Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the suitability of her temporary accommodation because she had the right to go to court to challenge the Council’s decision. In any case, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained her temporary accommodation was unsuitable because it is a one bedroom open plan flat that she shares with her adult daughter. She says they need two bedrooms. She also says her daughter has a long commute for education. She also complained the Council suggested moving outside London to improve her chances of being rehoused because she is a key worker, who works in London.
2. Ms X said that, due to Council failings, she had had to sleep on a sofa bed for two years, which was causing back and neck pain, sleep deprivation and was negatively affecting her mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Ms X was placed in temporary accommodation after she became homeless. Some months later, she complained the accommodation was unsuitable because she was sharing a one bedroom property with her adult daughter, which was affecting the mental health of both of them.
9. The Council considered whether the temporary accommodation was suitable and wrote to her with its decision in October 2023. Ms X asked for a review three days later.
10. In December 2024, the Council told Ms X it was “minded to” decide the temporary accommodation was suitable and gave her a chance to provide further comments. It issued a review decision in early January 2024, after considering all the information provided. Its decision sets out the factors it had considered and its reasons for deciding the temporary accommodation was suitable.
11. The Council also considered her concerns through its complaints process, during which it suggested Ms X’s priority band on its housing register could be changed from band C1 to band B if she was able to find private rented sector housing whilst waiting for social housing. It later said she would wait many years for social housing, even in band B. It also suggested she look at moving outside London. The Council introduced a revised allocation scheme in April 2024, following which Ms X was awarded band B in line with the new scheme.
12. Ms X had a right of review in relation to the Council’s decision about the suitability of her temporary accommodation, which she has already exercised, and the right to take the matter to court if she was unhappy with the review decision. We would usually decide it was reasonable to exercise those rights.
13. Even if it was not reasonable for her to exercise her right to go to court, we are not an appeal body. It is not our role to say whether the Council’s decision was correct. Unless there is fault in the decision-making process, we cannot question the decision reached. In this case, I am satisfied the Council considered all relevant factors when deciding whether the accommodation was suitable and explained in detail the reasons for its decision.
14. There is a national shortage of social housing, and this is particularly acute in London. It was not therefore fault for the Council to suggest Ms X considered private rented accommodation or moving out of London.
15. The Council awarded priority band B following its introduction of a revised allocations scheme in April 2024 and prior to that had awarded band C. These awards were in line with its published scheme at the time.
16. We will not consider Ms X’s complaint further because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because she had the right to go to court to challenge the Council’s decision about the suitability of her temporary accommodation. Even if it was not reasonable for her to exercise that right, we will not investigate because there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman