Summary: The Council was at fault for delay providing temporary accommodation because of which Ms X and her children experienced the distress of eviction. The Council was also at fault for leaving Ms X and her family in bed and breakfast accommodation for nine weeks longer than the six weeks allowed in law. This caused Ms X avoidable financial loss and the whole family significant distress. The Council has agreed to apologise and make payments to Ms X to remedy this injustice. The Council should update us on its progress against its Housing Needs Service Improvement Plan.

The complaint

1. Ms Y complained on behalf of Ms X that the Council:

1. Failed to act despite knowing she was threatened with homelessness in September 2023 until Ms X was evicted in December 2023
2. Provided unsuitable accommodation in a B&B from December 2023 to March 2024
3. Provided accommodation in March 2024 which has no bathroom downstairs, meaning Ms X has to use a bucket when her children are not at home to help her up the stairs
4. Delayed dealing with Ms X's request for a review of the suitability of her accommodation
5. Delayed responding to her complaints.

2. As a result, Ms X remains in unsuitable accommodation where she cannot reliably access the toilet without experiencing significant pain and she and her children have experienced significant and avoidable distress.

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. 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)
5. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)
6. 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 not investigated

7. Ms X has used her right of review and then appeal to court about the suitability of the temporary accommodation offered in March 2024. For the reasons set out in paragraph five, therefore, I have not investigated the complaints at c) and d) in paragraph one.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered the complaint and the information Ms Y provided.
9. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
10. I referred to the Ombudsman's Guidance on remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
11. 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

Homelessness law and 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.
13. If councils are satisfied applicants are homeless and eligible for assistance, they must take reasonable steps to secure accommodation. This is called the relief duty. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing. The relief duty usually lasts 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
14. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
15. If, at the end of the relief duty, a council is satisfied an applicant is 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)
16. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of his or her household.  This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty.  (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
17. Wherever possible, Councils should avoid using bed and breakfast accommodation. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.33)
18. 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. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.35)

What happened

19. Ms X was a tenant of a private landlord. The landlord gave Ms X a notice to leave. The landlord then applied to court for possession of the property.
20. Ms X approached the Council in May 2023. The Council assessed Ms X. Ms X told the Council about her physical health conditions, which she said affected her mobility. It asked her to provide evidence of her medical conditions.
21. At the end of May, the Council's records say it agreed to provide Ms X with interim accommodation because the landlord had applied for a bailiff's warrant to enforce possession. Ms X refused the accommodation offered because she did not think it was suitable. She said it was too far from her children's schools. The Council told Ms X it had no duty to provide further interim accommodation.
22. In July, the Council accepted the main housing duty. It offered Ms X temporary accommodation. This was a two-bedroom property on the second floor. Ms X refused the offer because she said she needed a ground floor property due to her physical health conditions. The Council's records note it was still waiting for Ms X to provide evidence of these conditions.
23. The Council ended its duty to Ms X after she refused the offered property. She asked for a review of this decision. In September, the Council decided its previous offer was unsuitable. It therefore still owed Ms X the main housing duty. Its letter to Ms X said the Council would contact her with a further offer.
24. In November, Ms Y complained to the Council on Ms X's behalf. Ms Y said:
• no one had contacted Ms X to offer her temporary accommodation since the review decision in September; and
• despite knowing Ms X was going to be evicted, the Council had taken no action nor made any contact with Ms X.
25. The Council's acknowledgment email said it would respond to the complaint by 6 December.
26. On 5 December, Ms Y wrote to the Council to remind it of the deadline. She asked it to tell her if it was not going to meet that deadline.
27. In early December, Ms X was evicted from her home. The Council provided a hotel for her and the children.
28. On 18 December, Ms Y wrote to the Council. She said:
• Ms X had now been evicted; and
• the Council had not responded to the stage one complaint.
29. The Council responded to Ms Y's complaint in mid-February 2024. It said:
• it was sorry for the delay responding to the complaint. It said this was because it had a "high volume of cases";
• its temporary accommodation team was actively looking for accommodation for Ms X; and
• Ms X could also look for another private tenancy.
30. Ms Y asked the council to consider the complaint at stage two. The Council responded at the end of March. It said it knew Ms X needed to move. She was on its transfer list and it was trying to find her temporary accommodation.
31. A few days later, the Council offered Ms X temporary accommodation. Ms X accepted the offer but asked for a review of its suitability. The Council did not respond to the review on time, so Ms Y applied to the county court.

My findings

32. I set out my findings on the complaint in the order they appear in paragraph one.

Accommodation before eviction

33. There is no evidence the Council made any contact with Ms X between September and December 2023. This was despite telling Ms X in September that an officer would contact her to offer alternative accommodation. This was fault. Once the review overturned the decision, the Council's main housing duty continued. It therefore had a duty to provide Ms X with temporary accommodation. Failure to do so was fault. The Code of Guidance says applicants with dependent children should not be evicted from private tenancies because of a council's failure to provide accommodation. (Code of Guidance 6.38) Yet that is just what happened to Ms X and her children. This caused them significant and avoidable distress and uncertainty, which is an injustice.

Bed and breakfast

34. Ms X lived in a B&B from early December 2023 until late March 2024. The law and guidance are clear that B&B should only be used for families with dependent children as a last resort and then for a maximum of six weeks. I am satisfied that when it offered Ms X the accommodation, B&B was the only option available to the Council. However, Ms X and her children spent over 15 weeks in B&B. This was nine weeks more than the six-week maximum. This service failure was fault.
35. Throughout this time, Ms X had no access to cooking facilities. She resorted to selling her possessions to pay for food for the family. She and the children had to travel over an hour to and from school. Ms X says this added to her chronic pain. Living in B&B can be particularly detrimental to the health and development of children. Ms X and her children experienced significant and avoidable distress and financial loss. This is a significant injustice.

Complaint handling

36. As it accepted in response to her complaint, the Council was at fault for delay in its complaints process. It took more than two months too long to respond at stage one. This fault caused Ms X avoidable distress and uncertainty, which is an injustice.

Back to top

Agreed action

37. To remedy the injustice to Ms X and her children from the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Ms X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology;
• Pay Ms X £500 in recognition of the avoidable distress caused by the Council's failure to contact her or offer temporary accommodation before she was evicted in December 2023;
• Pay Ms X £1,800, being £200 a week for the nine weeks she spent in B&B beyond the six-week maximum, in recognition of her avoidable financial loss and the significant distress caused to her and her children; and
• Pay Ms X a further £200 in recognition of the avoidable distress and uncertainty caused by the delays in the Council's complaint handling.
38. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
39. In March 2023 the Ombudsman published a public interest report 22007276 which found systemic failings in the Council’s homelessness service. It recommended the Council commission an independent external review of the homelessness service and produce an action plan setting out how it will ensure it meets its statutory duties to homeless applicants. The Ombudsman said the relevant scrutiny committee or Cabinet member should oversee progress in delivering the action plan.
40. The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) completed an independent review of the service and made several recommendations which the Council incorporated into a Housing Needs Service Improvement Plan. 
41. The Council has established a Housing Improvement Board which the Chief Executive, Leader of the Council and the Cabinet Member for Housing and Homelessness attend. The board reflects on and responds to key concerns and reports issued by the Ombudsman to drive service improvement.
42. Rather than recommend specific service improvements, therefore, I am instead asking the Council, within six weeks of this decision, to provide an update to the Ombudsman on its progress against the Housing Needs Service Improvement Plan.

Back to top

Final decision

43. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman