Summary: Ms C complained of behalf of Ms B that complained that the Council had delayed excessively in dealing with her homeless application and providing her with suitable accommodation. We found the Council delayed for at least 15 months in accepting the main housing duty towards Ms B and considering the suitability of her interim accommodation. It also took nine months to respond to her stage two complaint. This caused Ms B to live in unsuitable accommodation for at least a year longer than necessary. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms B and make a symbolic payment of £1800 in addition to the £300 already offered.

The complaint

1. Ms B complained that the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (the Council):
• delayed for two years in accepting the main housing duty and allowing her access to bid for accommodation on the housing register;
• failed to consider whether Ms B’s accommodation was suitable for her;
• failed to request any medical evidence to enable the Council to properly assess her medical needs;
• failed to provide suitable accommodation for her and her daughter; and
• delayed in dealing with her complaints about the matter
2. This has caused Ms B significant distress and inconvenience and prevented her from accessing the care and support she needs

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 evidence provided by Ms B and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Ms B 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

Homelessness

7. 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)

Assessments and Personal Housing Plans

8. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)

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)

Interim and Temporary accommodation

10. There are two types of accommodation councils provide to certain homeless applicants: interim accommodation and temporary accommodation.
11. 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 (people with dependent children, or who are vulnerable due to serious health problems/disability or are victims of domestic abuse). This is called interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
12. 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)
13. If a council ends its interim accommodation duty but then goes on to accept the main housing duty, it still has a duty to provide temporary accommodation.
14. 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)
15. Interim and temporary accommodation can be the same physical property. What changes is the legal duty under which a council provides it. This is important because 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.

Suitable accommodation

16. 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)
17. Homelessness temporary accommodation must be legally suitable. (Housing Act 1996, section 206) Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability. (Housing Act 1996, section 202) If the Council’s review decides the accommodation is unsuitable, the Council must provide suitable accommodation. 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)

Council’s housing allocations policy

18. This policy describes how the Council prioritises housing applicants. It is a points-based system, awarding points depending on the severity of the applicant’s housing needs. The length of time waiting for accommodation is taken into account but is not the main factor in awarding priority.
19. Applicants in the relief stage of homelessness received 10 points. Once the main housing duty has been accepted, they receive 100 points. Applicants receive 10 points for every year they wait for housing. If the Council decides a person’s temporary accommodation is unsuitable, they may be entitled to 900 points for health and independence (instead of the 100 homelessness points), if the Council is unable to find suitable alternative accommodation within six weeks.

What happened

20. Ms B approached the Council as homeless in December 2022. She had a history of domestic abuse and a number of health conditions. Her adult daughter lived with her and cared for her. The Council made referrals to various support agencies, carried out an assessment and placed her in interim accommodation in a different borough, in a fifth floor two bedroom flat with a lift.
21. The Council took no further action on the case until Ms B’s representative, Ms C requested a review of the suitability of the accommodation in March 2024 due to the distance from her medical support services. Ms C complained in April about the lack of response to her previous communication. She also requested an urgent move for Ms B to more suitable accommodation and clarification of Ms B’s housing status.
22. The Council responded in May 2024 at stage one of its complaints procedure. It apologised for the lack of response to Ms C’s communication about the suitability of Ms B’s accommodation. It said it would now carry out a medical assessment based on the information Ms C had provided.
23. On 10 May 2024 the Council decided Ms B did not qualify for health and independence points because her current accommodation did not significantly adversely affect her health or independence. It accepted she had severe and enduring medical conditions, but said she did not have an exceptional need to move to access appropriate housing medical or social care. She needed a two bedroom property with a maximum of 6 steps up to any level with a lift. There was no medical evidence to show she was receiving specialist medical care which was only available in the Council’s area. It said there was no evidence that Ms B had care and support needs, and her current accommodation was suitable.
24. Ms C escalated the complaint to stage two in May 2024. She sent in further medical evidence detailing Ms B’s conditions and said she had experienced delays in treatment due to moving out of the borough. She also complained that Ms B had been under the relief duty since 2022, far exceeding 56 days and with no further contact or communication about her housing situation.
25. The Council referred her case to the Occupational Therapy service in July 2024.
26. In June, July and August 2024 Ms C chased up the stage two response and the decision on suitability. The Council said Ms B’s case was being prioritised for a main duty decision and it resent a copy of the suitability decision which it said it had previously sent in May 2024.
27. In September 2024 Ms C complained to us given the lack of response from the Council. We sent it back to the Council asking it to respond to the complaint at stage two.
28. In November 2024 the OT completed an assessment. It said Ms B was struggling with toilet, bed and bath transfers and her daughter provided her care and support. The OT recommended a combined toilet seat and frame, a perching stool, a level access shower with a seat and space for daughter to help her shower. The current shower over the bath was not usable as Ms B was unable to get into the bath even with a board. The OT recommended level access accommodation.
29. We accepted the complaint in November 2024 as the Council had still not responded to the stage two complaint.
30. At the end of November 2024 Ms C chased up the stage two response again.

31. On 27 December 2024 the Council accepted the main housing duty towards Ms B. It says it sent notification to Ms B on this date, but she did not receive it.

32. On 17 January 2025 the Council carried out a review of Ms B’s medical needs as it had accepted the main housing duty, and the OT had completed their assessment. The Council concluded that the property was not suitable due to the lack of accessible bathing facilities. It said it would award Ms B 900 health and independence points if it had not found suitable alternative accommodation within six weeks.

33. It responded to Ms B’s complaint at stage two on 5 February 2025. It said it had accepted the main housing duty and resent the notification sent in December 2024. It confirmed that her current accommodation was unsuitable, and the Council was looking for an alternative. It upheld her complaint about the delays dealing with her housing and responding to her stage two complaint. It added 20 waiting points to her application. It said it would add 900 health and independence points to her application if no alternative accommodation was found by 28 February 2025. It offered her £300 compensation.

34. 900 points were added to her application on 28 February 2025, (making a total of 1020) and Ms B successfully bid on suitable permanent housing on 26 March 2025.

35. In response to my enquiries the Council accepted it had not progressed the housing application throughout 2023. This was due to the case not being properly identified on the system, staff turnover and a lack of proper case handovers. It was never allocated to a specific officer. It did not believe Miss B had missed out on any offers of suitable housing. It said during the period of delay there were nine offers of level access two bedroom accommodation. Of these properties two went to applicants in October 2023 with 150 points and one went to an applicant in January 2024 also with 150 points.

36. It said there were 41 other cases affected by similar delays. It was committed to resolving these by 30 April 2025.

Analysis

37. The Council took no action on Ms B’s homeless application between 21 December 2022 and May 2024. It placed her in interim accommodation but did not confirm it had accepted the relief duty towards her, made no enquiries into her situation and failed to draw up a personal housing plan. This was fault which meant Ms B was unable to join the housing register to bid for her own accommodation and had no formal right of review against the suitability of her interim accommodation.
38. When Ms C alerted the Council to Ms B’s case in April 2024, the Council, in May 2024 considered her medical needs and whether the accommodation was suitable but failed to ask for any up to date information to ensure it had an accurate picture of Ms B’s circumstances. It also delayed in deciding whether it owed her the main housing duty for another seven months, despite assuring Ms C in August 2024 that Ms B’s case was being prioritised. This was fault, which meant Ms B continued to live in unsuitable accommodation without a right of redress.
39. If the Council had acted on Miss B’s case in 2023 within a reasonable period of time, it is likely the Council would have decided that the property was unsuitable much sooner. The relief duty should have ended in mid-February 2023 and the Council should then have made a decision on the main housing duty without delay. This is likely to have led to a decision on suitability and the main housing duty by September/October 2023 and an award of the 900 points by November/December 2023, 12 months earlier than actually occurred. So, it is likely Miss B could have been rehoused in permanent accommodation by early 2024 if the Council had acted sooner and in accordance with the legislation and guidance.
40. Looking at the information on available properties during the period of delay it appears possible that if Miss B had been awarded 900 points, 12 months earlier, she may have been eligible for one of these properties. I accept this is not definite as it depends on whether the OT assessment would have been the same 15 months earlier or whether Ms B’s condition had deteriorated. However, the excessive delay has created considerable uncertainty that Miss B could have been housed in suitable permanent accommodation much sooner than she was. This is a significant injustice.
41. The injustice was exacerbated by the excessive delay in responding to Ms B’s stage two complaint, taking nine months rather than one. This caused Ms C significant time and trouble in chasing the Council on multiple occasions and prolonged the time Ms B was living in unsuitable accommodation.

Back to top

Action

42. I welcome the Council’s acknowledgement of fault causing injustice and the offer of £300. However, I consider this amount only addresses the distress caused by the delay in dealing with the complaint and an additional payment is appropriate for the length of time Ms B has been living in unsuitable accommodation.
43. So, I recommend that the Council within one month of the date of my final decision:
• apologises to Ms B and makes a symbolic payment to her of £1800 (in addition to the £300 already offered) made up as follows:
1. £1200 for the four-month period between November 2024 to March 2025 (4 months @£300 a month) when the Council had decided the property was unsuitable.
2. £600 for the uncertainty caused by the excessive delay in reaching a decision on her homeless case and the lost opportunity to bid on suitable properties at an earlier point.
44. The Council should also provide (within one month of the date of my final decision) confirmation that it has dealt with the backlog of 41 other cases subject to similar delays or details of the ongoing actions to achieve the target.
45. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

46. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman