Summary: Miss B complained the Council delayed making a referral to Council 2 to see if it would accept the homelessness duties owed to her. She also complained the Council failed to deal with a mice infestation in her temporary accommodation. Miss B said this caused her distress and impacted her mental health. We found the Council delayed referring Miss B to Council 2 and failed to take effective action to resolve the mice infestation. The Council has agreed to make a payment to Miss B to remedy the injustice caused by its faults.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss B, complained the Council delayed making a referral to Council 2 to see if it would accept the homelessness duties owed to her. She also complained the Council failed to deal with a mice infestation in her temporary accommodation.
2. Miss B said this caused her distress and impacted her mental health.

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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future 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:
• Miss B’s complaint and the information she provided;
• documents supplied by the Council;
• relevant legislation and guidelines; and
• the Council’s policies and procedures.
6. Miss B and the Council were invited to comment on a draft decision. Their comments were considered before making this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and Guidance

7. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code) set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
8. 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)
9. 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)
10. Accommodation is not suitable if it falls below certain minimum standards. The Council must have regard to the standards set in the Housing Act 2004. The Homelessness Code of Guidance recommends that any accommodation should, as a minimum, be free of category 1 hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Category 1 hazards can result from access into, and harbourage within, the home for pests. Councils should consider a building’s condition and risks to the health and safety of occupiers.
11. Applicants can ask for the Council to review the suitability of temporary accommodation. This carries a right of appeal to county court on a point of law.
12. If a council’s inquiries under section 184(2) of the Housing Act 1996 find an applicant has a local connection with the district of another council in England, Wales or Scotland, section 198 of the Housing Act 1996 allows it (‘the notifying authority’) to refer a case to another council (‘the notified authority’) at the point of the relief duty or main housing duty. Referrals are discretionary only. Councils are not required to refer applicants to other councils. 

Council complaint procedure

13. The Council has a two-stage complaint procedure:
14. Stage one: a senior officer from the service complained about or an appointee will oversee an investigation, which will focus on resolving the issue(s) raised. The Council aims to respond to this stage within an average of 15 working days.
15. Stage two: the complaint is investigated by a team independent of the service complained about who form part of the Chief Executive’s Office, or an appointee. The Council aims to respond at this stage within an average of 20 working days.

What happened

16. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
17. Miss B made a homelessness application in July 2020. In December 2020, the Council accepted the main housing duty and provided temporary accommodation. In July 2021, Miss B had to flee her temporary accommodation because of domestic abuse. The Council moved her into temporary accommodation in Council 2’s area. The property is privately owned and managed by an agent.
18. Between November 2021 and May 2022, Miss B reported an issue with mice in her temporary accommodation to the managing agent. The managing agent arranged for poison and traps to be laid but this did not resolve the issue. The manging agent told the landlord entry points behind the kitchen units needed to be blocked.
19. In May 2022, Miss B told the Council there was a mice infestation in her temporary accommodation. She said she told the managing agent, and pest control had attended three times, but she still had mice. The Council contacted the managing agent. The managing agent told the Council it had arranged for pest control to treat the property.
20. In June 2022, the Council inspected the property. Miss B told the Council she was still having problems with mice. The Council raised this with the managing agent. It said pest control had visited the property and it was going to put mice bait and poison in the kitchen.
21. Miss B raised the problem with the mice with the Council again in July 2022. The Council contacted the managing agent. It said it had arranged for its maintenance team to block the holes where the mice were thought to be entering the property. The work was completed in August 2022.
22. The managing agent inspected the property in August 2022 and found no problems.
23. In September 2022, Miss B reported problems with mice to the Council. The Council contacted the managing agent. The managing agent said it had carried out an inspection of Miss B’s property in August 2022 and not found any issues. The Council inspected Miss B’s property. That morning the managing agent’s maintenance team had sealed a hole Miss B was concerned about. Miss B told the Council she had not had any problems with mice since the maintenance team blocked the holes in August 2022.
24. The managing agent inspected the property in November 2022. Miss B raised issues with mice. The managing agent got a quote to remove the kitchen units to block the hole thought to be an entry point for mice. It spoke to Miss B’s landlord. He said he would try and block the holes without removing the units. Miss B also raised her concerns with the Council.
25. In December 2022, Miss B told the Council she was still having problems with mice. The Council asked the managing agent to get pest control to attend. The managing agent told the Council pest control had been out and this had not resolved the issue. It said there was a hole at the back of Miss B’s kitchen units that needed to be blocked and the kitchen units would need to be removed to do this. It said it had asked a contractor to do the work.
26. In February 2023, Miss B told the Council her landlord said she should ask to be moved because he did not want to pay for the kitchen units to be taken out. She told the Council moving was not the best thing for her. The Council contacted the managing agent. It said Miss B was still having problems with mice. The managing agent summarised the action it had taken and said there was still one hole that needed to be blocked.
27. Miss B told the Council in March 2023, the holes had been blocked but there must be other entry points because she still had mice. She told the Council she had a young child and was worried about them eating mice droppings. She said it was a health and safety issue.
28. In April and May 2023, the Council chased Miss B’s managing agent to see if it had undertaken the outstanding work.
29. The managing agent inspected the property in May 2023. Miss B did not report any problems with mice. The agent told the Council it had inspected Miss B’s property and she did not report any problems. The Council asked the managing agent to visit the property to address Miss B’s concerns about mice.
30. In June 2023, pest control visited the property. It confirmed all points of entry for the mice had been blocked apart from one behind the washing machine. Pest control arranged with Miss B to return to block this hole. Pest control said it found no mice activity during its visit and said this suggested a satisfactory level of pest control.
31. When I spoke to Miss B in September 2023, she said she was still getting mice in the property. She confirmed the issue remained in her response to the draft decision.

Referral

32. Miss B emailed the mayor’s office in November 2022. It responded in December 2022. It advised as her homeless application was for the London Borough of Hackney she could only bid for social housing within the borough. It said Hackney Council did not own any social housing properties outside the borough. It said the Council had given her information about the options available. These were:
• End her homelessness application with Hackney and make a new application to another council.
• The Council could make a referral to Council 2. This referral would be to see if Council 2 would accept the homelessness duties owed to her.
• Access support from the Council to secure private rented accommodation.
• Look for accommodation on Homefinder and HomeHunt.
33. It said unfortunately, the options available to help her to move into another London Borough under homelessness legislation were minimal.
34. In January 2023, Miss B told the Council she wanted it to make a referral to Council 2. The Council made a referral to Council 2 in May 2023. It explained Miss B wanted to be referred to Council 2 because she had family in the area. It said she had been living in Council 2 in temporary accommodation since July 2021. It advised she could not return to Hackney because of domestic abuse. It gave Council 2 Miss B’s contact information. In June 2023, Council 2 said it was not willing to accept the referral. It said it had accepted Miss B onto its housing register.

Complaint

35. Miss B complained to the Council in January 2023. She said she had not been contacted by a housing officer for about two years and she felt like she had just been left. She said the mayor’s office told her the Council would make a referral to Council 2, but she had not heard anything since.
36. The Council responded to Miss B’s complaint at stage one in March 2023. It said it was aware she reported a mice infestation. It said it was told by her landlord the issue was resolved in September 2022 by blocking the entry. It said it was concerned she was still experiencing issues with mice in her temporary accommodation, and it had raised this with the managing agent. It told her there was no need to refer her to Council 2. It said she was living in temporary accommodation in Council 2, and she could look for accommodation in the private rented sector. It provided her with a list of websites where she could look for accommodation and said it was happy to help her to secure private rented accommodation.
37. In March 2023, Miss B asked the Council to consider her complaint at stage two. The Council responded in July 2023. It apologised for the delay. The Council:
• Found fault with the time it took for it to make a referral to Council 2. It apologised. It said the delay was because of an oversight by one of its staff.
• Found fault with the time taken by the managing agent of her temporary accommodation to resolve the reported mice infestation. It apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused by the delay. It said it understood all repairs relating to the infestation had been completed. It said although it was the managing agent’s responsibility to deal with the mice infestation, it should have been more proactive in pursuing the matter with the agent.

Analysis

38. My findings are:
39. In accordance with the Council’s homelessness duties, it must ensure that temporary accommodation is suitable even if the accommodation is owned by a private landlord.
40. Miss B raised the issue with mice with the Council in May 2022. Between May and August 2022, the Council raised Miss B’s concerns with the managing agent and the agent acted to resolve the issue. In September 2022, she told the Council she had not had any issues since August 2022. Miss B did not raise concerns about mice again until November 2022. Therefore, it was reasonable for the Council to have considered the matter resolved.
41. When Miss B raised concerns about mice again in November 2022, the Council should have ensured the managing agent took prompt action to resolve the issue. There was a period of delay between the managing agent identifying that holes at the back of Miss B’s kitchen units needed to be blocked and this being done. In its stage two complaint response the Council accepted it should have been more proactive in pursuing her problem with a mice infestation with the managing agent. I found fault with the Council for failing to take effective action to resolve the matter.  This fault caused Miss B injustice. She and her child had to live in mice infested accommodation for several months longer than necessary causing them avoidable distress and inconvenience.
42. When Miss B raised concerns about health and safety in March 2023, the Council should have considered the suitability of the accommodation and told her about her statutory right to request a review of the suitability of the accommodation. The Council did not do either and this was fault. As a result, Miss B lost the opportunity for suitability of her accommodation to be considered.
43. The Council accepted in its stage two complaint response that it delayed referring Miss B to Council 2. Miss B asked the Council to refer her to Council 2 in January 2023 and it did not do so until May 2023. This delay caused Miss B avoidable uncertainty. If she had known the result of the referral sooner, she would have known this option was closed to her earlier.
44. There were Council delays at stage one and two of its complaint procedure. At stage one it took over 20 working days to respond and at stage two it took over 80 working days. These delays caused Miss B injustice because she had to wait longer for the Council to act to resolve her complaint.

Back to top

Agreed action

45. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults I have identified , the Council has agreed to the following recommendations.
46. Within one month of the final decision, the Council will:
• send a written apology to Miss B for the faults found in this investigation. The Council should refer to our guidance on Making an effective apology
• pay Miss B £150 a month for four months in recognition of the avoidable distress and inconvenience she suffered living in accommodation infested with mice for longer than necessary; a total of £600.
• arrange for officers to visit Miss B’s property and ensure the mice infestation has been eradicated. If the mice infestation has not been eradicated, the Council should remind Miss B of her right to request a review of the suitability of her accommodation.
• issue a reminder to relevant staff to ensure they are aware the Council is ultimately responsible for the actions of landlords/agents of temporary accommodation.
• pay Miss B £200 for the avoidable uncertainty caused by the Council’s delay referring her to Council 2.
• pay Miss B £200 for the injustice caused by the Council’s delays responding to her complaint.
47. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

48. The Council was at fault. This fault caused Miss B injustice the Council has agreed to my recommendations to remedy that injustice. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman