Summary: We found fault in the way the Council ensured the accommodation offered to the complainant (Ms X) when carrying out its main housing duty was in the right state of repair. This caused Ms X injustice. The Council agreed to apologise to Ms X, carry out a joint inspection of her accommodation if there are still any outstanding repairs and make a distress payment for Ms X.

The complaint

1. Ms X says the Council failed to ensure repairs were done to the property offered her by the Council as a temporary accommodation.
2. Ms X says the negative impact of the Council’s alleged failings on her and her family included:
• compromised security of her accommodation;
• her children being put at risk of harm;
• inconvenience;
• distress;
• time and trouble spent on chasing the repairs and complaining.

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

3. I investigated the matters which were raised with and dealt by the Council through its corporate complaint process. All other matters are premature at this stage as the Council should have an opportunity to respond to any issues before we look at them.
4. In her comments to my draft decision Ms X told me she asked the Council for a suitability review of her property and the Council recently decided the property was not suitable. I did not investigate any matters about Ms X’s suitability review as this was not part of her complaint to us.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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)
6. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), as amended)
7. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
8. 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

9. I spoke with Ms X and considered the information she provided.
10. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
11. Ms X 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

Law

12. Where an applicant is unintentionally homeless, eligible for assistance and has a priority need for accommodation, the housing authority has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193(2))
13. 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)

Key facts

14. The Council accepted a main housing duty to Ms X in October 2010.
15. In April 2022 the Council offered Ms X her current property as her previous temporary accommodation was requested back by the landlord. She accepted this offer and moved there in April 2022.
16. On 26 April Ms X sent the Council a list of repairs necessary in her new accommodation, which included:
• faulty locks in the front door;
• damaged front gate;
• broken bricks in front of the house;
• one hotplate on the hob not working;
• oven leaking;
• broken stair banister;
• faulty plug switches in the property;
• disordered garden.
17. Two days later Ms X contacted the Housing Supply manager, who advised on the correct process for reporting repair issues. The Housing Supply manager asked the Council’s Temporary Accommodation (TA) team to ensure Ms X’s front door can be locked securely. From this point Ms X communicated with the TA team.
18. In response to the Council’s query on 6 May the agents managing Ms X’s property for the private landlord (Agents) said:
• Ms X’s front door was repaired and working well. A contractor visited within an hour on the day it was first reported.
• Problems with heating were registered and on the same day somebody would visit the property.
19. Three days later the Agents confirmed the heating was repaired and working.
20. Throughout May Ms X contacted the Council a few times, asking for a telephone call and raising the issues of the oven and the non-working hotplate.
21. At the end of May Ms X confirmed to the Council she received a new oven but all the packaging and the old oven were left in the front garden. She stressed it was not her responsibility to remove the shed which was in a shabby state and not safe. Ms X also reported a bathroom sink tap needing repair.
22. Responding to the Council’s request for an urgent update the Agents explained the landlord refused to remove the shed as it came with the property and was used by the previous tenants. The landlord refused to replace the whole hob but confirmed it would arrange for the non-working hotplate to be repaired.
23. In the second week of June Ms X complained about the way the Council handled the repairs in her temporary accommodation.
24. Following the telephone conversation with Ms X, the TA team arranged a joint inspection of Ms X’s accommodation with the Agents present. This took place a few days later and the agreed action plan included:
• Removal of the shed and its content;
• Repairing the non-working hotplate or replacing the whole hob;
• Supplying and fitting a doorbell;
• Ensuring removal of the rubbish from Ms X’s garden left by the contractors;
• Providing timeframes for the agreed actions with the aim not to exceed 14 days.
25. After a chasing correspondence from Ms X, at the end of June the Agents told the Council:
• the shed and the rubbish were removed;
• the doorbell would be fitted on the following day;
26. On 7 July the Council asked the Agents for an update about the hob. It also told the Agents that if they failed to make the hob fully working within seven days, the Council would start withholding rent for the property.
27. In its stage two response to Ms X’s complaint in the beginning of August the Council apologised for the delay in completing some repairs. It confirmed everything had been completed apart from closing a gap in the garden fence. Although the Council accepted there were delays with repairing the hotplate, replacing the oven, removing the shed and a short delay with repairing the front door, it said it continued to actively chase the Agents to complete repairs. The Council disagreed with Ms X’s assertion it had ignored her communication until she complained.

Analysis

28. The Council offered Ms X her accommodation in April 2022 as a temporary accommodation when carrying out its main housing duty. The property is privately owned and managed. In its response to my draft decision the Council explained Ms X should first tell the landlord’s managing agents of any disrepairs. She should only contact the Council when the Agents fail to carry out necessary repairs. The Council remains, however, responsible for ensuring the property is suitable, safe and in the right order.
29. In its response to our enquiries the Council told us there are three categories of housing repairs:
• Priority A – should be made safe within two hours with the maximum time for completion of 24 hours;
• Priority B – with the maximum time for completion of five working days;
• Priority C – with the maximum time for completion of 28 working days.
30. Out of repair works first reported by Ms X:
• Ensuring full security of the front door fell into the priority A group - accepted by the Council;
• Restoring heating fell into the priority B group – no record of the Council’s position on the timescales for completing heating repairs but specifically included in the priority B housing repair document provided by the Council;
• All other repair works fell into the priority C group.
31. The Council accepted there were some delays with securing Ms X’s front door and replacing her oven. It also accepted a significant, over four weeks, delay to make Ms X’s hob fully functional.
32. Although in its stage two response the Council did not accept its responsibility for removing the shed, this action was agreed during a joint inspection meeting in June 2022. Ms X’s considered the shed posed risk to her children and in view of its content possibly presented infestation hazard. The fact the removal was agreed and with no evidence to the contrary, on balance I consider ensuring this happened was also the Council’s responsibility.
33. Records of the correspondence between the TA team and the Agents show the Council tried to resolve the disrepair issues for Ms X. Some of its communication, however, was only in response to Ms X’s prompts and reminders rather than a part of its own monitoring process.
34. In its comments to my draft decision the Council explained it had a system in place to monitor repairs in temporary accommodations and provided relevant evidence.

Fault and injustice

35. The Council failed to:
• ensure completion of the repair works in Ms X’s accommodation within the set timescales;
• robustly check progress and completion of the house repairs.
36. The Council’s failings amount to fault, which caused Ms X and her family injustice by:
• compromising security of her accommodation;
• posing risk to her children’s safety;
• not allowing her full use of the facilities.
37. The need to continue contacting the Council to get things done took much time and trouble and caused Ms X distress.

Back to top

Agreed action

38. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, we recommend the Council within four weeks of my final decision complete the following:
• send a written apology to Ms X;
• if within two weeks from the final decision Ms X tells the Council of any outstanding repair works and provides the list of these, the Council will carry out a joint inspection of Ms X’s accommodation with the Agents managing the property for the landlord to identify all outstanding repairs and set timescales for their completion. The Council will send us a report from this inspection which will include the timescales.
• pay Ms X £150 to acknowledge her distress and the extra time and trouble necessary to pursue her complaint;

Back to top

Final decision

39. I uphold this complaint. As faults identified caused Ms X injustice I have made recommendations. The Council has accepted my recommendations so this investigation is now at an end.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman