Summary: the Council was at fault for making four unsuitable offers of accommodation to Miss X. This caused her avoidable distress, inconvenience and disappointment. It was also fault to place Miss X and her children in unsuitable interim accommodation for five weeks. This had an impact on her sons’ wellbeing and Miss X’s mental health.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained that the Council placed her family in unsuitable interim accommodation in a hotel with no cooking or laundry facilities when she became homeless in August 2022. It also made unsuitable offers of alternative accommodation.
2. Following its investigation of Miss X’s complaint, the Council paid Miss X £350 to recognise it failed to discuss her need for assistance with removal and storage of her belongings. Miss X says this payment covered these costs. But she wants the Council to reimburse the extra costs of buying takeaway meals for her family while they were in the B&B hotel for five weeks. She said sharing a room for five weeks was very difficult and particularly affected her eldest son, who has autism, because he needs privacy and space. She said the unsuitable offers and time spent in the B&B hotel caused her mental health to deteriorate. She would like an additional financial remedy for this.

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 have spoken to Miss X and considered all the information she provided. I have considered the Council’s comments along with relevant case records and correspondence.
6. I gave Miss X and the Council an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The relevant law

7. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance (“the Code”) for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
8. Section 6.35 of the Code says:

“The Secretary of State considers that where an applicant is:

(a) an assured shorthold tenant who has received a valid notice in accordance with section 21 of the Housing Act 1988;

(b) the housing authority is satisfied that the landlord intends to seek possession and further efforts from the housing authority to resolve the situation and persuade the landlord to allow the tenant to remain in the property are unlikely to be successful; and,

(c) there would be no defence to an application for a possession order;

then it is unlikely to be reasonable for the applicant to continue to occupy beyond the expiry of a valid section 21 notice, unless the housing authority is taking steps to persuade the landlord to allow the tenant to continue to occupy the accommodation for a reasonable period to provide an opportunity for alternative accommodation to be found.”

9. A council must secure accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
10. If a council is satisfied an applicant is unintentionally 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.  This duty applies to interim and temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
12. Councils should avoid using bed and breakfast accommodation. It should only be used as a last resort in an emergency and then for the shortest time possible. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.24 and from 3 April 2018 17.30)
13. Bed and breakfast (B&B) accommodation can only be used for households which include a pregnant woman or dependent child when there is no other accommodation available and then for no more than six weeks. At the time of the events in this complaint, B&B was defined as accommodation which is not self-contained, not owned by the council or a registered provider of social housing and where the toilet, washing, or cooking facilities are shared with other households. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 and from 3 April 2018 Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.32)
14. With effect from 31 May 2023 the Order was amended to make it clear that accommodation with no cooking facilities, as well as shared facilities, is B&B.

Background

15. Miss X and her two teenage sons lived in a two bedroom private rented flat in the borough. Her eldest son has autism and can behave aggressively and be argumentative. He is prescribed medication to help him sleep. Miss X has severe and long-term anxiety and depression.
16. Miss X’s flat was affected by damp and mould and other defects. There was a cockroach infestation. The Council’s Environmental Health Service had issued a schedule of remedial works to the landlord.
17. Miss X contacted the Housing Service for assistance in early March 2022 when her landlord served a Section 21 Notice to terminate her tenancy. An officer completed the initial housing assessment on 14 March. On 22 March he told Miss X the Section 21 Notice was not valid because it was not in the correct form.
18. In late May 2022 Miss X sent the Council a new Section 21 Notice and other documents. The Council accepted the homelessness prevention duty on 30 June 2022 because Miss X was threatened with homelessness. The Section 21 Notice was valid and the landlord had sent all the other required documents. The Notice said Miss X had to leave the property by 24 July.
19. On 30 June the case officer completed a referral to the Council’s Procurement team to look for private rented sector accommodation. It accepted the referral on 5 July. In response to my enquiries, the Council said there were no larger properties available in the private rented sector at this time. It told me that staff in its Procurement team contact between 300 and 500 letting agents every month to find out if they have any properties to let. The Council has invested in more staff and reviewed its publicity material for landlords but it is still extremely difficult to procure properties in the current competitive private rental market.
20. On 4 July 2022 the Council sent Miss X a copy of the housing assessment and a Personalised Housing Plan (PHP). Among other steps it agreed to take, it said the Council would make a referral to its Private Rented Sector (PRS) team to help Miss X look for alternative accommodation and provide financial assistance to secure a tenancy. It also advised Miss X to search for private rented properties herself and to register for social housing.
21. Two days later, an officer sent Miss X an information pack about how to register for social housing and other housing options, including how to search for private rented accommodation.
22. In mid-July Miss X’s case officer contacted the Procurement team to ask if they had any suitable three bedroom properties for Miss X. The officer told him some three bedroom properties in Wandsworth were about to come through. The case officer passed this information on to Miss X’s sister when she called on her behalf.
23. By mid-July the Council’s Medical Adviser had recommended Miss X needed a three bedroom property. Her sons could not share a bedroom due to the behavioural issues arising from her eldest son’s autism.
24. On 5 August Miss X said she was struggling to find private rented accommodation The case officer contacted the Procurement team to ask if they had any suitable properties available for Miss X.
25. On 10 August Miss X’s sister reported that Miss X’s flat had suffered extensive damage from flooding. She sent video evidence showing the damp and disrepair.
26. On 11 August the case officer contacted Miss X to ask if she wished to move to interim accommodation. He decided it was not reasonable to expect her to stay in the flat due to the disrepair, her son’s needs and her own mental health issues.

Offers of accommodation and the B&B placement

27. Between 12 and 18 August Miss X discussed with Council officers when she wished to move into interim accommodation. She said she would like accommodation from 19 August. On 18 August she contacted the Council to postpone this until 26 August after she returned from a family holiday.
28. On 18 August 2022 the Council ended the prevention duty and accepted the relief duty. It decided Miss X was homeless because it was not reasonable for her continue to occupy the flat.
29. On 25 August the Council offered Miss X Property 1, a two bedroom flat in the borough, as interim accommodation. She refused it because the only access to the flat was from an external staircase across a roof terrace. She felt this was unsafe for her children. The Council accepted her reasons and withdrew the offer. On 26 August Miss X said she and her sons would stay temporarily with her mother over the Bank Holiday weekend. They slept on mattresses on the floor.
30. The Council then offered Miss X a private sector leased property in Wandsworth on 25 August, Property 2. The managing agent told the Temporary Accommodation team the property was ready for occupation. But following further discussions with the managing agent it became apparent the flat was not ready and the managing agent withdrew it.
31. As the Council had not found suitable accommodation, it booked Miss X and her sons into a B&B hotel from 31 August. They shared a family room and had their own bathroom but there were no cooking facilities.
32. Miss X had a kettle in the room. She asked the hotel management for permission to bring her own microwave but this was refused. The hotel provided items for a cold daily breakfast. Miss X says she incurred significant costs buying takeaway meals because she could not cook hot meals for her family. She also said there were no laundry facilities in the hotel which resulted in extra costs and inconvenience.
33. Miss X works in the borough and her eldest son, who has autism and special educational needs, attends a local secondary school. He was in the first year of GCSE studies. For these reasons, they needed accommodation within a reasonable travelling distance of her workplace and her eldest son’s school. Her youngest son attends a secondary school in a nearby London borough. Miss X confirmed that the B&B hotel was close to public transport routes to her place of work and her sons’ schools and the journey time was manageable.
34. Miss X said it was particularly difficult for her eldest son, who has autism, to share a family room with her and his brother because he needs privacy and his own space. He was also badly affected by the disruption to his usual routines. Sometimes he went to stay with his grandmother where he slept on an inflatable mattress in the living room.
35. Miss X told me that living in these difficult conditions caused her anxiety and depression to get worse. She was signed off work because of her increasing anxiety. She has since returned to work on reduced hours.
36. In late August the Council offered Miss X Property 3, in the south of the borough, some distance away from her workplace and her sons’ schools. Miss X says she could not view the property because the letting agent did not have the keys. According to the Council’s case notes, she said she did not feel safe there because she overheard men outside the property making threatening comments. She was not sure if these threats were directed at her or someone in their group. Miss X says the Council informed her on 6 September it was withdrawing the offer because of a dispute with the landlord.
37. On 6 September the Council offered Miss X Property 4. This was in another South London borough. The Council withdrew this offer when Miss X raised concerns about the distance, and long journey on public transport, from the property to her son’s school.
38. On 13 September the Council offered Miss X Property 5, a private sector leased property. It showed as a two bedroom property on the Council’s database. Miss X knew the property was smaller than she needed but was keen to view it because it was in her preferred area of the borough and she had been in B&B for two weeks by then. When she viewed the property on 20 September, she found it had only one bedroom. The Council says it had made an error when recording the property details on its database. It withdrew the offer.
39. In mid-September Miss X sent letters from her GP and the Special Educational Needs Co-ordinator at her eldest son’s school confirming his need to live close to the school with a short journey time. Miss X’s GP also said that due to her mental health issues, Miss X relied on support from members of her family who lived in the north of the borough.
40. Miss X says that, due to the Council’s failure to renew her room booking in time, she had to move to another B&B hotel in a neighbouring borough for one night in late September. She received a text message on 23 September to say she had to leave her room the next morning. The Temporary Accommodation team explained they had booked her a room in a hotel in a neighbouring London borough. She returned to the first hotel the following day.

41. Miss X said she had told an officer about the need to renew the room booking when she went to the Council’s office on 21 September. She says she was told not to worry and it would be sorted out.

42. Miss X’s sons were staying with their father that weekend so they were not affected by the disruption. But Miss X had to remove all their belongings from the hotel room. The hotel staff let her store everything in the hotel laundry room because they knew she would return the next day. She took an overnight bag to the other hotel and waited until 3:00pm to check in to her room.

43. The Council says it requested an extension of Miss X’s room booking one day before it expired. As no rooms were available, Miss X had to move to another hotel for one night. The Council said the availability of rooms in the hotel cannot be guaranteed and this was outside its control.

44. As the B&B was interim accommodation, Miss X could not request a statutory review of the suitability of the accommodation. But she did complain to the Council on 29 September and set out her concerns about the unsuitability of the B&B accommodation. She said it was stressful and expensive to live in the hotel without access to cooking and laundry facilities. She said this was taking its toll on her and her sons. Her GP had increased her anti-depressant medication, she was not sleeping properly and she had been signed off sick from work.
45. The Council then offered Miss X a three bedroom private sector leased property in the borough. Miss X accepted this property and moved in on 3 October. By then she had been in the B&B hotel for just under five weeks.
46. In early November 2022 the Council accepted the main housing duty. Miss X told me she has since been granted the tenancy of the property she had been occupying as temporary accommodation.
47. When it replied to her complaint, the Council accepted it had made unsuitable offers of accommodation to Miss X. It paid her £350 because it accepted officers had not discussed options to help with removal and storage costs. But it said it had no duty to meet the extra costs Miss X incurred on takeaway meals and laundry while she was staying in the hotel.

My analysis

48. By the end of June 2022 the Council knew Miss X had received a valid Section 21 Notice requiring her to leave the property by 22 July. In the event Miss X stayed at the property until 19 August beyond the expiry date in the Notice.
49. From the records I have seen, it seems the Council did not consider the advice in paragraph 6.35 of the Code and decide whether it was reasonable for her to remain in the property after 22 July. This section of the Code seems to apply to Miss X’s circumstances. She was an assured shorthold tenant who had been served with a valid Section 21 Notice. The case records do not indicate the case officer contacted the landlord to ask if Miss X could stay in the property until alternative accommodation was found. The landlord seemed to be intent on recovering possession of the property.
50. If the Council had considered the advice in the Code, and started searching for a property sooner, officers would have had longer to look for suitable interim accommodation. We do not know whether the Council would have found a suitable self-contained three-bedroom property in the right area of the borough if it had started looking sooner. So there is uncertainty about whether this would have avoided the need to place Miss X in the hotel in August. I recognise Miss X had a very specific need for a property within easy travelling distance to her eldest son’s school and this restricted the options. But the Council’s apparent failure to consider the advice in the Code, and consider searching for a property sooner, was fault.

Unsuitable offers of accommodation

51. The records show the Council did make efforts to find self-contained accommodation for Miss X in August and September 2022. It made five offers of accommodation between 25 August and 13 September 2022. However only the final offer met Miss X’s assessed needs for accommodation with three bedrooms within a reasonable travelling distance of her eldest son’s school. The other four properties were unsuitable. Properties 1 and 4 were too small: one had only one bedroom and the other had two bedrooms. The Council had accepted the Medical Adviser’s recommendation that the family needed three bedrooms. Property 4 was out of the borough and too far from her eldest son’s school. Property 2 was not ready for occupation. When it replied to Miss X’s complaint, the Council accepted the first four offers were unsuitable and offered an apology. In response to my draft decision, the Council said it did not knowingly make unsuitable offers and made them in good faith at the time.
52. I accept the Council did not knowingly or intentionally make unsuitable offers. Nevertheless, it was still fault to make offers of accommodation which did not meet Miss X’s assessed needs. If there had been only one or two unsuitable offers, which were quickly withdrawn, an apology might be enough. However, Miss X received four consecutive offers of unsuitable accommodation in a little over three weeks. This caused her inconvenience and wasted her time viewing properties which were clearly unsuitable for her needs. It also raised her hopes and caused disappointment. She had to explain to her sons each time a property proved to be unsuitable that they would have to remain in the hotel and this upset them. I have recommended a symbolic payment for the distress this caused.

B&B placement

53. The Council faces considerable pressures to source suitable accommodation for homeless households and ever increasing demand. The law and the Homelessness Code of Guidance is clear that B&B accommodation should only be used as a last resort in an emergency when no other accommodation is available. For families with dependent children, there is a legal limit of six weeks on the length of time they can stay in a B&B.
54. On 26 August Miss X told the Council they could stay with her mother over the weekend. But she was not offered hotel accommodation until 31 August. It is not clear why she was not contacted with an offer of accommodation on 30 August immediately after the Bank Holiday weekend. The delay in offering accommodation was fault. As a result Miss X and her sons slept on mattresses on the floor for an extra night.
55. Miss X and her sons then stayed for just under five weeks in the hotel. Although the hotel had no cooking facilities, it was not defined as B&B accommodation under the Order in force at the time. The Order was not amended to specifically include hotels with no cooking facilities until 31 May 2023. So Miss X’s stay in the hotel was not in breach of the Order.
56. However the Council has a legal duty under Section 206 of the Act to ensure that interim accommodation is suitable for the specific needs of the applicant and members of their household. When it placed Miss X in the hotel, it properly considered the location which was an important aspect of suitability. The hotel was within reasonable travelling distance to her eldest son’s school.
57. But I have seen no evidence that the Council considered other factors relevant to the suitability assessment. In particular, there is no evidence that the Council considered whether sharing a family room in a B&B hotel was a suitable arrangement when Miss X’s eldest son has challenging behaviour and sleep difficulties because of his autism. It was fault not to make a holistic assessment of all their needs and consider other factors as well as the location of the property.
58. If the Council had properly considered the family’s needs, it may have decided this accommodation was suitable for Miss X in the short term. However, there is nothing in the case records to show it applied its mind to this question and reached a view on the suitability of a shared family room for Miss X and her children. That was fault.
59. We cannot question a Council’s decision if it is made without fault. However, in this case, we found fault in the failure to properly consider the suitability of a shared room for the family before making the placement. The initial housing assessment and PHP referred to the eldest son’s autism, anger management issues and sleeping difficulties. By late July the Council knew the Medical Adviser had recommended separate bedrooms for Miss X’s sons. On the balance of probabilities, if the Council had considered this properly, it is unlikely to have decided a shared family room in a hotel was suitable accommodation. For these reasons, I have found fault.
60. I understand it was very inconvenient and stressful for Miss X to pack up her family’s belongings and move to another hotel for one night in September. She believes this would not have happened if the Council had extended the booking sooner. But we do not know whether the room would have been available if the Council had tried to renew the booking sooner. The Council does not make long-term bookings of hotel accommodation for homeless families so it is possible the hotel would still have been fully booked and the move was unavoidable.

Back to top

Agreed action

61. Within one month of my final decision, the Council will:
• Arrange for a senior manager to apologise in writing to Miss X for the injustice caused by the faults found in this investigation;
• Make a symbolic payment of £150 to recognise the avoidable distress and inconvenience caused when it made four unsuitable offers of accommodation to Miss X;
• Pay an additional £750 to recognise the impact on Miss X and her family of placing them in a shared family room in a hotel for almost five weeks. This payment is £150 per week in line with our published guidance on remedies for unsuitable B&B placements;

This brings the total financial remedy to £900.

• Issue a written note to remind officers:
1. to consider all relevant factors, including any needs arising from the health needs or disability of the household members, when they decide if a placement is suitable for the applicant and their household; and
2. to accurately record property descriptions on the database to avoid making unsuitable offers of accommodation to applicants.
4. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

63. I have completed the investigation and found the Council was at fault and this caused injustice to Miss X and her family.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman