Summary: The Council has been at fault as a family has spent almost a year in unsuitable accommodation. The family spent 30 weeks in Bed and Breakfast accommodation and a further eight months in a hostel. The family now have temporary accommodation in a house. An apology and a payment remedies the injustice to them.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Ms X, complains the Council has not offered her family suitable temporary accommodation after a review found her current accommodation was unsuitable. Ms X is waiting for permanent accommodation and thinks that her banding on the housing register should be higher.
2. Ms X says the impact on her family has been stressful, especially because her family have had to share one room and have had to share facilities.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), 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

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have investigated Ms X’s complaints about unsuitable accommodation.
6. I have not investigated the Council’s recent decision on her housing band. Ms X has a right to request a review of the decision. If she disagrees with the results of the review, she can then take the matter to court. 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) In this case, I consider it reasonable for Ms X to use her right to request a review as she has used her review right to challenge other decisions and so is able to do this.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I read the papers put in by Ms X and discussed the complaint with her.
8. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
9. Ms X and the organisation 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

Key Facts

10. Ms X lives with her four children, some of which are adults. She made a homeless application as her landlord served an eviction notice.
11. When they were evicted, Ms X and her family were given interim accommodation in three different hotels from 11 January until 26 July 2023. The Council booked 2 rooms for Ms X’s family.
12. Ms X complained about the conditions in the third hotel. The Council said the accommodation was unsuitable on 26 June 2023. The Council booked the family into a different hotel.
13. On 27 July 2023 the Council accepted the main housing duty to Ms X and she was then booked into a hostel (Temporary Accommodation) from 31 July 2023. There was an incident in the hostel on 4 August 2023.
14. Ms X sought a review of the suitability of the Temporary Accommodation on 7 August 2023. The review decided the accommodation was unsuitable on 4 January 2024, as Ms X was sharing one room with her four children.
15. The Council offered temporary accommodation in a 3 bedroom house outside London on 29 February, which Ms X accepted.

My Analysis

16. Ms X has now been moved to suitable accommodation. However, her family spent from 1 August 2023 to 1 March 2024 in accommodation that the review found was unsuitable. There was delay carrying out the suitability review, which should have been carried out within 8 weeks on 2 October 2023. Instead it took a further 12 weeks. This delay was fault.
17. In addition, the family spent from 11 January 2023 until 1 August 2023 in Bed and Breakfast (B&B) accommodation. The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2003 says B&B is not suitable for households with “family commitments”. The Order defines this as a household that includes a dependent child, as Ms X’s household does.  Where no other accommodation is available, the authority may place a family in B&B as a last resort but only for a maximum of six weeks.
18. I find there has been fault, as Ms X’s family was placed in B&B accommodation past the initial 6 weeks. The family was then placed in unsuitable accommodation.
19. To remedy the injustice, our guidance on remedies recommends a payment of:
• Between £100 to £200 a week after the first 6 weeks spent in B&B accommodation.
• Between £150 to £350 a month for time spent in unsuitable accommodation.

As Ms X’s family consists of 5 people who had to spend large periods in one or two rooms I consider the payment should be at the top end of the remedy range. Two of Ms X’s children were also at a critical year of schooling.

20. The family spent 30 weeks in B&B accommodation. So, I propose a remedy for the 24 weeks (past the initial 6 weeks) of £4800. The family also spent a further 31 weeks or 8 months in accommodation that the Council’s review found to be unsuitable. I propose a remedy of 8 x £350, a total of £2800.
21. I have considered whether to propose service improvements. The Council has explained that it has an acquisitions policy, which focuses on large scale leasing and purchasing of properties. The Council has said there is very little private rented accommodation available this year compared to last year. The Council has said that it prioritises cases requiring a move but finding suitable accommodation has never been harder. The Council’s actions to find accommodation are reasonable and so I do not intend to recommend service improvements.

Back to top

Agreed action

22. Within one month of the date of the decision the Council should:
• Apologise to Ms X. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Pay Ms X £7600.
23. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I have completed my investigation of this complaint. This complaint is upheld and the steps outlined above remedy the injustice to Ms X and her family.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman