Summary: There was fault by the Council. The Council placed a family in Bed and Breakfast accommodation for 14 weeks longer than they should have been. This also meant the family had extra costs for furniture storage that would not have incurred if they had been moved to more suitable temporary accommodation sooner. An apology and payment remedies the injustice to the family.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Miss X complains her family were placed in Bed and Breakfast accommodation for over 6 weeks. She says that it affected her health and she had to pay for takeaways and storage for her possessions.
2. Miss X also complains the temporary accommodation she was moved to was unsuitable.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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 and have not investigated

5. I have investigated Miss X’s complaint that her family were placed in Bed and Breakfast accommodation for over 6 weeks.
6. I do not intend to investigate the suitability of Miss X’s current temporary accommodation. The Council decided on 20 February 2024 that Miss X’s current temporary accommodation is suitable. The letter told Miss X she had a right to a review of the decision that the accommodation was suitable. Miss X did not use this right to challenge the Council’s decision and so I see no reason why the Ombudsman should investigate it now. Miss X had 21 days from 20 February 2024 to challenge the decision and would have been aware at that time that the accommodation was on the second, not the first floor, so could have challenged it on those grounds. Miss X could have also asked Occupational Therapy to carry out an assessment on whether the property was suitable for her, as she is partially sighted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I read the papers put in by Miss X and discussed the complaint with her.
8. I considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and any supporting documents it provided.
9. Miss 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

10. Miss X and her family were in Bed and Breakfast accommodation from 5 October 2023 until 20 February 2024. This is just under 20 weeks.
11. The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2003 says Bed and Breakfast accommodation is not suitable for households with “family commitments”. The Order defines this as a household that includes a dependent child or a pregnant woman. Where no other accommodation is available, the authority may place a family in Bed and Breakfast as a last resort but only for a maximum of six weeks.
12. The Council has accepted it was at fault, as the family were in Bed and Breakfast accommodation for 14 weeks longer than they should have been. The Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies recommends 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. Miss X is partially sighted, with three children and so I consider the payment should be at the top end of the remedy scale as I understand she had no cooking facilities so would have had costs for takeaway food. I recommend a payment of £2800 for the time spent in unsuitable accommodation.
13. Miss X has also said that she incurred storage costs of £1132 for furniture, which would not have been incurred if the family had been moved out of Bed and Breakfast accommodation earlier.
14. The Council has said that ‘Miss X was scheduled to be evicted from her private accommodation on 5 October 2023.  Her request for us to provide storage facilities for her belongings was made on 3 October 2023 and her temporary accommodation licence agreement began on 5 October 2023.  Unfortunately, this was during the period when our storage provision was suspended and Miss X was asked to make her own private arrangements for storage. With this in mind, if Miss X provides proof of the cost of storage from 5 October to 23 October, we will re-imbursement these costs’.
15. Our guidance on remedies says ‘we may recommend a council reimburses a homeless person for extra costs incurred as a direct result of fault in dealing with the homelessness application or arranging suitable accommodation. For example, charges to store personal belongings when a council has breached the six-week maximum limit for families in Bed and Breakfast accommodation and an earlier move to alternative temporary accommodation means they could have taken their belongings out of storage sooner’.
16. The Council has agreed to refund Miss X the £1132 storage costs she would not have had to pay if she had been moved to more suitable temporary accommodation earlier, so would not have needed to place her belongings into storage. I have deducted the costs for the first 6 weeks which Miss X would have had to pay, apart from the charges for 5 to 23 October which the Council has already agreed to pay. I have calculated the costs as £1132. This is £141.42 from 5 to 23 October 2024 and £990.35 from 16 November 2024 to 20 February 2025 (£86 + £904.35).

Back to top

Agreed action

17. Within one month of the date of the decision on this complaint the Council should:
• Apologise to Miss X. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Pay Miss X £3932 (£2800 + £1132).
18. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I have completed my investigation of this complaint. This complaint is upheld, as there was fault by the Council. The actions described above, remedy the injustice to the family.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman