Summary: The Council’s delay providing suitable temporary accommodation by 21 months was fault. The Council was also at fault for how it dealt with issues of disrepair and noise nuisance. The Council has agreed to apologise, pay Ms X £4,500, make ongoing payments of £200 a month until it makes Ms X a suitable offer of accommodation, and take action to improve its service.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained that the Council has failed to provide suitable temporary accommodation despite accepting in September 2020 that her current property is unsuitable.
2. She also complained about the Council’s handling of ongoing issues of disrepair and anti-social behaviour at the property.
3. As a result, Ms X and her young child remain in unsuitable accommodation where they cannot access necessary bathing facilities.

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. 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. I spoke to Ms X and considered the information she provided.
7. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance, including the Housing Act 1996, as amended and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities.
8. I referred to the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
9. Ms X 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

Temporary accommodation law and guidance

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 their occupation. This is called the main housing duty. The accommodation a council provides until it can end this duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
11. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household. (Housing Act 1996, section 206)
12. Councils must assess whether accommodation is suitable for each household individually. Whether accommodation is suitable will depend on the relevant needs, requirements and circumstances of the homeless person and their household. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.4 & 17.9)
13. The duty to provide suitable accommodation is immediate, non-deferable, and unqualified. Elkundi, R (On the Application Of) v Birmingham City Council [2022] EWCA Civ 601
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. (Housing Act 1996, s202)

What happened

15. Ms X is homeless. In February 2020, the Council provided temporary accommodation to meet its duty. Ms X says the bath in the property is in such a poor condition that it is unsafe for her or her young child to use.
16. In response to repeated reports from Ms X, in September 2020 the Council wrote to Ms X to say it had made an urgent request to transfer her to alternative accommodation “due to the complexity of this repair”.
17. In September, Ms X was in a serious accident which left her with ongoing health issues, including problems with her back.
18. In October, the Council offered Ms X an alternative property which she refused. The Council ended its duty to Ms X because she had refused a suitable offer.
19. Ms X exercised her statutory right to review the decision the offered property was suitable. In December, the review found it was not a suitable offer. The Council continued to owe Ms X the main housing duty and she remained in temporary accommodation.
20. In April 2021, the Council offered Ms X a private tenancy to end its duty. It withdrew the offer because it was not affordable for Ms X.
21. In July, Ms X began reporting issues with noise from an upstairs neighbour. In the following 12 months, Ms X made 35 reports of noise nuisance on the Council’s Noise App.
22. In September, the Council completed a medical assessment of Ms X. It identified that she needed a ground floor property or one with a lift.
23. Ms X complained to the Council in December. The Council responded at stage two of its complaints process in January 2022. It said:
• There were delays conducting repairs for which it accepted fault
• it was taking “all appropriate action” to progress Ms X’s need for a move
24. In July, the Council responded to Ms X’s complaint about noise nuisance. It found:
• It should have “taken additional steps” to investigate Ms X’s reports and “confirm whether this warranted further action”.
• It had missed opportunities to contact her with advice and updates
25. In September 2022, the Council identified alternative temporary accommodation for Ms X. At time of writing, it has not yet been able to offer it to Ms X but intends to do so.

My findings

Temporary accommodation

26. The Council says it experienced a “severe crisis of supply” and therefore it was unable to find alternative accommodation for Ms X. Nevertheless, the law says temporary accommodation must be suitable. The Council accepted in September 2020 that Ms X’s accommodation is not suitable. The Council therefore had a duty to secure alternative accommodation. It did not do so for almost two years. This was fault.
27. When the Council ended its duty in October 2020, it would not have been looking for alternative accommodation. However, the review decision reinstated the duty in December. Therefore, from December 2020 until September 2022 the Council failed to meet its statutory duty to Ms X. As a result, Ms X lived in a property where she could not access basic bathing facilities for herself and her child for over 20 months. This is a significant injustice to Ms X.
28. Ms X was in an accident in September 2020. The Council did not conduct a medical assessment until September 2021. The review found Ms X needed a property on the ground floor or with a lift due to her health conditions. The Council should have conducted this assessment as part of its transfer decision to decide what sort of property Ms X needed. Its failure to do so was fault.

Noise

29. The Council accepted fault in how dealt with Ms X’s complaints about noise and anti-social behaviour. It apologised and agreed an officer would contact Ms X within a week.
30. I do not consider this to be a suitable remedy for the injustice caused. Ms X went to significant time and trouble reporting instances of noise nuisance on the Council’s app and directly to the housing officer responsible for the building.

Disrepair

31. The Council has also accepted some fault in how it dealt with disrepair in the property.
32. However, by September 2020, Ms X had already had three plumbers visit the property. Each time, they confirmed the pipes, taps, and bath needed to be replaced. Despite this, the issue was still unresolved when Ms X reported it in October 2021, over a year later.
33. In response to her complaint, the Council said it had arranged an appointment to replace the bath in September 2020. This was cancelled because the Council could not confirm the appointment with Ms X. I consider this to be fault. This was a major repair and the primary reason the property is unsuitable. The Council should have tried to rearrange the appointment or contact Ms X through other means to confirm the appointment. The Council said it had introduced a new process to confirm appointments by post and text message as well as over the phone. This should improve services for others in future and is welcome.

Complaint handling

34. The council’s stage two decision referred Ms X to the wrong Ombudsman scheme. This was fault and caused Ms X avoidable time and trouble getting her complaint to the right Ombudsman.
35. I have recommended a service improvement to avoid such mistakes in future.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. To remedy the injustice to Ms X from the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Ms X in writing
• Pay Ms X £200 for each month she spent in unsuitable temporary accommodation. This is 21 months and £4,200.
• Continue to pay Ms X £200 a month until the Council makes a suitable offer of alternative accommodation or otherwise ends its duty.
• Pay Ms X a further £300 for the avoidable distress and time and trouble caused by the Council’s handling of her noise complaints and reports of disrepair.
37. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
38. The Council should also take the following action to improve its services:
• Share a copy of this decision with staff in the relevant departments.
• Remind relevant staff about which Ombudsman to direct complainants to. Provide training or guidance and amend any template letters or emails as appropriate.
39. The Council should tell the Ombudsman about the action it has taken within eight weeks of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

40. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman