Summary: There was fault by the Council. It took too long to process Mr B’s homelessness application and move his young family from a hazardous property to interim accommodation. It did not explain its processes and decisions to Mr B, and it did not handle his complaint properly. The Council’s shortcomings meant that the family lived in a damp and mouldy property for longer than they should have, and were uncertain as to how the Council would help them.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains that the Council:
• took too long to decide his homeless application, did not keep him updated and left his family living in unsuitable living conditions for too long;
• Failed to deal with his housing conditions; and
• Did not deal with his complaint to it properly.
2. Mr B says that as a result of delay by the Council, his family had to stay in an unsuitable property for too long. His children were ill very often due to the damp and mould, and the eldest, who also has a heart problem missed school due to illness.

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 the information provided by Mr B. I considered the information provided by the Council including its file documents. I also considered the law and guidance set out below. Both parties had the opportunity to comment on a draft of this statement. I have taken account of their comments in reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The law and guidance

Private housing repair

6. The Housing Act 2004 sets out councils’ duties and powers to address hazards in residential properties in their area.
7. Where a council, for any reason, considers it would be appropriate to inspect a property to determine whether any category 1 or 2 hazard exists, it must arrange an inspection. If a council considers a category 1 hazard exists it must take the appropriate enforcement action. If there is a category 2 hazard, the Council has the power to take enforcement action.
8. Enforcement action includes serving an improvement notice, instructing the owner what work must be done to put the property right. If the owner does not do the work, the Council can do the work in default and charge the owner the cost of this.

Homelessness

9. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan (PHP). (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
10. A person is to be considered homeless if they do not have accommodation that they are entitled to occupy, which is accessible and physically available to them (and their household) and which it would be reasonable for them to continue to live in. (Housing Act 1996, section 175)
11. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help the applicants to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. This is called the prevention duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
12. The prevention duty comes to an end after 56 days or sooner in some circumstances (such as the applicant becomes homeless, accommodation becomes available etc). The Council must notify the applicant in writing that the duty has ended.
13. The Council can extend the prevention stage where it considers there is still a chance homelessness could be prevented.
14. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is known as the relief duty. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
15. 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 the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
16. 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. 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)

What happened

Property disrepair and the homelessness application

17. Mr B lives in private rented property with his young family. He asked the Council for help with his housing because the house was in poor condition. The Council visited the property and in May 2022 it served improvement notices. It also found the family were overcrowded. The notices say that in category one there is excess cold from rotting windows. In category two there are hazards from:
• extensive mould to the living room, bedroom, bathroom and kitchen, and rot to the window frames;
• electrical hazard;
• a hole in the kitchen ceiling; and
• lack of a smoke alarm.
18. The Council had to serve notice on the agents to get the landlord’s contact details. In June, the Council tried to contact the landlord who it understands lives abroad. The landlord did not reply to the Council.
19. In July, the Council acknowledged that the family was living with a category one hazard and there was little prospect of repair. It asked its housing department how it could assist the family with housing now.
20. In October 2022, the Council served a further notice to the letting agent and was given the landlord’s address. In November, the Council wrote to the landlord’s address abroad. It also sought quotes to do the work in default if needed.
21. At the end of November, unable to progress improvement works via the landlord, the Council decided that Mr B’s family was threatened with homelessness and it accepted that it owed him a prevention duty. The Council offered Mr B a property in mid-December but Mr B could not afford the rent.
22. In January, the Council moved Mr B’s family to interim accommodation. Mr B, his wife and children sleep in the same room. But they have their own kitchen and bathroom and do not have to share these. The parents, and each of the children have their own beds. The Council says it is now trying to get quotes to complete the work needed to the property.
23. In December, the Council had revoked the earlier Improvement Notice and served a new one on the address abroad. In January 2023, the Council contacted contractors to progress quotes to do the work.
24. In March 2023, the Council accepted a relief duty and sent Mr B the PHP, and its assessment of his housing circumstances.
25. To date, Mr B’s family continue to live in one room with one window that opens onto the communal bins. He says there is great pressure on the family which is causing a great deal of friction.

Complaint handling

26. Mr B submitted complaint forms to the Council in May and August 2022. It did not acknowledge the first complaint. Mr B followed his second complaint with a telephone call. The Council acknowledged this complaint and passed it to the service department to deal with. It told him that it was not dealing with this under the complaint process.
27. Mr B’s MP contacted the Council in May and July. The Council says this too was not a complaint and was processed as a member’s enquiry.
28. The Council did not respond to Mr B’s August complaint and so he complained to the Ombudsman. The Council did not accept a formal complaint until 16 October 2022.
29. The Council responded on 4 November. It said that the Council was aware of his situation and it had told him to look in the private rented sector. It also noted that it had received the additional medical information about his child’s ill health. It did not uphold his complaint but said the Council would consider the medical information and let him know its decision. Mr B had submitted a letter from his GP saying that there may well be a link between his son’s respiratory problems and the mould in the property, and that this could impact on the heart.
30. Mr B asked the Council to consider his complaint at stage two of its procedure. It responded on 16 December. It said:
• The Council told Mr B that it was still at the prevention stage and he should continue to look for accommodation in the private rental sector.
• He should use the money he had saved from withholding rent to pay for the improvements to the property.
• The Council had already advised him that he needed to reduce his loan repayments so he can afford to pay rent, and it referred him to an organisation to help with this.
• It had not received medical information for his son.
• It had kept in contact with him.

Was there fault by the Council causing Mr B and his family injustice?

31. The Council acted in good time initially. It inspected the house and served the relevant enforcement notice. I realise that the landlord lived abroad and did not in any case cooperate with the Council. However, there was no action by the Council between June and November, despite that it knew that Mr B and his family were living with category one and two hazards.
32. Once the Council had attempted and failed to contact the landlord, it should have assessed whether it was reasonable to expect the family to continue to live in that property, or whether the Council owed any homelessness duties. Hazards and overcrowding do not mean a council will always find that it is not reasonable for a family to stay in a property. However, in this case, the Council eventually found that it owed the family homelessness duties. This means that had the Council acted without delay, the Council could have accepted these duties sooner.
33. I have also taken into account that the Council had to re-serve the notices in November when it established the landlord’s postal address. However, by this time it should have assessed the family’s housing situation alongside the enforcement action, it having become clear that the landlord would not be removing the housing hazards within a reasonable time frame.
34. There is no evidence that the Council has specifically taken into account that the house had damp and mould and that the youngest had a heart condition. It said on 4 November that it would investigate the impact on him. However, the Council knew about the damp and mould, and the children’s health from the outset.
35. The Council did not move the family to interim accommodation until November, but again had the Council assessed the family as potentially homeless without delay, it could have moved them sooner.
36. The Council has told Mr B to look for housing in the private rented sector. It did not notify Mr B that it had accepted a prevention duty or send him his PHP. It has not sent any evidence that it has assisted Mr B to find suitable property. It has not shown for example that it has tried to identify properties, negotiated with landlords, or discussed with Mr B whether he is entitled to help with the deposit or rent in advance. The Council extended the prevention duty, almost doubling the 56 days. The Council did not notify Mr B that it had extended the prevention duty or explain why. All this is fault by the Council.
37. In response to my investigation, the Council has acknowledged that its advice that Mr B should pay for the work was wrong. The Council has also acknowledged that it took too long to process the homelessness application, and that this caused unnecessary uncertainty for Mr B and his family. The Council is reorganising its housing service and has appointed new senior management.
38. The Council can differentiate between complaints and service requests, and refer the latter to the service department to see if they can be resolved without resorting to a formal complaints process. However, in this case Mr B had already made one complaint and his MP had made two enquiries. For this reason, the Council was wrong to treat Mr B’s second complaint made in July 2022, as a service request. In addition, its stage one complaint response is inadequate because it fails to address whether the Council should have assessed Mr B’s homelessness.
39. The Council’s delay caused Mr B and his family to stay in unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary. It also caused him uncertainty. Mr B wants the Council to move him from his current interim accommodation. However, the relief duty does not require the Council to offer him social housing. At the time of my investigation, the relief duty had not ended. Although the family is sharing a room, and I can see this puts pressure on the family, they have their own kitchen and bathroom. There is no clear indication that the Council has failed to make sure the family has suitable interim accommodation.

Back to top

Agreed action

40. The Council will within one month of the date of this decision:
• Apologise to Mr B for the faults identified;
• Pay to Mr B a symbolic payment of £1,000 in recognition that his family spent longer in unsuitable property than they would have done had the Council moved them in around July, rather than five months later in January;
• Pay to Mr B a symbolic payment of £250 in respect of distress and uncertainty, and additional time and trouble, when it did not explain its actions to Mr B or handle his complaints properly:
• Share this decision with the relevant staff.
41. The Council will within three months of the date of this decision review its practices and guidance to staff on when to refer a complaint as a service request and when to process this under the complaints procedure, so that complainants can access this. The Council will show how it has communicated this to the relevant staff.
42. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

43. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council causing injustice to Mr B and his family.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman