Summary: Mr B and Miss C complained how the Council dealt with their housing situation. They say the Council gave them short notice to move to new temporary accommodation and its communication was poor. They also say the Council unreasonably threatened to evict them and it insisted they had to rehome their pets without properly considering their medical evidence. We find the Council was at fault for applying a blanket policy and not properly considering the medical evidence. It also failed to inform Mr B and Miss C of their right to request a review of the temporary accommodation. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

The complaint

1. Mr B and Miss C complained how the Council dealt with their housing situation. They say the Council gave them short notice to move to new temporary accommodation and its communication was poor. They also say the Council unreasonably threatened to evict them and it insisted they had to rehome their pets without properly considering their medical evidence.
2. Mr B and Miss C say the Council’s failures have caused them distress and upset.

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. 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

5. I considered information from Mr B and Miss C. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered information it sent in response.
6. Mr B, Miss C 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

Homelessness

7. 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.
8. If a council has ‘reason to believe’ someone may be homeless or threatened with homelessness, it must take a homelessness application and make inquiries. The threshold for taking an application is low. The person does not have to complete a specific form or approach a particular council department. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)
9. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to ensure that accommodation is available for them. This is the main housing duty.
10. The law says councils must make sure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of their household.
11. Homeless applicants can ask for a review of the suitability of temporary accommodation provided once the council has accepted the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 202)

What happened

12. Mr B and Miss C approached the Council for homelessness assistance. The Council put them in temporary accommodation in a two-bedroom flat in February 2022.
13. The Council provided Mr B and Miss C with a license agreement when they moved in. The license applied to any temporary accommodation. It said they could not keep any animals in their accommodation, the Council had the right to transfer them to alternative accommodation at short notice and they could not create a dwelling through the agreement.
14. Miss C gave birth to the couple’s twins in April.
15. Mr B and Miss C had a meeting with their social worker and housing officer later that month. They both said they would benefit from moving into permanent accommodation. All parties agreed this would be the best option.
16. The Council decided to move Mr B and Miss C to alternative temporary accommodation in May. This was because of electrical faults in the accommodation they were living in. An officer phoned them on 5 May and offered them a one-bedroom flat. She said they would need to move within three days.
17. Miss C raised issues with the temporary accommodation when they moved in. She said the hot water tap was not working, there was no heating, and they could not use the washing machine. She also said the Council needed to remove the furniture that was already in the property because it was too crammed with their own personal belongings.
18. The Council responded and said the property was not big enough for their belongings. It said they would need to only keep essentials and put the rest of their belongings in storage. It sent a link to a garage they could rent out to store their belongings. It also said it had become aware they had pets which was against the terms of the license agreement. It said they would have seven days to rehome their pets. Finally, it said it would raise the other issues with the repair team and someone would come and inspect the property.
19. The Council wrote to Miss C on 12 May and said she was breaching the terms and conditions of her license agreement by having pets and personal furniture in the property. It re-iterated she had seven days to rehome the pets. It said if she did not comply, it could withdraw her accommodation.
20. Mr B complained to the Council on the same day. He said he was told in a meeting they would stay in their previous temporary accommodation until they moved to permanent accommodation. He also said the Council had put furniture in the new temporary accommodation despite them having a lot of furniture. Finally, he said the Council’s communication was poor and it told them they had to remove their pets. He said a housing officer threatened them with eviction.
21. Miss C emailed the Council and asked why she could not have her own furniture in the accommodation. The Council responded and said the license agreement states occupants should not create a dwelling. It said when people bring furniture into temporary accommodation, they create a dwelling.
22. Mr B’s GP and youth co-ordinator/counsellor contacted the Council. They said he has mental health needs and if he was to lose his pets, it would severely affect his mental health.
23. The Council did not accept the supporting letters. It told Mr B and Miss C they would need a letter from their mental health professionals. Therefore, they had to rehome their pets to avoid eviction.
24. Miss C contacted the Council on 18 May and confirmed the issues with the washing machine and hot water had been resolved.
25. The Council responded to Mr B’s complaint. It said it was satisfied the alternative temporary accommodation was reasonable for his family to occupy. It said they could not bring their own furniture because it creates a dwelling which is contrary to the license agreement. Finally, it said it told him in the license agreement they could not have pets in temporary accommodation.
26. Miss C sent the Council a letter from Mr B’s psychiatrist on 15 June. This said his illness had deteriorated since his pets had been removed. The psychiatrist said his pets had been a source of therapy for his mental health issues.
27. The Council responded on 30 June and said they could have their pets back.
28. Mr B contacted the Ombudsman as he remained unhappy with the Council’s handling of the matter.
29. The Council offered Mr B and Miss C permanent accommodation in September. They accepted the Council’s offer and have now moved in.

Back to top

Analysis

30. Mr B and Miss C say it was wrong for the Council to move them to alternative accommodation at such short notice. Miss C says she was recovering from a caesarean section after the birth of their children.
31. It states in the license agreement the Council has the right to move occupants to alternative accommodation at short notice. In this case, there were electrical faults in the previous temporary accommodation. The Council says it had to take urgent action because if Mr B and Miss C remained in the property, it could have put the family at risk. Therefore, considering the circumstances, I find no fault in the Council’s decision to move Mr B and Miss C at short notice. Although the Council was aware Miss C had recently given birth, it was not aware she was recovering from a caesarean section.
32. Mr B and Miss C say officers told them in meeting in April 2022 they would stay in their previous temporary accommodation until they found a permanent property. I have not seen any evidence to support their claims. I have reviewed the minutes from the meeting they are referring to. This says that Mr B and Miss C would benefit from living in permanent accommodation. However, there was no commitment for them to remain in their previous temporary accommodation until they secured a permanent property.
33. The Council should have provided Mr B and Miss C with a decision letter when it offered them alternative temporary accommodation. This would have given them the right to request a suitability review if they did not feel the accommodation was suitable for their family. The Council’s failure to do so was fault, and it means Mr B and Miss C were not properly informed about their rights. There is no guarantee they would have asked for a review, or that it would have been upheld, but the Council’s faults provide them with some uncertainty.
34. I find the Council responded in a reasonable timescale to Mr B’s and Miss C’s queries about the disrepair issues in the accommodation.
35. Mr B and Miss C are unhappy the Council threatened them with eviction. The license agreement states that occupants of temporary accommodation cannot create a dwelling. Therefore, the Council told them they could not store their furniture in the temporary accommodation as it would be creating a dwelling. However, it did provide them with information on where they could store their furniture. While I can appreciate it was distressing to receive the threat of eviction, the Council was following the terms and conditions of the license agreement.
36. With regards to the pets, the license agreement makes it clear animals are not allowed in temporary accommodation. The Council will however allow animals if it receives appropriate supporting evidence. Mr B provided the Council with letters from his GP and youth co-ordinator/counsellor. However, it would not accept these until he provided it with a letter from his psychiatrist.
37. I asked the Council why it would not accept the supporting letters. It said in the past GPs have provided supporting letters which do not properly evidence why a household requires support animals. Therefore, it usually asks for letters from mental health professionals.
38. I have reviewed the letter from Mr B’s GP. It sets out Mr B’s mental health issues, says he is closely attached to his pets and that losing them would worsen his mental health issues. The letter from Mr B’s youth co-ordinator/counsellor also confirms his pets provide him with comfort, companionship, and release from emotional disturbance. This correspondence is sufficiently detailed to explain why the pets were important for Mr B’s mental wellbeing. Although the Council may have received generic and non-specific letters from GPs in the past, in this case it had received detailed information about why the pets were important for Mr B. It was also very similar to the information it eventually received from Mr B’s psychiatrist. The Council appears to have applied a blanket policy without properly considering the information. It also put Mr B to the onerous task of contacting his psychiatrist for even more information. This is fault. This has caused Mr B and Miss C distress as they had to rehome their pets for many weeks. Mr B and Miss C are vulnerable and have mental health issues, and so being without their pets caused them significant upset and distress.
39. Mr B has told me one of his pets has now passed away. He says it is unlikely this would have happened if the Council had accepted his medical evidence from the outset. While I understand Mr B’s upset, I cannot say with any certainty that his pet would have still been alive if the Council had not been at fault.

Back to top

Agreed action

40. To address the injustice caused by fault, by 9 January 2023 the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Mr B and Miss C.
• Pay Mr B and Miss C £200 for the upset and distress caused.

41. By 6 February 2023 the Council will:

• Issue written reminders to housing staff to ensure they properly notify homeless applicants of their rights when they are offered temporary accommodation.
• Issue written reminders to housing staff to ensure they do not apply blanket policies and fully review medical evidence applicants provide in respect of why support animals are necessary.

Back to top

Final decision

42. There was fault by the Council, which caused Mr B and Miss C an injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and so I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman