council officer a few days later and set out their concerns. They were also concerned about the condition of the property.
23. The Council accepted that Mr X felt unsafe at Property 2 and withdrew the offer.
24. In September 2021, the Council offered Mr X another property, Property 3. Mr X asked for a review of the suitability of that accommodation and did not move into the property by the target date. As a result, the Council viewed that Mr X had refused the offer of accommodation and wrote a letter to him on 21 October 2021 saying it was minded to discharge the Council’s main housing duty. Mr X obtained legal advice and is currently going through the Council’s process to review the Council’s decision to discharge that duty.

Analysis

25. The records show that the Council has made efforts to accommodate Mr X in alternative accommodation. These have been unsuccessful for one reason or another but I have not seen any evidence that once the Council recognised that duty, it deferred acting or failed to act in accordance with its duty.
26. Mr X was aggrieved that he was made some offers of accommodation that were not suitable. However, when Mr X raised his concerns, the Council withdrew those offers, which was a reasonable response and showed it had its eye on its duty to act in accordance with the statutory guidance on homelessness, the relevant parts of which are summarised in my paragraphs 8-17 above. I do not find the Council at fault.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have not found the Council at fault and have now completed this investigation.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

28. I have not investigated the part of Mr X’s complaint that relates to the Council’s approach to Property 3. Mr X has properly decided to go through the Council’s review process in relation to that part of the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman