Summary: The Council failed to take proper account of the health needs of Miss B’s son, when it offered her interim accommodation that was too far away from his school and involved him making a long journey on public transport. It has acknowledged that the accommodation may not have been suitable for the family. Miss B had to separate her children to sleep on the floors and sofas of other family members during this time. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy the injustice it caused Miss B and her family.

The complaint

1. Miss B complained the Council failed to consider whether the interim accommodation it offered her family was suitable, and wrongly ended its duty to her when she refused this accommodation.
2. Miss B says that as a result of the Council’s failings her family were forced to separate into different households. They were sleeping on floors and sofas. This caused them distress, and impacted on their existing physical and mental illness.

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. 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

5. I considered the information provided by Miss B and discussed the issues with her. I considered the information provided by the Council including its file documents. I also considered the law and guidance set out below. Both parties had the opportunity to comment on a draft of this statement. I have considered any comments received before issuing this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The law and guidance

6. 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.
7. 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. This is called the relief duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
8. If a council is satisfied an applicant is 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. (Housing Act 1996)
9. A council must secure interim accommodation for an applicant and their household if it has reason to believe the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
10. 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)
11. Councils must consider the location of accommodation when they consider if it is suitable for the applicant and members of their household. If a council places an applicant outside its district, it must consider, among other matters:

• the distance of the accommodation from the “home” district;
• the significance of any disruption to the education of members of the applicant’s household; and
• the proximity and accessibility to local services, amenities and transport. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2012)

12. As well as this, the councils must have regard to the suitability of accommodation for households with particular medical and/or physical needs. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.5)
13. Statutory guidance on travel to school says that as a general guide a child should travel a maximum of 45 minutes each way to primary school. However, councils should consider how a child’s medical needs might affect the child during their journey to and from school.

What happened

14. Miss B lived with her four children in rented accommodation. Her landlord served a notice as he intended to sell the property.
15. Miss B applied to the Council as homeless. The Council noted that her daughter has a condition that means she cannot reliably sense danger and this is treated by the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS). The Council also noted that Miss B’s son has a long-term physical illness that means that he has additional toileting needs, as well as pain and fatigue. A consultant’s letter to the Council makes clear that he needs easy access to bathroom facilities, his own space at home to rest, and he should be housed as close to school as possible to limit his need to travel on public transport.
16. The Council accepted that it owed Miss B a relief duty in April 2024. The landlord took court action and the bailiff warrant was due to be executed in May 2024.
17. The Council offered Miss B interim accommodation. She refused this. The Council made another offer of interim accommodation. Miss B again refused this offer. Miss B said that neither property was suitable because it would take her son an hour to travel to school and he would need to take three trains without access to public toilets. Miss B said that the interim accommodation was not suitable and goes against the medical advice she had provided. Miss B said that the journey is also not suitable for her daughter who cannot reliably sense danger. Lastly, Miss B said that her employment contract stipulates that she must live within three miles of her employer.
18. The Council had completed an assessment of the suitability of these properties before it offered them to Miss B as interim accommodation. The assessment says the children can change school if housed further away, but noted that Miss B’s daughter’s school had confirmed that she should stay within the borough. It noted that Miss B’s son’s medical condition meant that he has to attend regular hospital appointments, and that the family do not have access to a car. The assessment does not mention that Miss B’s son needs access to public toilets and should limit travel by public transport.
19. Miss B asked the Council to review its decision. The Council did this but decided that the interim accommodation offered was suitable. As part of the review, the Council considered the reasons Miss B had refused the accommodation. The Council said the journey time from the interim accommodation to school would be 59 minutes. It said that it is not ideal given the medical needs of both children. It said it had taken her son’s medical needs into account and prioritised accommodation within the borough, but this had not been available. The Council suggested that she negotiate with her employer regarding travel times to work.
20. The Council has explained to me that it took into account the statutory guidance on travel to school. This sets a maximum of 45 minutes for each leg of the journey. It’s view was that the emergency accommodation it offered Miss B was close to this limit. The Council has also explained that there is a shortage of interim accommodation and demand far outweighs supply. The Council did not have any accommodation available in the borough and so it offered accommodation further away. It explained that it would continue to look for accommodation and would move Miss B’s family back to the borough as soon as possible.
21. The Council said that it had explained to Miss B that as he had refused the properties, it would not offer her any further interim accommodation. By this time, Miss B had been evicted from her rented property, and would now have to make her own arrangements for accommodation. The Council told her it would continue to progress her homeless application. The Council added that Miss B did not have a right to request a review of this decision, but she could take court action for a judicial review.
22. Miss B has explained that she had to separate the children to live with different relatives, where she and children slept on sofas and floors. Miss B has explained that this caused her and the children distressed and also impacted greatly on the children with health needs.
23. In June, the Council ended the relief duty and accepted that it owed Miss B a main housing duty. In July, the Council provided Miss B accommodation.

Was there fault by the Council causing Miss B and her family injustice?

24. It is for the Council to decide whether accommodation is suitable. However, the Council has acknowledged that it did not have sufficient regard for the needs of Miss B’s son when it offered interim accommodation. When it completed its suitability assessment, the Council did not mention that her son needed to access toilet facilities easily and limit public transport journeys. The Council did consider this when it reviewed its offer of accommodation at Miss B’s request. However, it then said the offer was suitable because there was nothing closer to her son’s school.
25. I sympathise with the Council’s position. However, the fact that there was nothing better available does not make the accommodation offered suitable. Given the clear evidence from the consultant, it is unlikely that the interim accommodation was suitable. As such the Council should have continued to look for suitable interim accommodation for the family.
26. Miss B says that as a result of the Council’s shortcomings, she had to split up the children to live with different family members. I realise that suitable accommodation may not have been available but I have also taken into account that the Council told Miss B it would not offer further interim accommodation. This is likely to have caused Miss B and her children distress and uncertainty. It also has the potential to impact on their health. This situation lasted from mid-May to mid-July.

Back to top

Agreed action

27. The Council will within one month of this decision statement:
• Apologise to Miss B. 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.
• Pay to Miss B £600 in recognition of the distress and uncertainty it caused her, and to recognise that her family was forced to stay in unsuitable accommodation for several months.
• Share this decision with relevant homelessness staff and remind them that interim accommodation should always be suitable, and it needs to take into account the individual circumstances and needs of the household.
28. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council leading to injustice to Miss B and her family.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman