Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s failure to provide suitable temporary accommodation and promptly respond to her reports of disrepair. We found the Council was at fault because it took too long to carry out a suitability review. There was also fault with the Council’s complaint handling and the actions of the Council’s contractor. The Council already accepted some fault and provided a partial remedy in response to her complaint. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused by the additional areas of fault we identified, the Council agreed to apologise and make a further symbolic payment to Ms X. It will also take action to improve its service.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s response to concerns she raised about disrepair at her temporary accommodation. In particular, she complains about:
1. persistent failure to promptly and effectively address numerous disrepair issues;
2. delay in responding to her request for a suitability review; and
3. poor complaint handling and customer service.
2. Ms X says this caused significant distress and frustration.

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.
5. 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)
6. 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, section 25(7), as amended)
7. 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(1), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. I have investigated matters from September 2023 to September 2024. This period covers 12 months prior to when Ms X complained to the Ombudsman in September 2024.
9. I have not exercised discretion to investigate matters before September 2023. This is because they are late complaints and there are no good reasons to investigate them now. Ms X was aware of the matter at the time, and I consider she could have complained to the Ombudsman sooner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law, guidance and policy

Homelessness

12. 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.
13. 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 for them. 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)

Suitability of temporary accommodation

14. Temporary accommodation is accommodation provided to homeless applicants as part of a council’s main homelessness duty.
15. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of his or her household. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
16. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified of the decision on their homelessness application. There is also a right to request a review of the suitability of temporary accommodation provided once the Council has accepted the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 202)
17. Councils must complete reviews of the following decisions within eight weeks of the date of the review request regarding suitability of accommodation.

Disrepair in temporary accommodation

18. Temporary accommodation is not suitable if it falls below certain minimum standards.
19. The Council contracts the management of temporary accommodation, including carrying out repairs, to a private contractor, ZFA Group (“the Contractor”). Under the terms of the contract, repairs should be resolved between two hours and 28 days, depending on the nature of the repair.

What happened

20. I have set out below a summary of the key events. But it is not meant to show everything that happened.

Contextual information

21. Ms X made a homelessness application to the Council in 2022. In response. the Council accepted she was owed the main homelessness duty and provided her with temporary accommodation (“the Flat”) in the private sector. She shared the flat with her young child. Since moving into the Flat, she made several reports of disrepair, including lack of hot water. Ms X was dissatisfied with both the suitability of the Flat and the Contractor’s failure to respond promptly to her reports of disrepair and its poor customer service.

Events I have investigated

22. From September 2023 onwards, Ms X continued to report disrepair to the Contractor and the Council. Her landlord was also involved in trying to resolve issues at the Flat, including a faulty bathroom door, blocked shower, broken blind and lack of hot water, an issue that had occurred previously.
23. Ms X formally complained to the Council in October 2023. She says she was frustrated by the Contractor failing to resolve the problems at the Flat and the Contractor’s poor, and often rude, customer service. She also wrote to her MP, who asked the Council to look into the matter.
24. A Council officer (Officer B) carried out an inspection in October 2023.
25. In response to her complaint, Ms X was told her concerns had been, “escalated to the Temporary Accommodation Management Team”. Because this response failed address any of her concerns, she made a further complaint.
26. In February 2024, Ms X was served with a notice to quit by her landlord.
27. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaint in March 2024. In summary the Council:

• accepted its stage one complaint response was inadequate;
• agreed to prioritise a move from the Flat because of her impending eviction;
• found no evidence her reports of disrepair had been ignored by the Contractor;
• said it would look into the conduct of the Contractor; and
• offered Ms X £300 in recognition of its poor complaint handling.

28. Dissatisfied with this outcome, and the Council’s failure to rehouse her, Ms X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman in September 2024.
29. Ms X was moved into alternative temporary accommodation in November 2024.

Analysis

30. I will respond to Ms X’s separate areas of complaint below.

Disrepair

31. Councils should ensure applicants are in suitable accommodation which is free from disrepair or hazards. Where there is persistent or recurring disrepair which has not been remedied, we would expect the Council to be pro-active and undertake thorough investigation to establish the underlying cause of the disrepair and the remedial works required.
32. The case records show Ms X made a number of reports of disrepair to the Contractor between during the time period I have investigated. The emails I have seen confirm both the Council and the Contractor responded to these reports within a reasonable timescale and, in the most part, took prompt remedial action.
33. The Council has acknowledged it took longer than its expected timescale of two weeks to restore hot water to Ms X’s kitchen in October 2023. The Council has already apologised to Ms X for this delay.
34. It is clear from the records I have seen that the relationship between Ms X, the Contractor and her landlord became strained over time. The Contractor also claims Ms X contributed to the disrepair by her own actions and was often unavailable that led to delay in carrying out some repairs. Ms X has told me she was let down on numerous occasions when tradesmen failed to attend.
35. In response to my enquiries, the Council carried out its own review of communications between Ms X and the Contractor. It concluded there was evidence of “attitude and language displayed towards Ms X that falls very short of the standards we expect from out managing agents”. The Council says it will take this matter up with the Contractor to prevent a reoccurrence.
36. Taking into account this admission, together with the delay in reinstalling Ms X’s hot water, I am persuaded to make a finding of fault in respect of this aspect of Ms X’s complaint.

Suitability review

37. In response to my enquiries, the Council confirmed Ms X requested a review of the suitability of the Flat in November 2022. This review was not completed until May 2024. The law says such reviews should be completed within eight weeks. In this case, there was a delay of 15 months
38. This lengthy delay was fault.
39. Because the review finally determined the Flat was suitable, the injustice to Ms X is limited to her distress caused by the delay as opposed to living in unsuitable accommodation for longer than necessary. This is reflected in my recommendations below.

Complaint handling and customer service

40. The Council took too long to respond to her formal complaint. The stage one response was also inadequate and failed to address any of the issues raised by Ms X. It has apologised for this and paid her £300. I consider this action is a proportionate remedy for the frustration experienced by Ms X
41. I found no evidence of any significant delays by Council officers dealing with Ms X’s housing related issues leading. Nor did I find evidence of poor customer service, beyond the issues I have dealt with above.

Back to top

Agreed action

42. When a council commissions or arranges for another organisation to provide services, we treat actions taken by or on behalf of that organisation as actions taken on behalf of the council and in the exercise of the council’s functions. Where we find fault with the actions of the service provider, we can make recommendations to the council alone. Here we have found fault with the actions of the of both the Council and the Contractor and the Council has agreed to take the following action, to be completed within four weeks from the date of my final decision.
1. Apologise in writing to Ms X.
2. Pay Miss X £100 as a symbolic payment to acknowledge the significant delay in completing a suitability review.
3. Pay Miss X £100 as a symbolic payment to acknowledge the distress caused by the action so the Contractor and delay in completing repairs.
4. By training or other means remind officers they should ensure suitability reviews are carried out within eight weeks of a request being made.
43. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

44. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take action to remedy the outstanding injustice to Ms X and improve its service.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman