Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to deal with a mice infestation issue in her temporary accommodation. She also complained the Council failed to resolve the issues with the window handles being too loose. We find the Council was at fault for how it handed the disrepair issues and its failure to conduct a suitability review. This caused Miss X avoidable distress and frustration, and it meant she had to live in unsuitable temporary accommodation. The Council has agreed to our recommendations to apologise to Miss X, make a payment to her to reflect the time she was living in unsuitable temporary accommodation and the distress and frustration this caused and implement service improvements.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council failed to deal with a mice infestation issue in her temporary accommodation. She also complained the Council failed to resolve the issues with the window handles being too loose.
2. Miss X says the matter has caused distress and upset. She is also worried about her child’s safety.

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. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.

We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(1)(A) and 25(7), 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. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Miss X and the Council 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 and temporary accommodation

8. 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)
9. Homelessness temporary accommodation must be legally suitable. (Housing Act 1996, section 206) Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability. (Housing Act 1996, section 202) If the council’s review decides the accommodation is unsuitable, the council must provide suitable accommodation. If the review decides the accommodation is suitable, the applicant has the right to appeal to the county court on a point of law. (Housing Act 1996, section 204).
10. 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 (section 17.8 of the homelessness code of guidance for local authorities).

What happened

11. Miss X is homeless and lives in temporary accommodation with her young child. She contacted the Council in May 2023 and said she had a severe mice infestation issue in the property. She also said she wanted it to put a window restrictor in the property as her child was regularly opening the window and it was unsafe. She said the managing agent was not resolving the issue. The Council sent Miss X’s concerns to the managing agent.
12. The managing agent contacted the Council a few days later and said it would visit Miss X the following day to fit a window restrictor. It also said it would investigate the holes from the mice and get them filled first before it arranged for pest control to visit.
13. The managing agent updated the Council after the visit and provided evidence of fitting the window restrictor. It said Miss X had gone away for a week and when she returned it would fill the holes and then ask for pest control to visit.
14. Miss X complained to the Council in June about the lack of urgency in resolving the mice infestation. She said she had returned from holiday and the managing agent failed to fill the holes.
15. The Council responded to the complaint and said its temporary accommodation team had contacted the managing agent about the issues. It said it would continue to monitor the situation. It sent an email to the managing agent the following day and asked it to contact Miss X to assess window safety and pest control management.
16. Miss X contacted the Council and said she wanted a surveyor to inspect the property to decide whether it was suitable. The Council responded and said it had passed her concerns to the managing agent.
17. The managing agent emailed a pest control company in late June and asked it to visit the property.
18. Miss X raised a further complaint to the Council in July and said she remained unhappy with how it was dealing with the matter. She said the managing agent had filled some holes but not all. She also said pest control had visited and put poison down, but the issue remained. She said her and her child were living in unsuitable conditions.
19. The Council contacted the managing agent for an update in August. The managing agent responded and said it and the pest control team had visited several times to fill the holes and put down treatment. It said it had visited Miss X a few days ago because the issue was still unresolved. It said it would cover the kitchen floor with additional chipboard to stop the mice coming in. It also said it had instructed a contractor to get the flooring, and it would arrange to revisit as soon as possible to install it.
20. The Council issued a further response to Miss X’s complaint in late August. It said the managing agent would visit to put down the flooring. It also said its property inspector would get in contact with her to arrange an inspection.
21. The managing agent emailed the Council and said Miss X was away until early September and it could not install the flooring until she returned.
22. The Council emailed the managing agent in mid-September and asked if it had contacted Miss X as she had returned from holiday. It copied Miss X into the email. Miss X responded and said the managing agent had failed to contact her. She sent an email the following week and said a contractor had visited to inspect the matter, but he did not install any flooring. She asked the Council if it was reasonable for her and her young child to be living in such conditions.
23. The Council inspected the property in early October. It identified several disrepair issues with the property. It issued a notice of disrepair at the end of October and asked to managing agent to resolve all the issues. This included fitting a replacement window restrictor within seven days and blocking all the holes within 14 days to stop entry/exit points for the mice.
24. The Council sent the managing agent several emails in early November asking for an update on whether it had resolved the disrepair issues. The managing agent did not respond.
25. The Council sent further emails to the managing agent at the end of November and early December and asked for updates. It said it had imposed a financial penalty because of the failure to resolve the ongoing disrepair.
26. Miss X sent an email to the Council in early January 2024 and said she was upset it had not resolved the matter. The Council responded and said it had not received a response from the managing agent. It sent an email to the managing agent and asked it to contact Miss X to resolve the disrepair issues.
27. Miss X emailed the Council and the managing agent in March and said she was still waiting for a resolution.
28. The Council has recently (January 2025) moved Miss X to alternative temporary accommodation. It explained it did this as the managing agent said it was unlikely it could resolve the issues in the property while Miss X was still living there.

Back to top

Analysis

29. The Council had a duty to ensure Miss X’s temporary accommodation was suitable and free from disrepair. When she first raised the issues with the mice and the windows, it did contact the managing agent to get them resolved. However, I find there were some occasions when it failed to have enough oversight of whether the managing agent had completed the works and resolved the issues. It did so after Miss X had complained which was reactive rather than proactive. This is fault.
30. Miss X also asked for the Council to inspect the property in June and decide whether it was still suitable for her. The Council did not inspect the property until October. Given Miss X’s continuous reports of disrepair, the Council should have arranged its own inspection sooner. This delay is fault.
31. The Council identified several disrepair issues with the temporary accommodation, including issues with holes in the property (linked to the mice infestation) and issues with the windows. While I accept it did chase the managing agent and issue a financial penalty, the managing agent failed to resolve the issues. The Council stopped chasing the managing agent, and left Miss X in a property with unresolved disrepair issues. The Council is responsible for the actions of the managing agent when it acts on its behalf to manage temporary accommodation. I therefore find the Council at fault.
32. Miss X’s reports of disrepair and the unresolved issues should also have prompted the Council to reconsider the suitability of the accommodation. Its failure to do so is fault.
33. The Council’s faults have caused Miss X avoidable distress, and she was caused frustration by having to continually raise the issues. It is also more likely than not that if the Council had conducted a suitability review, it would have decided the property was unsuitable for Miss X (after the inspection report and disrepair notice in October 2023). This is because it has now moved Miss X because the managing agent could not resolve the issues with the property while she was still living there. There is no evidence the issues with the property now are any different to those in October 2023. Therefore, the Council’s faults also meant Miss X was deprived of suitable accommodation from October 2023 to January 2025, a period of 15 months. This is a significant injustice.

Back to top

Agreed Action

34. When a Council commissions another organisation to provide services on its behalf, it remains responsible for those services and for the actions of the organisation providing them.
35. By 14 April 2025 the Council has agreed to:

• Apologise to Miss X for the injustice caused by fault in this statement.
• Pay Miss X £2,250 to reflect the time she was living in unsuitable temporary accommodation (October 2023 to January 2025).
• Pay Miss X a further £250 for the distress and frustration caused.

36. By 12 May 2025 the Council has agreed to ensure it has mechanisms in place to assess the suitability of temporary accommodation following reports of disrepair from tenants.
37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final Decision

38. There was fault by the Council, which caused Miss X an injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and so I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman