Summary: Mrs B says the Council delayed completing a homeless assessment, failed to follow through with appointments in her personal housing plan, gave her an incorrect banding on the housing register, failed to ensure her landlord addressed issues of mould in the property and delayed providing her with three-bedroom accommodation. The Council failed to carry out appointments in the personal housing plan and delayed providing Mrs B with temporary accommodation. A payment to Mrs B is satisfactory remedy. There is no evidence of fault in the remainder of the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs B, complained the Council:
• delayed completing a homeless assessment;
• sent an email to the wrong email address;
• failed to follow through with appointments in her personal housing plan;
• failed to consider her circumstances when awarding her banding on the housing register;
• failed to ensure her private landlord addressed issues of mould in the property;
• delayed providing her with three-bedroom accommodation.
2. Mrs B says the Council’s actions have caused her significant distress and led to her having to take time off work.

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. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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

6. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and Mrs B's comments;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
7. Mrs B and the organisation 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

What should have happened

8. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 (the Act) and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the code of guidance) set out councils' powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
9. 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 their occupation. This is called the main duty.
10. 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.
11. The accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty is called temporary accommodation. Councils meet this duty in different ways, including:
• the council's own housing stock;
• dedicated hostels or purpose-built accommodation;
• properties procured from housing associations or other registered providers of social housing;
• properties leased from private landlords.
12. The Council’s temporary accommodation allocations policy (the policy) sets out the Council’s policy for prioritisation of homeless households for temporary accommodation. It says where it is not reasonably practicable to provide temporary accommodation within the borough for all households requiring it a series of decisions must be made about how available property will be allocated. Those decisions will be made with reference to the circumstances of each household and on the relevant characteristics of the properties available to the service for use as temporary accommodation.
13. The policy says in conjunction with the temporary accommodation acquisitions policy the policy seeks to ensure all temporary accommodation placements are made based on:
• a comprehensive assessment of the homeless household circumstances and needs; and
• balanced assessment of the needs of all households requiring temporary accommodation against the characteristics of the properties which are available to be allocated at any given point.

What happened – homeless application

14. Mrs B was living in two-bedroom private rented accommodation with her two children which she secured through the Council in April 2021 after she became homeless. Following a previous Ombudsman investigation the Council took a homeless application from Mrs B at the end of April 2022 as she had reported she was homeless due to disrepair issues at the property.
15. On 6 May 2022 the Council accepted a prevention duty and completed a personalised housing plan. The Council sent Mrs B a list of documents required.
16. Following a medical assessment on 17 May the Council agreed Mrs B’s sons needed their own bedrooms. That meant Mrs B moved into band 3 on the Council’s housing register as she was overcrowded. The Council wrongly reduced that banding to band 4 while it was processing the homeless application but later recognised its error and reinstated band 3 priority.
17. The prevention duty ended on 20 June and the Council wrote Mrs B to tell her it had a duty to help her secure accommodation. The Council said it also had a duty to secure interim accommodation if it believed Mrs B was in priority need. The Council told Mrs B it would seek alternative accommodation for her in the private sector.
18. Mrs B chased the Council in July. The Council told Mrs B it was looking for an alternative private rented home and emergency temporary housing within the borough but did not have any three-bedroom private rented homes or temporary housing suitable to offer to her at that point. The Council told Mrs B it had a severe shortage of available and affordable three-bedroom properties in the area and therefore it could not guarantee when a property could be offered.
19. On 25 July Mrs B told the Council she was struggling with her son and one of her sons was sharing her bed so the boys did not disturb each other. Mrs B said she had contacted several estate agents herself but had not identified anything due to high rents and the rent guarantee required.
20. Mrs B provided the Council with a list of potential properties she had identified on 31 July. The Council told Mrs B if she identified a private rented property she should tell the agent she would be working with the local authority around payment of rent and a deposit.
21. On 6 September 2022 the relief duty ended and the Council accepted a main duty. The Council wrote Mrs B to tell her it was trying to identify suitable alternative affordable accommodation but was having difficulty due to the level of demand in the area.
22. Mrs B contacted the Council again about alternative accommodation in October 2022. The Council told Mrs B it still did not have sufficient three-bedroom properties to allocate and suggested Mrs B seek her own property in the private sector. The Council said it could provide the deposit and one month rent in advance.
23. Mrs B chased the Council again in January 2023 and raised concerns about the lack of contact.
24. Mrs B’s tenancy came to an end at the end of April 2023. The Council provided temporary accommodation to Mrs B on 3 May.

What happened – housing repairs

25. Mrs B had reported and mould and other issues in her private rented property to the Council in November 2021. The Council had visited and written to Mrs B’s landlord to ask it to resolve the issues. A Council officer visited on 30 May 2022 to inspect the works carried out so far. The officer was satisfied with the works completed and noted there were some outstanding works. The Council asked the landlord for an update on the outstanding works which the landlord provided later that day.
26. The Council chased the landlord about outstanding repairs in July, August and September 2022 and received some updates.
27. Mrs B contacted the Council in October 2022 to say some works remained outstanding and mould had started to grow back in the bedroom and bathroom. The Council contacted the landlord who said a contractor would return at the end of the month to finish the outstanding work.
28. The Council chased the landlord at the end of November 2022. The landlord told the Council the work had been completed and provided some evidence in December.
29. The Council carried out a joint inspection in January 2023. That identified a small amount of mould to be resolved. The Council had planned a further visit to the property although that had not taken place by the time Mrs B moved out.

Analysis

30. Mrs B says the Council delayed completing a housing assessment for her homeless application. Mrs B says this assessment was booked with one officer who then went on annual leave and another officer completed the assessment a day later. While I understand Mrs B’s frustration about the officer she was supposed to deal with not carrying out the assessment I am satisfied the Council carried out the assessment within one day. I do not consider that warrants a finding of fault.
31. Mrs B says the Council sent an email of a list of documents required to the wrong email address despite the fact she provided the email address for the Council to use. Having considered the documentary evidence I have not found any evidence to suggest the Council used anything other than the email address Mrs B regularly emailed the Council from. That is also the email address the Ombudsman holds for Mrs B. I therefore do not consider the Council at fault here.
32. Mrs B says the Council failed to follow through with appointments set out in her personal housing plan. In particular, Mrs B refers to an appointment not taking place on 13 May and says the planned review on 27 May did not take place. Having considered the personal housing plan I note an appointment is referred to on 13 May, although there are no times listed for that appointment. There is then an appointment for a review of the plan on 27 May. There is no evidence either of those appointments took place, which the Council concedes. Failure to carry out the action set out in the personal housing plan is fault. I am satisfied the apology the Council has already given is satisfactory remedy for that, alongside a reminder to officers of the need to carry out the actions in personal housing plans.
33. Mrs B says the Council failed to consider her circumstances when it awarded her banding on the Council’s housing register. The Council accepts it was at fault for placing Mrs B in band 4 while it considered her homeless application. Band 4 is the relevant band for a homeless applicant where the Council has not accepted a duty to house the applicant. However, Mrs B already had band 3 due to the decision her two children needed separate bedrooms. Changing Mrs B’s band to band 4 is therefore fault. The Council has apologised for that, reinstated the correct banding and backdated it to the date of the medical assessment. I consider that a satisfactory remedy. That is because I consider it unlikely Mrs B missed out on a property during the period in which she was in band 4 given the likely wait for social housing is 9 years.
34. Mrs B says the Council failed to act to ensure her private landlord addressed mould in her property. The Council is not responsible for repair issues at Mrs B’s property. However, Mrs B made a homeless application on the basis the property was unsuitable for her to remain in due to repair issues and the Council accepted her as homeless. In those circumstances I would have expected the Council to work with Mrs B’s landlord to address the repair issues at the property to prevent Mrs B becoming homeless. I am satisfied the Council did that in this case as there is evidence of the Council liaising with Mrs B’s landlord to ensure the repairs were completed. I am satisfied as part of that a Council officer visited Mrs B’s property and will visit again to ensure the repairs have been completed. As I am satisfied the Council took appropriate action here I have no grounds to criticise it.
35. Mrs B says the Council delayed providing her with three-bedroom accommodation even though it has accepted her as homeless. The Council accepts it did not provide temporary accommodation to Mrs B until May 2023. By that point Mrs B’s private tenancy had come to an end. Given the Council had accepted Mrs B was homeless and in priority need I would have expected it to either secure suitable accommodation for Mrs B or provide her with temporary accommodation. The Council did neither in this case until May 2023. That is despite the fact the Council told Mrs B on 20 June 2022 the prevention duty had ended and the Council now had a duty to secure accommodation for her and despite the fact the Council accepted a main duty to house Mrs B on 6 September 2022. Failure to provide Mrs B with temporary accommodation when the Council accepted she was homeless and that her current accommodation was unsuitable is fault.
36. I appreciate the Council has had limited availability of three-bedroom properties available to allocate to homeless households. The evidence I have seen satisfies me the Council allocated the three-bedroom properties that became available before May 2023 to families with a greater level of need or where the property was particularly suited to their needs because they were a larger family. I appreciate that is frustrating for Mrs B but it is not fault for the Council to consider the relative needs of homeless households when allocating properties. That is also in accordance with the Council’s policy. In those circumstances it is likely if the Council had offered Mrs B temporary accommodation it would have been out of the Council’s area or a hostel. That would potentially have put Mrs B in a worse position given the Council was working with Mrs B’s landlord to address the repair issues in the property. Nevertheless, failing to provide Mrs B with temporary accommodation when it had accepted her current accommodation was unsuitable is in breach of the Council’s duty. As a result Mrs B had to stay in unsuitable accommodation for 10 months longer than she should have. In accordance with the Ombudsman’s guidance I recommended the Council pay Mrs B £150 a month to reflect the period she had to remain in unsuitable accommodation. That makes a total of £1,500. I also recommended the Council apologise to Mrs B and remind officers of the need to provide temporary accommodation where an applicant is accepted as homeless and in priority need. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.
37. Mrs B says the Council failed to register her on the housing register as a homeless applicant which meant she could not bid on properties restricted to homeless applicants. The Council accepts this is the case. The Council says that is because its policy says an applicant can only bid on properties restricted to homeless applicants if the Council has accepted the main housing duty and the applicant is living in temporary accommodation. The Council says because Mrs B was not living in temporary accommodation she did not qualify to bid for properties restricted to homeless applicants in temporary accommodation.
38. It is not for the Ombudsman to tell the Council how to operate its allocations policy. So, restricting properties to homeless applicants who are in temporary accommodation is not fault. However, as I said earlier, the Council should have provided Mrs B with temporary accommodation. Had the Council done that Mrs B would have been able to apply for properties restricted to homeless applicants. So, I consider Mrs B’s ability to bid on properties restricted to homeless applicants was affected by fault. However, I do not consider it likely Mrs B missed out on securing a permanent property due to that fault. That is because Mrs B has only been on the Council’s housing register for a short time and the current waiting time for two and three-bedroom properties is more than nine years. I am therefore satisfied it is unlikely, on the balance of probability, Mrs B would have secured a property had she been able to bid on Council properties restricted to homeless applicants.

Back to top

Agreed action

39. Within one month of my decision the Council should:
• apologise to Mrs B and pay her £1,500;
• send a reminder to officers dealing with homeless applicants to ensure they are aware of the need to:
1. carry out the actions, including appointments, set out in personal housing plans; and
2. ensure applicants accepted as homeless and in priority need are provided with temporary accommodation when the Council has decided the current accommodation is unsuitable.

Back to top

Final decision

40. I have completed my investigation and found fault by the Council in part of the complaint which caused Mrs B an injustice. I am satisfied the action the Council will take is sufficient to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman