Summary: Miss B complained about how the Council handled her homelessness. There was fault because the Council wrongly advised her about its duty to protect her belongings and it placed her family in hotel accommodation without cooking facilities for longer than the law allows. This caused Miss B to accrue rent arrears when she could not move her belongings, and caused her distress and expense when she could not cook for her family. The Council should apologise to Miss B, make a payment to recognise the impact on her of the unsuitable accommodation, and waive some of the rent arrears she accrued.

The complaint

1. Miss B complains that the Council:
• Failed to take effective action when Miss B told it that her case officer knew her family and requested a change of officer;
• Failed to give her proper advice and information about homelessness or her housing situation;
• Offered her unsuitable housing because it did not meet the disability needs of her child and did not take into account her work situation;
• Wrongly decided that she was not eligible to join the housing register; and
• Wrongly advised her about storage of her belongings whilst homeless so that she had to pay for moving her belongings, and accrued rent arrears while her belongings were in a property that she no longer lived in.
2. Miss B says that as a result of the Council’s shortcomings she has been unsupported looking for settled housing for her and her children; she has been caused distress and frustration; and she incurred rent arrears because she could not move her belongings.

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

What I have and have not investigated

Timeframe

5. I have investigated the Council’s actions regarding Miss B’s housing situation from February 2024 to when she complained to us in July 2024.

Matters which I have not investigated

6. 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 accommodation and accommodation provided under the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
7. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the various decisions including these relevant to this case:

• giving notice to bring the relief of main housing duty to an end;
• the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.

8. 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)
9. 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)
10. I have not investigated whether the temporary accommodation the Council offered Miss B was suitable, nor whether the Council was wrong to end the relief duty and the main housing duty. This is because, Miss B used her legal right of review and the Council informed her of her right to take these matters to court. I appreciate that Miss B was in a stressful situation and had limited funds. However, Miss B had legal representation and so it was reasonable to expect her to use her right to start court action.
11. I have investigated whether the Council made sure that the emergency accommodation it offered her was suitable.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

12. 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 all the comments before reaching this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The law and guidance

The relief duty

13. 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)

The main housing duty

14. 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 (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

Interim and temporary accommodation, suitability, and B&B accommodation

15. There are two types of accommodation councils provide to certain homeless applicants: interim accommodation and temporary accommodation.
16. 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)
17. If, having made inquiries, the council is not satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible, and in priority need, it will have no further accommodation duty.
18. 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)
19. 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. The right to ask for a review of suitability, and the right to start court action about this only applies to temporary accommodation and not interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
20. Wherever possible, Councils should avoid using bed and breakfast accommodation. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.33)
21. Bed and breakfast (B&B) accommodation can only be used for households which include a pregnant woman or dependent child when no other accommodation is available and then for no more than six weeks. B&B is accommodation which is not self-contained, not owned by the council or a registered provider of social housing and where the toilet, washing, or cooking facilities are shared with other households. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.35)

Protecting belongings during homelessness

22. Where the council owes or has owed certain housing duties to an applicant, it must protect the applicant’s personal property if there is a risk it may be lost or damaged. A council may make a reasonable charge for storage and reserve the right to dispose of the property if it loses contact with the applicant. (Housing Act 1996, section 211, Homelessness Code of Guidance chapter 20)

Housing allocations and the Council’s scheme

23. 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))
24. The Council’s allocations scheme says that a person must have a local connection to be eligible to join the housing register. This is largely a person who has lived or worked in the area for some time. But the scheme allows some applicants to join the register without a local connection. Relevant to Miss B’s situation, this includes those who have to move due to domestic abuse, homeless people, and key workers.

What happened

Homelessness

25. Miss B and her two children had been living with her mother but they were asked to move out. Miss B made a homeless application to the Council in February 2024. The Council triaged the application that day. It established that Miss B would be facing homelessness within the next two weeks and so it booked an appointment for it to assess the situation with Miss B.
26. During the appointment, Miss B realised that the case officer knew her mother and so she asked for a change of officer. The officer says that Miss B made this request during the conversation but she had understood that it was agreed that the officer would continue to work with Miss B. The same officer completed the full homelessness assessment later that week. Miss B has told me that she had thought it was agreed the case would be reallocated to a new officer.
27. The Council says it discussed Miss B’s options with her and correctly advised her to register on the Council’s housing register. The Council also advised Miss B to look for private rented housing.
28. On 12 March, the Council accepted it owed her a relief duty and it offered her interim accommodation. Miss B moved there but said that it was not suitable because her job involved supporting vulnerable people and one of her clients lived on that street. The Council changed the housing officer. Miss B’s manager contacted the Council with details of the risk to Miss B, and after a few days the Council agreed to move Miss B and her children to a hotel. The room had its own bathroom but no kitchen.
29. Miss B asked the Council whether it would help her move and store her belongings. The Council at first told Miss B that it could not help her with this. The Council then told Miss B it would help her apply for a discretionary payment toward the cost of storage and moving her belongings from the vacated interim accommodation.
30. In the meantime, the Council had offered Miss B temporary accommodation. This would be available to her for at least six months and so the Council said that this offer would end the relief duty. The Council was able to offer this property because it had been hard to let.
31. Miss B said the temporary accommodation was not suitable for Miss B’s disabled child. Miss B had already spoken to the Council about this and it had mentioned it might offer a ground floor property instead.
32. The Council reviewed its decision to offer Miss B that property. It overturned the decision to end the relief duty because it was concerned that it had not properly checked whether the property it had offered was suitable for Miss B’s child. The Council decided that it would re-start the relief period. It asked Miss B to provide medical information about her daughter’s needs, or give consent for the Council to ask her doctor about this.
33. Miss B remained in the hotel but her belongings were still at the original interim accommodation because Miss B could not afford to move or store them. This meant that Miss B also had to pay rent on the interim accommodation. Miss B had moved from the interim accommodation to the hotel on 27 March. Miss B had applied for the discretionary payment to help her move her belongings but the Council served a notice on her that it would dispose of these before it had decided her application.
34. The Council then notified Miss B on 9 April that it accepted a duty to protect and store her belongings. A few days later the Council told Miss B that it would make a discretionary payment of £532 toward moving and storing her belongings, but that she owed over £400 in rent arrears, and she would have to pay the ongoing cost of storage. The Council’s financial assessment said that she should reduce her non-essential expenditure. It listed items, including a payment to a named credit card that Mrs B does not have.
35. Miss B asked the Council to reconsider the charge for storage of her belongings while she was in the hotel. She said that she does not make the non-essential expenditure listed and the bank statements she sent to the Council show this to be the case.
36. The Council reviewed Miss B’s finances but said that it was satisfied she could afford the storage costs. It said that its officer had meant that non-essential expenditure as examples only. The Councill accepted this was confusing and instructed the officer to stop this practice.
37. The Council again considered the suitability of the temporary accommodation it had offered. Miss B had not provided evidence that showed her daughter could not manage the stairs, and had not given consent for the Council to get information from the doctor. Miss B had also said that the area would not be suitable as she had been threatened by her former partner nearby. The Council asked for more information about this, but did not receive any.
38. On this basis, the Council decided that the temporary accommodation was still suitable. It was still available and so the Council offered Miss B the temporary accommodation again. It gave Miss B some time to consider the offer and view the property. It also warned her that if she refused the property, the Council would not owe her a further housing duty.
39. At this time, the Council also moved Miss B from the hotel to a self-contained apartment. Miss B and her children had lived in the hotel from 22 March to 28 May, just under 10 weeks.
40. In the meantime, the relief duty ended as 56 days had elapsed. The offer of the temporary accommodation was outstanding and it was waiting for Miss B to view the property and so the Council accepted the main housing duty and made a formal final offer of the same property to Miss B under the main housing duty.
41. Miss B’s solicitor submitted a review request against the suitability of the temporary accommodation. The Council processed the review request. It considered the evidence it had from Miss B’s work, the lack of evidence of the impact of her daughter’s disability, other information it had about the area and transport links, and the lack of information of DA that might affect the area she could live in. The Council decided that the temporary accommodation was suitable and it was right to end the housing duty when Miss B refused this.

The Council’s housing allocations scheme

42. Miss B had applied to join the Council’s housing register. The Council decided that Miss B had no local connection because she had not lived in the area before, and although she worked in the area her contract of employment was only four months.
43. Miss B asked the Council to review this decision. She said the Council should make an exception and allow her to join the register. She said she met the criteria of the Council’s policy because she was moving to escape domestic abuse and because she was homeless.
44. The Council completed the review. It had asked Miss B for more information about the domestic abuse but she had not responded to this, and so it could not assess whether Miss B could go on the housing register without a local connection. By this time, the Council had ended its homelessness duty to Miss B and so it also could not admit her as homeless to the register. The Council had also considered whether it could admit Miss B as a key worker. Its policy says that it will consider the circumstances of a key worker on a case-by-case basis. Miss B had a temporary short-term contract and so the Council said this too would not be enough to exempt her from having a local connection.

The Council’s position

45. Miss B complained to the Council. Its two complaint responses say:
• Miss B had requested a change of worker. There was no policy around officers dealing with people they know. There was no evidence of malice by the housing officer, and the case officer has since changed.
• The Council had given the correct housing advice to apply to the housing register and to look at private rented housing, while the Council considered interim accommodation and whether it had a homelessness duty. It could not give more concrete advice at that time.
• It was correct to offer her the interim accommodation because it did not have any information at the time to suggest that it was not suitable. The Council also said that although it moved Miss B to the hotel, the Council had not actually established that the interim accommodation posed a safeguarding risk to her.
• The Council should have checked whether the first property it offered her was suitable for her child’s needs. Its location, however, was suitable for Miss B.
• The Council had not given Miss B correct information about its duty to protect her belongings. It apologised to Miss B and said it would train staff and review how they communicated with the public.
• The Council said however, it was not responsible for Miss B’s rent arrears because although it had not given her the correct advice, it had helped her with a discretionary payment.
• The Council said it should not award compensation at that time as it had not been able to establish an intentional abuse of power or malice.

Analysis

Complaint that the Council did not change the officer when it became clear they knew Miss B’s mother

46. The Council does not have a set procedure or practice for when this happens, and I appreciate that a member of staff working and living locally may at times come in contact with someone they know. However, I would expect the Council to have considered this and have some means of identifying and dealing with conflicts of interest. This is part of ensuring members of the public are treated fairly and proportionately, and is good administrative practice.
47. In this case, I cannot tell when and how Miss B asked the Council to change the staff member dealing with her housing situation. However, there is no evidence that by continuing to work with Miss B, this member of staff was biased or treated her unfairly. I also note that the Council gave Miss B a new case officer fairly early on in the process. The Council could have been more prepared and handled this situation better, but there is no clear evidence of fault.

Complaint that the Council failed to give Miss B proper advice and information

48. The Council’s files are clear that at the assessment interview it advised Miss B to apply to the housing register, but that there could be issues with her local connection. The Council also told Miss B to look for private rented housing and that it would decide what duty it had to her. It set this out in her personalised housing plan. It then notified Miss B within two weeks that it accepted a relief duty.
49. At that early stage, the Council was still assessing the situation and it could not be certain what course of action it would take. The advice it gave Miss B was full and it gave her as much information as it could.
50. I can see that there were times when Miss B was left uncertain or where the process became confusing for example, when Miss B was waiting for a decision on the housing register. However, this was not due to fault by the Council.

Complaint that the Council offered Miss B unsuitable housing

51. I have not investigated whether the Council ensured that the temporary housing was suitable because Miss B had a legal right to ask the Council to review this and could then take court action.
52. I have investigated whether the Council ensured that the interim accommodation was suitable. This was the original housing where Miss B stayed for around four days, the hotel, and the apartment.
53. Miss B told the Council that its original offer was not suitable because it was close to a client she was supporting at work and might put her at risk. The Council reviewed whether this made the housing unsuitable. It found that there was no clear safeguarding risk, but it decided that as a gesture of goodwill it would move Miss B to the hotel.
54. There was no fault when the Council placed Miss B at the first interim accommodation. It did so based on the information it had at the time. It took action soon after Miss B raised concerns.
55. The law says wherever possible, Councils should avoid using private accommodation with no cooking facilities, such as a hotel, for families with children. It can only be used for families when no other accommodation is available and then for no more than six weeks.
56. Miss B was at the hotel for nearly ten weeks, four weeks longer than the law allows. I appreciate that during that time, the Council offered Miss B the temporary property. The Council may have expected Miss B to move to that property and leave the hotel. However, each time the Council offered this property, Miss B asked for a legal review of its suitability. The Council must provide interim accommodation whilst it is carrying out a review. It still had to make sure this was suitable, and was still bound by the same legal limit of six weeks in the hotel.
57. Keeping Miss B in the hotel for longer than six weeks was fault by the Council. I can see from the case notes that the Council tried to help with asking the hotel restaurant to heat food and with getting Miss B a fridge and microwave in the room. However, this is not the same as cooking facilities and Miss B told the Council how difficult and expensive it was to feed the family at the hotel.

Complaint that the Council wrongly decided that Miss B could not join the housing register.

58. There was no fault in how the Council decided Miss B’s housing register application. It decided in accordance with its allocations policy that Miss B did not have a local connection. When Miss B asked the Council to review its decision, it considered whether domestic abuse meant she was exempt from needing a local connection, but did not have enough information to find this. The Council also considered whether her homelessness, or her job would allow Miss B to join the housing register without a local connection.
59. There was no fault in how it reached its decisions and it has been able to explain fully its reasons.

Complaint that the Council wrongly advised her about storage of Miss B’s belongings

60. The Council has acknowledged that it did not give Miss B correct advice about how it could help protect her belongings. This caused Miss B distress at an already very difficult time. I can see that the Council corrected this advice and helped Miss B to apply for a discretionary payment and for housing benefit. The Council also made sure that it refreshed staff training to remind it that the Council has a legal duty to protect a person’s belongings during homelessness.
61. However, Miss B only occupied the property for four days but was left with rent arrears as she could not move her belongings. I am persuaded that the Council’s wrong advice contributed to the rent arrears. Had the Council advised Miss B and helped protect her belongings sooner, it is likely that she would not have accrued rent arrears (or at least this would have been minimal). I appreciate that there would have been a charge for storage, but it is likely that this would have been less than the rent charges during that period.

Other matters

62. The Council in its complaint response said it feels it should not award compensation as it had not been able to establish an intentional abuse of power or malice. Our approach to remedies is that they are to put right the impact of what went wrong. The aim is to put the complainant back in the position they would have been in had there been no fault by the Council, regardless of the intention behind the actions. We encourage councils to take a similar approach.
63. The Council assessed how much Miss B could afford towards the storage costs. When it wrote to her about its decision, it listed some non-essential expenditure at fast food outlets and to a named credit card. Miss B asked the Council to reconsider this because her bank statements did not show this expenditure, and she does not have that credit card. The Council said that the list was meant as an example of non-essential expenditure and was not specific to her. However, another expense queried by the Council was specific to Miss B, and so I am not persuaded by its explanation.
64. Miss B said the Council should not have restarted the relief period when it decided on review, that it did not have enough information to say that the first offer of temporary accommodation was suitable. I have decided not to investigate this part of the complaint further. This is because even if this was fault, the impact of it on Miss B is limited.
65. Had the Council taken the relief period to continue during the review, it would have ended by the time the Council decided the review. It is likely that the Council would have then gone on to accept the main housing duty. The Council would still have gone on to offer the same property to Miss B. Even if Miss B disagrees with the Council’s decision to restart the relief period from the beginning, it did not significantly disadvantage her.

Back to top

Action

66. The Council will within one month of the date of my final decision:
• Apologise to Miss B for the further fault I have found. 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 to Miss B £250 in recognition of the distress it caused her when she was in the hotel for four weeks longer than the law allows.
• Waive the rent arrears incurred at the interim accommodation after Miss B moved to the hotel (or pay Miss B an equivalent amount if she has paid these off) to recognise that the Council’s wrong advice contributed to the arrears accruing. If the Council has arranged storage and charged Miss B for this, the Council may deduct from the amount it waives of rent arrears, the cost of the contribution to the storage costs that Miss B would have paid had the Council correctly advised her of its duty to protect her belongings.
• Share this decision with the relevant staff and remind them that the law says that households with children or a pregnant member cannot be in hotel or bed and breakfast accommodation for longer than six weeks.
67. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

68. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council causing injustice to Miss B.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman