Summary: Miss B says the Council failed to move her from unsuitable temporary accommodation despite agreeing to do so and failed to act on antisocial behaviour from another resident. The Council left Miss B in what it accepted was unsuitable temporary accommodation for 18 months longer than it should have and failed to follow its antisocial behaviour policy. An apology, payment to Miss B, reminder to officers and training is satisfactory remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Miss B, complained the Council:
• failed to move her from unsuitable temporary accommodation despite agreeing to do so; and
• failed to act on antisocial behaviour (ASB) from another resident towards her.
2. Miss B says the Council’s failures have affected her mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. 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

6. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and Miss B's comments;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided.
7. Miss B 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

The Homelessness Code of Guidance

8. The code of guidance says where a housing authority discharges its functions to secure that accommodation is available for an applicant the accommodation must be suitable.
9. Housing authorities will need to consider carefully the suitability of accommodation for households with particular medical and/or physical needs.
10. Accommodation that is suitable for a short period may not necessarily be suitable for a longer period and housing authorities have a continuing obligation to keep the suitability of accommodation under review, and to respond to any relevant change in circumstances which may affect suitability, until such time as the accommodation duty is brought to an end.
11. Bed and breakfast accommodation caters for very short-term stays only and affords residents limited privacy, and may lack or require sharing of important amenities, such as cooking and laundry facilities. Wherever possible, housing authorities should avoid using such accommodation as accommodation for homeless applicants, unless, in the very limited circumstances where it is likely to be the case, it is the most appropriate option for the applicant.

The Council’s anti-social behaviour policy

12. The Council’s Antisocial Behaviour Policy (the policy) says the Council has adopted the definition of ASB as outlined in the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014:
• conduct that has caused, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to any person;
• conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to a person in relation to that person‘s occupation of residential premises; or
• conduct capable of causing housing-related nuisance or annoyance to any person.
13. Each case is assessed individually and the Council will write a personalised support plan for those experiencing/reporting ASB.
14. ASB is counted as a breach of tenancy and in extreme cases the Council will be forced to evict the tenant and seek possession of the property. It says housing management will use a range of early intervention practices and legal remedies to mitigate ASB, including:
• Mediation;
• early warnings;
• visits;
• letters;
• contracts;
• agreements.
15. Written or verbal warnings can be issued to challenge unacceptable behaviour, and reinforce that antisocial behaviour is not tolerated. The Council will use warnings to remind residents of their obligations under their tenancy/lease and will set out the specific clauses/conditions which have been breached.
16. When issuing warnings the Council will tell the individual it is monitoring their behaviour and warn them further enforcement action will be taken if their behaviour continues.
17. When an ASB report is received the Council will complete a risk assessment with individuals to assess any vulnerability/safeguarding issues, and may make safeguarding referrals in line with the Safeguarding Policy.
18. The Neighbourhood Officer will carry out a risk assessment during the initial report and repeat at regular intervals as and when incidents occur or escalate. Throughout the case, the Neighbourhood Officer and complainant shall agree to a certain level of regular progress updates which is at least every two weeks.
19. A Neighbourhood Management Team Leader shall carry out a full review of each case to ensure the Neighbourhood Officer has taken all relevant and appropriate actions. This is monthly throughout the duration of a case.
20. ASB incidents are graded 1-3 based on their severity and that affects the timescales for action.

What happened

21. Miss B lives in temporary accommodation. The Council accepts it agreed the property was unsuitable for Miss B in November 2022 following an incident of domestic abuse. The Council offered Miss B temporary accommodation in a hotel. Miss B initially moved into the hotel but returned to her property as she could not cope in the hotel without washing facilities as she is doubly incontinent. Because of that the hotel accommodation was affecting her mental health.
22. There is no evidence the Council made any further offer of temporary accommodation, other than hotel accommodation, until after Miss B began reporting concerns about ASB from another neighbour in August 2023. Miss B reported smells from her neighbour’s property, him leaving the door open for his pet, him spraying some type of chemical on her door which had also been sprayed on her and threats to kill. The Council opened an ASB case and asked Miss B to keep a diary of any ASB.
23. The Council contacted the manager of the accommodation and the police. The manager of the accommodation told the Council she had spoken to Miss B’s neighbour and he had apologised.
24. Miss B reported further ASB on 8 September and on 9 September told the Council her neighbour had placed a personal shopping trolley outside his door. The Council’s ASB officer spoke to Miss B’s neighbour and warned him about placing items outside the door causing a fire hazard.
25. Miss B contacted the Council again later the same day to report her neighbour had sprayed air freshener at her door and that he was naked. Miss B provided the Council with videos.
26. The Council tried to contact Miss B’s neighbour but when it could not it wrote to him on 11 September. Miss B’s neighbour contacted the Council to deny the allegations on 18 September and agreed to meet. As Miss B’s neighbour did not contact the Council again it asked the manager of the accommodation on 21 September to speak to him.
27. Miss B’s neighbour contacted the Council on 25 September to explain why he had not been in contact. He said due to a hospital visit he had to rest and would contact the Council when he was fit enough to visit the Council’s offices. The Council said it could not leave the matter until then and said it needed to visit him at his property. The Council said otherwise it would need to consider enforcement action.
28. Miss B reported further ASB from her neighbour on 13 and 14 October.
29. Miss B asked the Council for an update on 25 October. Miss B reported further ASB from her neighbour and said she felt scared and traumatised.
30. Miss B asked about whether there was any other alternative temporary accommodation on 21 November as the Council had decided her current temporary accommodation was suitable for her on health grounds.
31. The Council met with Miss B’s neighbour on 29 November. The Council showed him videos of his behaviour and he explained why he was naked on one of the videos. The officer asked him to keep the doors closed, keep an eye on his pet and not speak to Miss B. The Council served an antisocial behaviour warning letter on him.
32. Following a complaint from Miss B the Council wrote to her on 1 December. The Council accepted it had not yet resolved the issues. The Council said it would therefore look for alternative temporary accommodation and as soon as a suitable home became available the Council would contact her with further details. The Council said though there was an unprecedented shortage across London of temporary accommodation properties and therefore it could not say when it would make her an offer. The Council told Miss B if she felt at risk due to the ASB it could temporarily move her to a hotel until it found suitable alternative accommodation, noting so far she had not wanted to take up that offer. The Council also suggested she contact the police if she felt threatened.
33. Miss B reported further ASB on 13 and 24 December and again on 3 January 2024. The Council told Miss B it would arrange a meeting with her neighbour to discuss the concerns. The Council suggested a potential relocation for Miss B to another flat in the same building if it could identify one. Miss B declined that option as she did not feel safe in the building.
34. The Council had difficulty arranging the meeting due to Miss B’s neighbour not engaging. Miss B’s neighbour came up with various reasons why he could not meet. The manager of the accommodation was able to visit the neighbour’s property on 18 January though and identified some issues.
35. Later in January 2024 the Council offered Miss B different temporary accommodation and asked her to respond by 2 February. Miss B said it was quite far away and she needed a property closer to her GP. She asked though whether she could view the property. There is no evidence of further contact about that property.
36. In February 2024 the Council agreed an action plan which included discussing the neighbour’s possible breach of licence to occupy the property. The manager of the accommodation wrote to Miss B’s neighbour 6 February with a warning letter and an appointment for a visit.
37. Miss B reported further ASB on 16 February.
38. On 21 February an agency working with Miss B’s neighbour contacted the Council. That enabled a meeting to go ahead with Miss B’s neighbour on 26 February. At that meeting the following was agreed as a plan:
• for the neighbour to refrain from any direct or indirect contact with Miss B including leaving items outside her door;
• to report any coincidental encounters with Miss B to the Council;
• to ensure fire doors remain closed;
• to control his pet in the communal areas;
• to respond promptly to communications from staff and to cooperate on addressing some property issues;
• that any further complaints from Miss B about his behaviour would be unacceptable.
39. Miss B's neighbour said he understood and offered an apology. The Council agreed to monitor his engagement with staff and interactions with Miss B until 26 April. The Council then told Miss B about what had been agreed.
40. Miss B contacted the Council on a couple of occasions in March 2024 but that concerned issues with her neighbour’s pet. I am not aware of any further reports of ASB.
41. The Council offered Miss B alternative temporary accommodation in March 2024 and chased her for a response on 2 April. The Council later withdrew that offer. Miss B moved into a property she had bid on in May 2024.

Analysis

42. Miss B says the Council failed to move her from suitable temporary accommodation despite agreeing to do so. Miss B therefore believes the Council left her in unsuitable temporary accommodation.
43. There are two issues here. The first is Miss B’s concern about whether the accommodation was suitable for her due to medical needs. Miss B says because she is doubly incontinent she needs access to a washing machine in any property she lives in and therefore the property she was placed in was not suitable as it had only a communal washing machine.
44. As I said in paragraph 3, the Ombudsman does not have jurisdiction to consider a complaint about matters where there is an alternative route for remedy. Miss B could have sought a review of the Council’s decision the temporary accommodation was suitable for her on medical grounds and then appealed to a County Court on a point of law if she remained dissatisfied. This part of the complaint is therefore outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.
45. The second issue for suitability relates to the ASB Miss B experienced. The Council accepts it agreed in November 2022 the property Miss B occupied was unsuitable for her following an incident of domestic abuse. I am satisfied the Council offered Miss B a room in a hotel so she could move out of the property quickly. I appreciate hotel accommodation is not a suitable long-term solution for Miss B due to her incontinence issues. However, the suitability of short term accommodation is different to considering the suitability of long-term accommodation. I therefore do not criticise the Council for offering Miss B hotel accommodation to resolve the immediate issue.
46. I would have expected the Council to have continued to look for suitable alternative temporary accommodation for Miss B though rather than leaving her either in hotel accommodation or unsuitable temporary accommodation. I say that particularly as I note the police advised following the incident in November 2022 Miss B should not go back to her temporary accommodation. I have seen no evidence the Council made any attempt to seek alternative accommodation for Miss B until after incidents with another neighbour in November 2023. Leaving Miss B in unsuitable accommodation between November 2023 and May 2024 is fault.
47. Miss B also says the Council failed to act when she reported ASB from her neighbour. Having considered the documentary evidence I am not satisfied the Council followed its ASB policy when dealing with the concerns Miss B raised. The Council’s policy says it will write a personalised support plan for those experiencing ASB. I have seen no evidence the Council did that in this case. Nor have I seen any evidence the Council completed a risk assessment to assess whether Miss B had any vulnerability or safeguarding issues, as required by the Council’s policy. The Council’s policy also says it will agree regular progress updates with the person that has reported ASB and, again, I have seen no evidence the Council did that. Instead, the evidence I have seen satisfies me Miss B often had to chase the Council for updates. Finally, the policy says the team leader will carry out a review of each case monthly to ensure the officer dealing with it has taken the appropriate actions. Again, I have seen no evidence the Council did that in this case. That is fault.
48. I am concerned failure to follow the policy meant there were periods where the case was not progressed as it should have been. For instance, the Council told Miss B’s neighbour on 25 September 2023 it could not allow him to avoid contact while he was ill and he would need to facilitate a visit or the Council would consider enforcement action. Despite giving Miss B’s neighbour that warning there is no evidence the Council followed through. That is despite Miss B continuing to report ASB. That again is fault and is likely to have left Miss B believing the Council was not taking her concerns seriously.
49. I understand the Council had difficulty contacting Miss B’s neighbour and getting him to engage. However, I consider the Council could have resolved some of those issues at an earlier stage if it had followed its policy properly. For instance, it is possible the Council could have identified an alternative way to engage with Miss B’s neighbour if the team leader had been involved as they should have been. That may have enabled the Council to identify other people working with Miss B’s neighbour as a way to get him to engage with the ASB officer. Given that resolved the matter in February 2024 I therefore consider it likely the Council’s failure to follow its policy led to a period of drift. That meant Miss B likely had to live with ASB for longer than she should have.
50. I now have to consider what remedy is appropriate to reflect the 18 months Miss B had to stay in unsuitable temporary accommodation as well as her uncertainty about whether the problems with her neighbour would have been resolved earlier if the Council had followed its policy properly. I consider a suitable remedy for the 18 months living in unsuitable accommodation would be for the Council to pay Miss B £150 per month. That makes a total financial remedy of £2,700. I also recommended the Council pay Miss B an additional £300 to reflect her uncertainty about whether the issues with her neighbour from August 2023 could have been resolved earlier. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.
51. I further recommended the Council remind officers dealing with those placed in temporary accommodation of the need to seek alternative temporary accommodation when it has agreed the accommodation is unsuitable for the applicant’s needs. I also recommended the Council carry out a training session for officers dealing with ASB cases to make sure they know the steps they need to take under the Council’s ASB policy. The Council has agreed to my recommendations.

Back to top

Agreed action

52. Within one month of my decision the Council should:
• apologise to Miss B for the uncertainty she experienced due to the faults identified in this decision. The Council may want to refer to the Ombudsman’s updated guidance on remedies, which sets out the standards we expect apologies to meet;
• pay Miss B £3,000;
• remind officers dealing with those placed in temporary accommodation of the need to ensure alternative accommodation is sought when the Council has agreed the accommodation is unsuitable;
• carry out a training session for ASB officers to make them aware of the steps required under the Council’s policy when investigating a complaint of ASB.

Back to top

Final decision

53. I have completed my investigation and uphold the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman