Summary: Ms X complained the Council has failed to provide suitable temporary accommodation for her son Mr Y despite accepting a homelessness duty. We find the delays in dealing with Mr Y’s homelessness application and the failure to provide suitable interim or temporary accommodation are fault. These faults have caused Mr Y and Ms X an injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X complained the Council has failed to provide suitable temporary accommodation for her son Mr Y despite accepting a homelessness duty.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, 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. Mr Y has made several homelessness applications since 2020 but my investigation focuses only on the most recent application in 2023. The earlier applications occurred significantly more than 12 months before Ms X complained to the Ombudsman. We would not now consider them.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Ms X;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• discussed the issues with Ms X; and
• Ms 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

7. 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.
8. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)

The relief duty

9. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
10. 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)

The main housing duty

11. 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)
12. 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)
13. There is a statutory right to review the suitability of temporary accommodation. This then carries a right of appeal to county court on a point of law. There is no statutory right to review the suitability of interim accommodation.

Housing register

14. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. All allocations must be made in strict accordance with the published scheme. (Housing Act 1996, section 166A(1) & (14))
15. The Localism Act 2011 introduced new freedoms to allow councils to better manage their waiting list and to tailor their allocation priorities to meet local needs.
16. The Council places applicants into Bands A to D, with A being the highest priority band. Homeless applicants who do not satisfy the 10-year continuous residence rule are placed in Band D.

What happened here

17. Mr Y made a homelessness application on 3 May 2023. He was sleeping on Ms X’s sofa but could not continue to stay there as it breached the terms of her tenancy agreement.
18. On the same day the Council wrote to Mr Y accepting he was homeless and that it owed a relief duty. This meant it had a duty over the next 56 days to help him secure accommodation. As the Council had reason to believe Mr Y may have a priority need it confirmed it also had a duty to provide him with interim accommodation.
19. On 4 May 2023 the Council offered Mr Y interim accommodation at Property 1. Mr Y declined the offer as Property 1 was too far from his mother’s home and was not self-contained. As the Council considered Property 1 was suitable for Mr Y’s needs it discharged its duty to provide interim accommodation. It told Mr Y it would not offer any alternative interim accommodation.
20. Ms X disputed this decision. She noted the property was outside the Council’s borough, in an area Mr Y was not familiar with and too far from his friends and family. She asserted moving to this property would have had a detrimental impact in Mr Y’s mental health. Mr Y did not have a formal right of appeal against this decision and there is no record the Council responded to Ms X’s concerns.
21. Mr Y also applied to join the housing register. The Council rejected and closed his application as he had no fixed abode and could not apply using Ms X’s address.
22. On 17 May the housing officer referred Mr Y to the Council’s adult social care service for a care assessment. The referral advised that to find suitable accommodation for Mr Y they needed to ensure he was able to live independently and if so, whether he was eligible for support if required. The officer said they required information regarding any medical reason why Mr Y cannot share facilities in privately rented accommodation.
23. The housing officer also advised Ms X they needed to ensure Mr Y was offered suitable accommodation with support in place if needed. And therefore required a care and support needs assessment by social services before the case could progress.
24. Mr Y’s solicitor chased the Council for an update in August 2023. They noted the Council had accepted a relief duty in May 2023 and that more than eight weeks later he was still homeless and living in unsuitable accommodation. The solicitor understood the Council had agreed with Mr Y that he would not go into shared accommodation as this was unsuitable for him. They advised Mr Y had applied to join the housing register but had been refused as he was living with Ms X. They asked the Council to assist with this application and to chase social services for an assessment as this was preventing Mr Y from finding more secure accommodation and being supported.
25. In its response the housing officer said they currently had no information to indicate that shared accommodation was not suitable for Mr Y. Mr Y had provided evidence he had been referred for an assessment but there was no formal diagnosis of Autism spectrum disorder. The officer said they could refer Mr Y for shared accommodation to relieve his homelessness however he had stated he will not accept this. They also confirmed Mr Y’s had been added to the housing register and sent details of his registration.
26. The housing officer also chased social services for an assessment for Mr Y. An appointment was arranged for 14 August 2023.
27. On 24 August 2023 Mr Y’s solicitor advised the housing officer Mr Y was now street homeless. They asked whether the social care assessment confirmed Mr Y needed self-contained accommodation. The solicitor then chased a response on 30 August 2023.
28. The care assessment recommended Mr Y be offered suitable accommodation which meets his needs taking into consideration his mental health and wellbeing. It states shared accommodation would not be suitable at present and could have an adverse effect on his current mental health state.
29. The housing officer sent the Council’s medical advisors a copy of the assessment and asked for advice on whether Mr Y would be deemed vulnerable and whether shared accommodation would be suitable. The medical advisor did not consider Mr Y’s specific medical issues were of particular significance when compared to the ordinary person if homeless. They did not specifically comment on the suitability of shared accommodation.
30. Mr Y’s solicitor noted the assessment recommended Mr Y was provided with a stand-alone supported living environment within self-contained accommodation. They asked the Council to confirm Mr Y would be provided with suitable accommodation. The solicitor chased the Council for a response on 26 September 2023.
31. On 27 September 2023 the Council wrote to Mr Y advising it did not consider he was in priority need. As such it advised that its duty was to provide advice and assistance in Mr Y’s attempts to secure accommodation.
32. In a second letter of the same day the Council advised Mr Y its relief duty had come to an end. It noted the 56 day period had elapsed and it had complied with its duty. The Council had decided Mr Y was not in priority need. It had determined that shared accommodation in either supported or private rented accommodation, available for at least six months, would be suitable to relieve his homelessness. As Mr Y had said he did not want to reside in shared accommodation the duty had now ended.
33. Mr Y, via his solicitors requested a review of the decision that he was not in priority need. The Council completed a review and responded on 11 December 2023. It confirmed Mr Y satisfied the criteria to be determined in priority need and his case would now be passed to an officer.
34. On 21 December 2023 the Council wrote to Mr Y accepting it owed him a main housing duty, to provide him with accommodation. The Council offered Mr Y temporary accommodation which Mr Y refused as it was too far from Ms X’s home
35. In early January 2024 Ms X and Mr Y’s solicitor chased the Council regarding accommodation for Mr Y. The solicitor asked the Council to confirm the type of accommodation that should be available to Mr Y, and to ensure that Mr Y was able to bid on properties on the housing register.
36. The Council advised it was working to secure accommodation for Mr Y and as soon as it had something suitable it would contact Mr Y to arrange viewings. The Council also provided details of Mr Y’s housing register account and confirmed adult social care would arrange a package of care after Mr Y had been accommodated.
37. It subsequently confirmed that officers tried to keep applicants as close to the borough or their desired accommodation as possible but this was not always possible. Interim accommodation was very limited and it could only offer what was available at the time.
38. In February 2024 the Council confirmed Mr Y was eligible for self-contained accommodation but at the moment the only properties available have an element of sharing a main kitchen. It said the main duty team would be looking into Mr Y’s medical information to see what they could find that would be suitable.
39. Ms X made a complaint to the Council in May 2024. Although the Council had accepted a duty to provide accommodation in December 2023 it had still not provided suitable accommodation. She complained Mr Y had been treated unfairly and had been the subject of discrimination.
40. The Council’s response set out the history to Mr Y’s homeless application and said its actions were in line with its social housing allocations policy. The Council was satisfied there was no evidence Mr Y had been treated less favourably or that he had been discriminated against.
41. As Ms X and Mr Y were dissatisfied with the Council’s response they have asked the Ombudsman to investigate their concerns.
42. In response to my enquiries the Council says it has to look for available temporary accommodation on the day a homeless applicant approaches the Council and is homeless. Although Mr Y felt the accommodation offered was too far away, the Council did not consider the area was unsuitable. It noted Mr Y had no physical disability that would mean he could not use public transport and he was not working.
43. The Council says Mr Y needs a self -contained studio or one bedroom accommodation in either the private or social sector. It says Mr Y was invited to a viewing at a newly acquired block of flats which he refused.
44. The Council has placed Mr Y on auto-bidding for social housing and the Homefinders team are looking for suitable affordable accommodation for him. As soon as they find one they will contact him.
45. It says Mr Y has refused any offer of temporary accommodation. He has been advised to approach the Council if he wants to be provided with temporary accommodation but he has not as yet.
46. As Mr Y has no fixed abode the Council says he cannot apply for social housing. He cannot apply using Ms X’s address as she lives in sheltered accommodation and she cannot have anyone living with her. However, as an accepted homeless applicant without ten years continuous residency he has been awarded Band D priority on the housing register. This is in line with the Council’s Social Housing Allocation Policy.

Analysis

47. It is clear from the documentation that there have been delays in dealing with Mr Y’s homelessness application. The Council accepted it owed Mr Y a relief duty on 3 May 2023. This duty should have come to an end 56 days later, on 28 June 2023, but the Council did not complete its enquiries until 27 September 2023. This delayed Mr Y’s ability to exercise his right of review.
48. There was also a delay in considering Mr Y’s review request. The Council should have issued a decision by 27 November 2023 but did not do so until 11 December 2023. It did not then confirm it owed Mr Y the main housing duty for a further 10 days.
49. These delays amounts to fault.
50. I also consider the Council’s failure to explain the reasons for its decision on the review is fault. The Council’s letter of 27 September 2023 sets out the evidence it has considered and explains why the Council did not consider Mr Y was in priority need. However, its letter of 11 December 2023 overturning this decision does not explain why it now considers Mr Y satisfied the criteria to be determined in priority need. It is unclear what, if any, additional information the Council considered which led it to change its position. The leads to uncertainty regarding the basis of the original decision.
51. Having accepted a relief duty and agreed to provide interim accommodation the Council had a duty to ensure the accommodation it provided was suitable.
52. In deciding whether accommodation is suitable the Council must have regard to a number of factors, including the location and the specific needs of the applicant due to a medical condition or disability
53. Ms X asserts the interim accommodation offered in May 2023 was not suitable for Mr Y’s needs. The letter discharging the Council’s duty to provide interim accommodation says the property was within the borough and therefore a reasonable distance to travel. It was also self-contained in that it had its own bathroom, bedroom, microwave, hotplate, and fridge, with the use of a larger shared kitchen. The Council said it considered the property met suitability as it was the most suitable available property it could offer while it conducted enquiries.
54. I am not persuaded that being ‘the most suitable available property’ is the correct test of whether the property was suitable for Mr Y’s needs.
55. The Council has not provided specific details of the temporary accommodation it offered Mr Y following acceptance of the main housing duty. But says it offered a property in Feltham, which Mr Y rejected as it was too far away from Ms X. It notes that Mr Y does not have a physical disability which means he cannot use public transport, and that he is not working. It did not therefore consider Feltham unsuitable. There is no evidence the Council considered any other issues such as Mr Y’s mental health or support needs when considering the location of the temporary accommodation.
56. Mr Y also refused the offer of a property with a shared kitchen. It is unclear why the Council would consider this a suitable property when it accepts Mr Y needs a self-contained studio or one bedroom accommodation.
57. It has also, more recently invited Mr Y to view newly acquired flats. Ms X says this was unsuitable as it was on the sixth floor of a large block of flats. There would be too many people in the building for Mr Y to cope with. It was also too far from her property.
58. The Council appears to accept that the properties offered were not suitable as it has not discharged its duty to Mr Y on the basis it has refused an offer of suitable accommodation. Nor has it informed Mr Y of his right to request a review of the suitability. The Council has instead said it is looking for suitable and affordable accommodation for him and will contact him as soon as it finds a property.
59. The Council also says Mr Y has refused any offer of temporary accommodation. It says it has advised Mr Y to approach the Council if he wants to be provided with temporary accommodation. However the documentation provided does not support this. It shows Ms X has repeatedly contacted the Council to request suitable accommodation for Mr Y and that the Council has advised the only properties available have a shared kitchen. The Council is aware shared accommodation is not suitable.
60. I consider the failure to provide Mr Y with suitable interim or temporary accommodation is fault.
61. Ms X also complains the Council has failed to properly consider Mr Y’s priority on the housing register. I am satisfied the Council’s decision to place Mr Y in Band D is in line with it housing allocation scheme.
62. The faults identified have caused Mr Y and Ms X an injustice. Mr Y has lived in unsuitable accommodation, sleeping on the sofa in Ms X’s one bedroom property since May 2023. This is in breach of Ms X’s tenancy and has caused her unnecessary distress and anxiety.
63. The Ombudsman has published guidance to explain how we calculate remedies for people who have suffered injustice as a result of fault by a council. Our primary aim is to put people back in the position they would have been in if the fault by the Council had not occurred.
64. Where a complainant has been deprived of suitable accommodation during what would inevitably have been a stressful period in life we may recommend the Council makes a symbolic payment to acknowledge their distress, hardship and inconvenience.
65. In the circumstances I consider a payment of £150 per month since May 2023 is appropriate. These payments should continue until the Council offers Mr Y suitable temporary or permanent accommodation.

Back to top

Agreed action

66. The Council has agreed to:
• apologise to Mr Y and Ms X for the delays in making decisions on Mr Y’s homeless application and for the failure to provide suitable interim or temporary accommodation. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• pay Mr Y £2,700 in recognition of the distress and difficulties he experienced while in unsuitable accommodation between May 2023 and October 2024;
• Pay Mr Y £150 per month for every month he remains in unsuitable temporary accommodation after October 2024;
• pay Ms X £500 to recognise the distress and anxiety she has experienced and the time and trouble she has been put to as a result of the Council’s failings;
67. The Council has also agreed to provide training/ written reminders to all relevant staff of the statutory duties to:
• ensure main housing duty decisions are made within 56 days and that if an extra 15 working days is required, that this is properly documented.
• ensure homelessness reviews are conducted within statutory timescales, and remind relevant staff of the statutory deadlines in writing.
• provide interim and temporary accommodation and to properly document decisions regarding the suitability of accommodation. The Council should ensure all offers of temporary accommodation are made to the applicant in writing and set out the applicant's statutory right to request a suitability review.
68. The Council has agreed to carry out a review of its procurement of temporary accommodation and identify ways of increasing the supply of different types of self-contained temporary accommodation.
69. The Council should take this action within one month of the final decision on this complaint and provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

70. The delays in dealing with Mr Y's homelessness application and the failure to provide suitable interim or temporary accommodation are fault. These faults have caused Mr Y and Ms X an injustice.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman