Summary: Due to service failure, the Council placed the complainant’s family in inappropriate interim accommodation for considerably longer than the law permits. The Council has agreed to offer the complainant a financial remedy to reflect the injustice this represents.

The complaint

1. I will refer to the complainant as Mr F.
2. Mr F complains the Council placed his family in bed & breakfast accommodation for an extended period of time.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Mr F’s correspondence with the Council, and sought the Council’s clarification on some points.
5. I also shared a draft copy of this decision with each party for their comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr F, his wife and child approached the Council as homeless in August 2023. The Council accepted the relief duty for the family, and placed them in bed & breakfast (B&B) accommodation as an interim measure while considering their homelessness application.
7. In January 2024 Mr F submitted a complaint to the Council. He said the accommodation was unsuitable because it was too small, there was no hot water or laundry facility, and the bed was broken.
8. The Council responded to say the room was for suitable for three people, but acknowledged it was not ideal. The Council explained the family was on its waiting list for alternative accommodation, but said there was greater demand than supply. It suggested Mr F seek accommodation through the private sector, or to look for social housing outside London.
9. The Council also said it had contacted the accommodation managing agency, who had confirmed it had resolved the hot water problem. However, it said there was no laundry facility in the building and that residents needed to use a launderette.
10. Mr F submitted a further complaint, saying that although the hot water was now fixed, the bed was still broken. He reiterated his view the room was too small and said his wife had become ill because of the food storage facility.
11. The Council responded in February. It repeated that the room was for three people, but that it understood it was unsuitable and it was seeking alternative accommodation for the family. However, the Council explained again there was a severe shortage of accommodation available in London. It again urged Mr F to consider private rented accommodation or to look outside London.
12. The Council noted Mr F said the bed remained broken, but said there was no record he had informed the managing agency of this. It asked Mr F to do so and to only make a complaint if he remained dissatisfied afterwards.
13. The Council did not uphold Mr F’s complaint and referred him to the Ombudsman if he wished to pursue it further. Mr F then approached the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Legislative background

14. There are two types of accommodation councils provide to certain homeless applicants: interim accommodation and temporary accommodation.
15. 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)
16. If, having made inquiries, the council is not satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible, and in priority need, it will have no further accommodation duty.
17. 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)
18. 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)
19. 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 Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.35)

Back to top

Analysis

20. As Mr F’s family includes a young child, the law says they must only be placed in B&B as a last resort, and then for a maximum of six weeks. However, the family’s stay in B&B accommodation lasted from 23 August 2023 to 9 May 2024, at which the Council moved them to larger accommodation. This is approximately 37 weeks, 31 weeks beyond the maximum.
21. As the Council has mentioned, we are conscious there is a critical shortage of suitable accommodation for homeless people and families, particularly in London. This being so, I do not suggest the Council’s inability to rehouse Mr F’s family sooner was due to any administrative failure. Rather, this appears to be an example of what we call ‘service failure’, which is where an authority is unable to discharge a duty, despite its best efforts, because of the unavailability of a necessary resource.
22. This does not alter the fact that the family’s extended stay in B&B accommodation was fault; and that this fault caused an injustice, because it was unsuitable for their needs.
23. Our guidance on remedies says:

“We will assess financial redress in these cases by reference to the number of weeks a family has stayed in B&B beyond the point where they should have been moved. This may be earlier than the maximum six weeks. We are likely to recommend a weekly payment in the range of £100 to £200. This payment is additional to reimbursement of any specific quantifiable costs that the homeless household incurred.”

24. As part of his complaint to the Council, Mr F sent a short video of the family’s room. From this I can see the room had a separate en-suite bathroom, with a shower and toilet, as well as its own fridge-freezer. There are no cooking facilities in the room, but Mr F has confirmed the hotel had shared cooking facilities.
25. While this qualifies as B&B accommodation under the Code of Guidance, I consider it provided the family with a reasonable level of private facilities, above what is often the case with this type of accommodation. This being so, I consider it appropriate to recommend a remedy slightly below the level set out in our guidance, at £75 for each of the 31 weeks the family stayed at the B&B. This amounts to a remedy of £2325.

Back to top

Agreed action

26. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to offer Mr F £2325, to reflect the length of time his family was placed in unsuitable B&B accommodation.
27. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman