Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to provide suitable temporary accommodation since 2019. We have not found the Council to be at fault. Miss X did not request a suitability review until late 2021, and so we are unable to investigate what happened before she did so. We have not found fault with the Council’s handing of this request.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s failure to provide suitable temporary accommodation in response to her homelessness application since 2019.
2. As a result, Miss X says she and her two young children lived in cramped, unsafe accommodation for too long. This has caused significant distress to Miss X and her son has been injured.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

3. I have investigated events from December 2021. Part of Miss X’s complaint is about the standard of her temporary accommodation from 2019 and the detrimental impact on her family. We expect people to make a complaint to us within a year of them thinking there may have been some fault by the Council. I have seen no evidence of Miss X either complaining to the Council or submitting a review request between 2019 and 2021. For this reason, this part of her complaint is late.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

7. I reviewed the information provided by Miss X.
8. I made enquiries with the Council and reviewed the relevant law.
9. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law

Homelessness

10. 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.
11. 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)

Suitability of accommodation

12. 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)
13. 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. This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
14. Certain decisions councils make about homelessness carry a statutory right of review. The review decision then carries a right of appeal to court on a point of law. Homeless applicants have a right to review the suitability of temporary accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, s202)
15. Homeless applicants must request a review within 21 days of the decision. However, applicants can ask a council to reconsider its decision about the suitability of temporary accommodation at any time. This might be necessary, for example, if there is a change in the applicant’s circumstances. This new decision is open to review under s202, with a new 21 day timescale. R(B) v Redbridge LBC [2019] EWHC 250 (Admin)
16. The question of what is suitable can give rise to disputes between councils and applicants. Applicants may be disappointed that the accommodation offered does not meet all of their wishes. However, the housing authority is entitled to rely on the facts that:

• Accommodation is in short supply
• There are huge strains on their resources, and
• Perfection cannot be expected.

What happened

17. In 2019, Miss X made a homelessness application. She was accommodated under the “relief duty” at Property A. This was hostel type accommodation with shared facilities. Shortly afterwards, the Council confirmed Miss X was owed the main homelessness duty.
18. In December 2021, Miss X requested a review of the suitability of Property A. She did not receive a response and so resubmitted her request in January 2022. In March 2022, the Council determined Property A was unsuitable. Miss X was offered alternative accommodation in a self-contained flat (Property B) the following month. Miss X accepted this offer.
19. Miss X remains dissatisfied that she was placed in unsuitable accommodation for so long. She complained to the Council, but this was not upheld. The Council said it had carried out its suitability review correctly and made an offer of alternative accommodation.

Analysis

20. For the reason explained at paragraph three above, I will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the suitability of Property A. I have seen no evidence Miss X submitted a review request before December 2021. I appreciate Miss X’s dissatisfaction that she and her children lived in cramped conditions for so long, but in the absence of her submitting an earlier review request, I am unable to consider the impact on Mrs X and her children. This remans the case, regardless of the fact the Council ultimately decided Property A was unsuitable.
21. Miss X made her request for a review of the suitability of Property A on 15 December 2021. She has provided a copy of this letter. There is no record of this request in the Council’s case records. It is therefore probable the Council did not receive this letter. It is unfortunate there was delay of one month at the start of the process however I do not consider this is significant enough to pursue the matter further, especially as the Council promptly actioned the review when it became aware of it.
22. Once the Council had accepted her review request it carried out its enquires and issued its decision within an acceptable timeframe. It also made an offer or alternative accommodation within five weeks. This was within the 12 week time limit set out in the relevant legislation.
23. Overall, I am satisfied with the Council’s handing of Miss X’s review request and do not find it acted with fault.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I have not found fault with the Council’s actions. On this basis I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman