Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s failure to house her and her children, one of whom is disabled, in suitable accommodation when she became homeless. There was fault by the Council which meant Miss X and her children lived in unsuitable bed and breakfast accommodation for over six months after they became homeless. Miss X also experienced a financial loss because she had to pay for separate storage for her belongings while waiting for suitable accommodation. The faults also caused avoidable distress, time, and trouble for Miss X. The Council agreed to pay a financial remedy, review relevant processes, and issue reminders and a copy of our decision to its staff.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the Council’s failure to house her and her two children, one of whom is disabled, in suitable accommodation when she became homeless in late 2022. She says the Council:
• failed to properly consider its duties when she reported issues with the condition of her private rented property, and that she was at risk of homelessness because the landlord had given notice to evict her;
• once she became homeless following the eviction, provided unsuitable interim accommodation, which was damaging to her health, and left her family there for longer than it should have;
• agreed to arrange and pay for storage for her belongings but failed to do so; and
• was unhelpful in how it communicated with her, belittled her, and ignored her.
2. Because of this, Miss X says:
• this affected her mental and physical health. She also suffered a financial loss because she had to pay for storage for her belongings;
• one of her children could not study during their GCSEs, which affected their results;
• her youngest child is autistic and did not have enough space to be comfortable and meet their needs; and
• her older children who do not live with her could not visit for family events because the accommodation was a hotel.
3. Miss X wants the Council to:
• provide her family with suitable three-bedroom accommodation which meets the needs of her children and is in a suitable location for their school;
• repay her for the money she spent on storage for her belongings; and
• compensate her for the distress and time and trouble caused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), as amended)
6. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
7. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
8. We may investigate matters coming to our attention during an investigation, if we consider that a member of the public who has not complained may have suffered an injustice as a result. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26D and 34E, as amended)
9. 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

10. I considered:
• information provided by Miss X and her responses to my written queries about the complaint;
• documentation and comments from the Council;
• relevant law and guidance; and
• the Ombudsman’s Guidance on Jurisdiction and Guidance on Remedies.
11. Miss X and the Council had opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Homelessness legislation and statutory guidance

12. 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.

Threatened with homelessness

13. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council on or after 3 April 2018:
• they are likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• they have been served with a valid Section 21 (eviction) notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)

The prevention duty

14. 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. This is called the prevention duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

The relief duty and interim accommodation

15. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. This is called 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)
16. 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)
17. The relief duty ends when the applicant accepts or refuses an offer of accommodation which is suitable and likely to be available for at least 6 months, or, failing this, if 56 days have passed.

The main housing duty and temporary accommodation

18. 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. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)
19. The accommodation a council provides until it can end the main housing duty is called temporary accommodation. If a council ends its interim accommodation duty, but then goes on to accept the main housing duty, it still has a duty to provide temporary accommodation. Interim and temporary accommodation can be the same physical property. What changes is the legal duty under which a council provides it.

Suitability of accommodation

20. 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 (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
21. Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable has a statutory right to ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability within 21 days of being notified of the decision. (Housing Act 1996, section 202). There is no statutory right to review the suitability of interim accommodation.
22. Councils must complete reviews of suitability of temporary accommodation within eight weeks of the date of the review request.
23. If a council’s review decides temporary accommodation is unsuitable, the council must provide suitable accommodation. If the review decides the accommodation is suitable, the applicant has the right to appeal to the county court on a point of law. (Housing Act 1996, section 204)
24. Councils must advise applicants of their right to appeal to the county court on a point of law, and of the period in which to appeal. Applicants can also appeal if the council takes more than the prescribed time to complete the review. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202, 203 and 204)

Bed and breakfast accommodation

25. 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)
26. Bed and breakfast (B&B) accommodation can only be used for households which include a pregnant woman or dependent child when no other accommodation is available and then for no more than six weeks. B&B is 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)

Protection of belongings

27. Where the council owes or has owed certain housing duties to an applicant, it must protect the applicant’s personal property if there is a risk it may be lost or damaged. A council may make a reasonable charge for storage and reserve the right to dispose of the property if it loses contact with the applicant. (Housing Act 1996, section 211, Homelessness Code of Guidance chapter 20)

The Equality Act 2010

28. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. It offers protection in employment, education, the provision of goods and services, housing, transport, and the carrying out of public functions.
29. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010. The ‘protected characteristics’ referred to in the Act are: age; disability; gender reassignment; marriage and civil partnership; pregnancy and maternity; race; religion or belief; sex; and sexual orientation.
30. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act. However, we can find an organisation at fault for failing to take account of its duties under the Equality Act.

Summary of key events

31. In 2021, Miss X lived with two of her children, one of whom is disabled, in privately rented accommodation. She had been on the Council’s social housing allocation list for many years. The Council recorded she was eligible for a three-bedroom Council property because she had provided evidence about the needs of her disabled child.
32. In February 2022, the Council accepted a homelessness application from Miss X because her landlord had threatened to evict her. Following an assessment, it accepted the prevention duty.
33. Miss X was evicted in late-November 2022. On the same date, the Council accepted the relief duty and offered Miss X and her family interim accommodation in a bed and breakfast (B&B). Miss X moved in the same day.
34. In February 2023 Miss X complained to the Council. She said:
• she had been continuously raising issues with the suitability of her interim B&B accommodation, but the Council had taken no action;
• she was sharing one hotel room with her two children, one of whom is autistic and cannot share a bedroom;
• the beds were broken so the family was sleeping on the floor; and
• her housing officer had not communicated with her appropriately and had belittled her.
35. In March 2023, the Council accepted the main housing duty. Miss X was still in the B&B accommodation so this became temporary accommodation and the Council told Miss X she could now request a review of its suitability. Miss X continued to tell the Council it was not suitable.
36. Shortly after it accepted the main housing duty, the Council issued its Stage 1 response to Miss X’s complaint. It said following a phone call with Miss X it understood she wanted to withdraw the complaint. Miss X escalated her complaint to Stage 2 and said she did not want to withdraw it and did not understand why the Council had said this. She said the issues she had complained about were unresolved. She also said her housing officer had said the Council would help her pay for storage of her belongings while in the B&B but had failed to do so.
37. In late-March 2023, while still considering her complaint, the Council wrote to Miss X in response to medical evidence she had provided about her child. It said it had decided based on the medical evidence her family needed a 3-bedroom property. It accepted the B&B accommodation was not suitable for her. However, the Council said this letter was not a response to her request for review of the suitability of the temporary accommodation. It said this was instead a decision about Miss X’s priority on its social housing allocation list.
38. In May 2023 Council issued its Stage 2 complaint response and upheld the complaint. The Council:
• apologised for failings in how it communicated with Miss X, including its misunderstanding that she wanted to close her complaint at Stage 1. It said it had allocated her a new housing officer;
• accepted Miss X had been in “less than adequate temporary accommodation… beyond an acceptable period of time”. It said it would replace broken beds in her temporary B&B accommodation as soon as possible;
• said it would arrange transfer of Miss X’s personal belongings to storage paid for by the Council; and
• offered financial payments of £500 for distress caused by its delays, and £150 to recognise the time and trouble spent by Miss X chasing up the Council.
39. A month later the Council had not:
• made any contact to Miss X from her new housing officer;
• responded to Miss X’s request for review of the suitability of the temporary accommodation;
• contacted Miss X further about storage of her belongings; or
• arranged payment of the £650 it had offered her in response to her complaint.
40. Miss X came to the Ombudsman in June 2023. On the same day, the Council offered her new temporary accommodation. She moved to the new accommodation ten days later.
41. After Miss X came to the Ombudsman, after repeated chasing by Miss X’s solicitor, the Council paid her the £650. At the time of our decision, Miss X had not raised any concerns with the council that her new temporary accommodation was not suitable. She remained on the Council’s social housing allocation list, to wait for a permanent Council home.

My findings

Issues with condition of previous privately rented property

42. The Council’s records showed Miss X told the Council there were issues with her privately rented property in September 2021. She said it was unsuitable because it was too small for her family, and there were pest problems. She also said the landlord planned to evict her, which ultimately resulted in the Council accepting a homelessness application from Miss X.
43. The law says we cannot investigate events which happened more than 12 months before somebody complained to us, unless we decide there are good reasons to. Miss X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman in June 2023. Miss X could have complained to the Council, and to the Ombudsman, sooner, if she was dissatisfied with how the Council considered reports about the condition of the property before the eviction. There are no good reasons to investigate those issues now.

Eviction - threatened with homelessness

44. Before she was evicted from her privately rented accommodation, Miss X asked the Council to consider whether it could offer alternative accommodation before the eviction date. She said because of her child D’s autism she was concerned about the impact on D if the family only found out where they would move to on the day of the eviction. The Council did not consider or respond to this request. This was fault which caused Miss X distress. The Council offered Miss X interim accommodation on the date of her eviction and so she had no notice of where she was moving to. There remains uncertainty for Miss X about whether things may have been different, and the impact on D may have been lessened, had the Council properly considered her request. The Council should remedy the injustice caused.
45. Because the Council did not properly consider this request from Miss X, I also cannot say it properly considered its duties to D under the Equality Act. It cannot evidence it considered how the issues may affect D, and by extension Miss X, specifically because of D’s disability. It did not consider whether it should alter its standard processes or take other action to support the family on that basis. This failure to consider its duties under the Equality Act was also fault.

Homelessness following eviction

46. The Council placed Miss X and her family in interim accommodation which was B&B accommodation. The Council accepted fault in that it left Miss X in B&B accommodation for 6.5 months, significantly longer than the 6-week limit set out in statutory guidance. It said this was because there was a shortage of accommodation in its area and no suitable alternative was available. In these circumstances, we consider the fault to be service failure. The Council apologised to Miss X for this in response to her complaint and offered a financial remedy for distress caused by its delays. The Council should go further to remedy the injustice caused.
47. After accepting the relief duty and placing Miss X in this interim accommodation, the Council took 103 days to accept the main housing duty. The legislation says this should take no more than 56 days, so this delay was fault. Miss X had been telling the Council the B&B was unsuitable for her since she moved in. Because the Council delayed accepting the main housing duty, the B&B remained interim instead of temporary accommodation, so the Council prevented Miss X from seeking a review of its suitability.

Suitability of accommodation

48. Once the Council accepted the main housing duty, it should have considered whether Miss X’s interim accommodation was suitable for her, before it decided this should become temporary accommodation. It did not record any consideration about this even though Miss X had been repeatedly raising issues. This was fault.
49. Once the Council decided the accommodation would become temporary, it should have carried out a suitability review straight away because Miss X had already made it clear she considered the B&B unsuitable. However, it did not start this until four weeks later, which was fault.
50. Also, the Council should not have needed to carry out a suitability review, and delay things further, to decide the accommodation was not suitable, because:
• the law says B&B accommodation is not suitable for families with dependent children for any longer than 6 weeks. When the Council started the suitability review, Miss X had already lived there for 18 weeks; and
• it had already written to Miss X a week before it started the suitability review and stated it had decided the accommodation was not suitable for her based on medical evidence she provided about D.

Protection and storage of belongings

51. In response to our enquiries, the Council said Miss X did not tell it she could not make suitable arrangements to store and protect her belongings herself. However, it accepted it did not ask Miss X about her belongings or tell her about its duties to protect them if she could not do so. It did not tell her it could help her with the costs of moving or storage. It also accepted it was at fault because it failed to follow up on this further after it agreed to do so in response to her complaint.
52. The Council told us it will repay Miss X any money she spent on:
• storage costs from November 2022 when she was evicted and became homeless, to June 2023 when she moved into her latest temporary accommodation; and
• moving her belongings into the B&B in November 2022, and out of the B&B in June 2023.
53. This offer by the Council is suitable to remedy the injustice caused to Miss X.

Communication with Miss X

54. The Council did not keep recordings of its phone calls with Miss X, so I could not consider these conversations. However, in response to Miss X’s complaint, the Council apologised for any distress caused to Miss X by how her first housing officer communicated with her, and it allocated her a new officer. It said it had addressed this with the staff member and arranged further customer service training.
55. In early-March 2023, while the Council was considering Miss X’s complaint at Stage 1, Miss X arranged a phone call with her housing officer. Miss X asked the Council if it could arrange an interpreter for this phone call because English is not her first language. The Council agreed to this request. On the day no telephone interpreter was available, so the housing officer communicated with Miss X in writing instead. Shortly after this, the housing officer’s manager rang Miss X to discuss her ongoing complaint. Miss X was not offered an interpreter for this call even though this was an adjustment she had requested for spoken conversations. The Council’s failure to properly record and consider this request, was fault.
56. Because of this, there was a misunderstanding on the complaint phone call which led the Council to wrongly decide Miss X wanted to withdraw her complaint. This led to avoidable time and trouble for Miss X in asking the Council to reopen her complaint. In response to Miss X’s complaint the Council said it would pay her £150 for time and trouble. This is suitable to remedy the time and trouble caused. However, the Council should go further to recognise the distress caused to Miss X by its failure to properly consider her request for reasonable adjustments.

Others affected

57. The Council told us when it placed Miss X in B&B accommodation, it was housing around 300 families in this type of accommodation. It said this was because there was a shortage of accommodation in its area. Internal emails from before the Council responded to Miss X’s complaint at Stage 2, showed that in April 2023 there were other families who had been in B&B accommodation longer than Miss X.
58. There may be other families who have experienced an injustice because the Council left them in unsuitable B&B accommodation longer than the six weeks allowed by law. We have the power to make recommendations to remedy the injustice experienced by complainants and members of the public affected by fault we identify. (Local Government Act 1974 s 31(2B)). We therefore opened another investigation to find out whether the Council needed to take any action to remedy injustice caused to others who may have been affected by these issues.

Back to top

Agreed action

59. Our Guidance on Remedies says where a family with children stays in unsuitable B&B accommodation in excess of the six-week legal limit, we are likely to recommend a weekly payment of between £100 and £200 to recognise this unsuitability. For Miss X’s family, a weekly payment of £200 per week for the extra 22 weeks spent in the B&B is suitable. In arriving at this figure, I considered the following.
• Miss X had to share one room with her two children. The Council had already decided Miss X needed to live in a three-bedroom property, because her children could not share a bedroom due to the needs of her autistic child.
• There were no adequate facilities to store, prepare or cook food.
• The beds were broken so Miss X and her children were sleeping on the floor.
• The impact on her youngest child will have been significant due to their autism.
60. Within one month of our final decision the Council will:
1. pay Miss X a total of £5,814.50, comprising of:
1. £4,400 to recognise the 22 weeks Miss X and her family spent living in unsuitable B&B accommodation beyond the 6-week legal limit;
2. £1,614.50 to repay Miss X for the money she spent on storage costs from 29 November 2022 to 12 June 2023;
3. £300 to recognise the avoidable distress caused to Miss X by its failure to properly communicate with her and consider her requests for reasonable adjustments;
4. £150 to recognise the avoidable time and trouble spent by Miss X because it wrongly decided to withdraw her complaint; and
5. I have reduced the total amount by £650 to account for the money the Council already paid Miss X when it responded to her complaint.
2. ask Miss X to provide evidence of any money she spent on moving her belongings into the B&B in November 2022, and out of the B&B in June 2023. It should then also repay Miss X for any money spent on moving costs.
61. Within three months of our final decision the Council will review relevant processes, and share a copy of our final decision with/ issue reminders to, relevant housing staff, to ensure:
1. it tells homelessness applicants about its duties under section 211 of The Housing Act 1996 to protect their personal property if there is a risk it may be lost or damaged;
2. if 56 days have passed since it accepted the relief duty, and no suitable accommodation offer has been refused, it accepts the main housing duty to meet statutory timescales;
3. it meets the Council’s duties under The Equality Act 2010, including the reasonable adjustment duty. It should properly record and consider all requests for reasonable adjustments, so all staff interacting with a homelessness applicant apply adjustments the Council has already agreed to; and
4. where it upholds a complaint about homelessness it properly completes follow-up actions it has agreed to, in good time.
62. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

63. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council which meant Miss X and her children lived in unsuitable B&B accommodation for over six months after they became homeless. Miss X also experienced a financial loss because she had to pay for separate storage for her belongings while waiting for suitable accommodation. The faults also caused avoidable distress, time, and trouble for Miss X. The Council agreed to our recommendations to remedy this injustice, review relevant processes, and issue reminders and a copy of our decision to its staff.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman