Summary: On behalf of Miss X, Ms D complained the Council failed to offer Miss X suitable interim accommodation after accepting she had a priority need. The Council said Miss X owed rent for the interim accommodation, but Ms D said Miss X had never accepted or stayed at the property. Ms D also said the Council failed to provide temporary accommodation for Ms D when it accepted the main housing duty and communicated poorly. We have not found the Council at fault for offering unsuitable interim accommodation. We have found the Council at fault for not terminating the interim accommodation sooner, and for failing to offer Miss X temporary accommodation when it accepted the main housing duty. We have also found the Council at fault for its record-keeping and communication. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss X and write-off some of the arrears Miss X accrued for the interim accommodation. The Council has also agreed to pay a symbolic financial remedy to recognise the avoidable uncertainty and frustration caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council:
1. offered unsuitable interim accommodation after accepting Miss X had a priority need. The Council said Miss X owed rent arrears for this accommodation, for the period between November 2023 and July 2024. However, Miss X disputed liability for these arrears. She said she never accepted the accommodation, nor resided there, and told the Council it was unsuitable when it offered it.
2. failed to offer temporary accommodation after it accepted the main housing duty towards Miss X in March 2024.
3. communicated poorly with Miss X and her representative about these matters.
2. Miss X said the Council claiming she was in arrears impacted her mental health and affected her housing opportunities. She said she was homeless for a prolonged period, due to the Council failing to offer temporary accommodation. Miss X also said the Council’s poor communication caused avoidable frustration, distress and uncertainty.

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. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
6. 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.
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(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. Miss X’s complaint referred to the Council’s decision that she did not have priority need in November 2023. Miss X also told the Ombudsman she disputed historic arrears accrued at a different interim accommodation property, prior to November 2023.
9. Miss X exercised her right to seek a review of the Council’s decision about her priority need. The review addressed Miss X’s substantive concern, with the Council changing its decision. The Ombudsman would expect someone to use a relevant review right where one exists. The restriction set out in paragraph 5 applies and I have not considered this matter as part of my investigation.
10. Miss X’s liability for the arrears at the previous property were not part of the complaint Miss X made to the Council. The Council has not therefore had the opportunity to consider this as a complaint and respond. The restriction set out in paragraph 4 applies and I have not considered this matter as part of my investigation.
11. Though I have not considered the matters above, I refer to some of them in the statement for context.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

12. I considered evidence provided by Ms D, Miss X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
13. Ms D, Miss 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

Relevant legislation, guidance and policy

Homelessness

14. 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.
15. 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)

Relief duty

16. 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 accommodation duty

17. 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)

Priority need

18. Examples of applicants in priority need are:
• people with dependent children;
• pregnant women;
• people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems, disability or old age;
• care leavers; and
• victims of domestic abuse.

Main housing duty

19. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to make accommodation available (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

20. There are two types of accommodation councils provide to certain homeless applicants: interim accommodation and temporary accommodation.
21. 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)
22. 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.
23. 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)
24. 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.
25. 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)
26. 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.

Suitability

27. 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)
28. 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)

Back to top

What I found

Key events

29. Below is a summary of the key events leading to this investigation. It does not detail every exchange between parties. Where necessary, I have expanded on some of these events in the “analysis” section of this decision statement.
30. In September 2023, the Council wrote to Miss X to confirm it had decided she did not have priority need. In November 2023, the Council wrote to Miss X again to notify her it had discharged the relief duty towards her. Miss X, through her then-representative, asked the Council to review its decision. On 24 November 2023, the Council wrote to Miss X to confirm it had decided she did have priority need. It reopened Miss X’s housing application to complete a new assessment.
31. On 27 November 2024, the Council offered Miss X interim accommodation at Property B. I have seen evidence this offer was sent to Miss X and her representative in writing. The Council asked Miss X to confirm acceptance of the offer by return e-mail. I have seen evidence both Miss X and her representative responded to the Council, confirming Miss X would accept the accommodation at Property B.
32. In the following days, both Miss X and her representative highlighted the distance between Property B and Miss X’s work commitments. Both Miss X and her representative asked the Council if it could provide interim accommodation closer to Miss X’s work commitments. Miss X’s representative highlighted what the code said about how the Council should assess suitability. Miss X’s representative also said Miss X had been unsuccessfully trying to contact her case officer.
33. On 4 December 2023, following further contact from Miss X’s representative, the Council responded. It said:
• When identifying suitable interim accommodation, the priority had been placing Miss X into accommodation located outside the Council’s district, to alleviate the risks posed to her by domestic violence.
• It had reviewed the distance between Property B and Miss X’s work commitments. It believed the distance was reasonable and, given the risks associated with placements inside the district, the Council believed Property B was suitable.
34. Miss X’s representative complained to the Council on 22 December 2023. The complaint concerned the Council’s priority need decision. It also concerned how officers understood domestic abuse and inappropriate comments made to Miss X.
35. On 2 February 2024, the Council responded. It apologised for the discomfort caused by some officers’ comments and said it would address this. The Council confirmed it had overturned Miss X’s non-priority need decision at review and had since provided Miss X with interim accommodation. It said Miss X’s new caseworker would contact her soon. Later in February 2024, the Council conducted a telephone interview with Miss X as part of its new assessment of her homelessness. Over the following weeks, it sought supporting information from Miss X.
36. On 11 March 2024, the Council asked Miss X to confirm her current address, so it could send her a copy of the main housing duty decision letter. Miss X provided the Council with the address of a friend, where she said she had been staying since 2023. The Council accepted the main housing duty on this date.
37. In June 2024, Miss X’s new representative, Ms D, contacted the Council on Miss X’s behalf. Ms D said she found that Miss X’s caseworker had left the Council and Miss X’s case was part of a wider backlog of cases. The Council told Ms D it would contact Miss X about providing temporary accommodation, but this did not happen.
38. Around the same time, the Council contacted the provider of Property B to ask if Miss X still lived there. The provider told the Council there was evidence the room had been used, but it appeared Miss X had not been there for some time. The provider sent the Council pictures of Property B, showing some possessions and that the room had been used. On 1 July 2024, the Council served a notice of termination, ending Miss X’s placement at Property B.
39. Ms D continued to contact the Council on Miss X’s behalf, seeking an update. The Council did not respond to Miss X or Ms D. On 9 July 2024, Ms D complained to the Council:
• Ms D set out the events and multiple contact attempts that had led her to complain.
• Ms D said Ms X was awaiting an offer of temporary accommodation after the Council had accepted the main housing duty towards her. Ms D highlighted Miss X’s vulnerability and that she was sofa-surfing with a friend. Ms D said the Council failing to provide temporary accommodation had made a traumatic and upsetting time in Miss X’s life worse.
• Ms D asked the Council to provide suitable temporary accommodation for Miss X.
40. On 5 August 2024, the Council responded to Ms D’s complaint:
• The Council said it provided Miss X with accommodation at Property B from late November 2023. It said after Ms D had contacted the Council in June, it had investigated and found Miss X had stayed there, but appeared not to have been there for a while. The Council said the provider had confirmed Miss X was still in possession of the keys to Property B.
• The Council said it terminated Miss X’s accommodation at Property B in July, sending a notice of termination there. It said Miss X had not contacted the Council since then. The Council did not uphold Ms D’s complaint.
41. On 6 August 2024, Ms D escalated her complaint:
• Ms D said Miss X had never collected the keys to Property B, having told the Council it would be too far to travel to. Ms D said there had been conversations about Property B’s suitability in December 2023. Given these conversations, Ms D said it was reasonable to conclude Miss X had never stayed there. Ms D asked how the provider could evidence Miss X had collected the keys, or ever used the room.
• Ms D said because Miss X had refused Property B, the Council should have discharged its s188 interim accommodation duty. However, when it accepted the main housing duty in March 2024, Ms D said the Council should have made Miss X a new offer of temporary accommodation.
• Ms D said the Council had not confirmed under which housing duty it provided Property B. Ms D asked why the Council had sent its termination notice to Property B when it knew Miss X was not living there. Ms D said Miss X had not received this notice, nor notice of any right to ask for a review.
• Ms D said Miss X was still entitled to an offer of temporary accommodation, which the Council had not made.
42. Internal records show the Council sought to verify the provider’s account. The provider verbally attested to its description of events.
43. Later that month, Miss X sent the Council details of her work addresses and highlighted her difficulty travelling too far. The Council asked whether Miss X needed temporary accommodation, or whether she was able to continue staying with her friend, citing the likely costs of accommodation to Miss X. Miss X said before she would agree to anything, she would like to know how long it would take the Council to find permanent accommodation. The Council said it could not give a definitive timescale, as this depended on several factors.
44. On 2 September 2024, the Council asked Miss X to sign and return her Personalised Housing Plan (PHP). The Council's records show Miss X returned the signed document on 5 September 2024.
45. On the same day, the Council responded to Ms D’s complaint at stage two of its complaints procedure:
• the Council accepted it had been unclear about which housing duty it had acted under previously. It upheld this part of the complaint and said it would further consider what duties it owed Miss X.
• The Council said it had appropriately discharged its interim accommodation duty in March 2024, when it accepted the main housing duty. It did not uphold this part of Ms D’s complaint.
• The Council said Property B had been available to Miss X between November 2023 and July 2024, when it found out Miss X no longer resided there. The Council said the provider maintained Miss X had attended, collected the keys, and left some belongings in the room. It said there was no CCTV and no requirement to sign in and out of the accommodation.
• The Council said in December 2023, it had confirmed it believed Property B was suitable for Miss X’s housing needs. The Council said it had in good faith understood Miss X was still living at Property B, until Ms D notified it otherwise. The Council said Miss X had obligations for the accommodation, but had disregarded these responsibilities and chosen not to stay at Property B, without properly terminating the placement.
• The Council said when it sent Miss X its main duty decision letter, it provided Miss X with the right to seek a review of her accommodation and of its decisions. The Council said Miss X never sought a review. It did not uphold this part of Ms D’s complaint.
• The Council said it sent Miss X’s termination notice to Property B, which had been available for Miss X throughout. The Council accepted it could also have sent a copy by e-mail. It said it would accept a late review request in recognition of this.
• The Council said Miss X had accrued considerable arrears.
46. In November 2024, the Council provided Miss X with new temporary accommodation and issued a new main duty decision letter.

Analysis

Did the Council act with fault?

Suitability of interim accommodation at Property B

47. Though I have not seen a copy of a decision letter to this effect, the Council confirmed it provided Miss X with accommodation at Property B under its s188 interim accommodation duty. As paragraph 26 sets out, there is no right to request a review of the suitability of interim accommodation. However, the Council must ensure the accommodation it provides is suitable for the needs of the applicant. It must keep this suitability under review, considering any new information it receives, or material changes in the applicant’s circumstances.
48. The Council considered Property B suitable for Miss X because it met her identified housing needs and was located outside the borough, a primary concern given the risk posed to Miss X from remaining in-borough. When Miss X and her then-representative highlighted the distance from Miss X’s work, the Council considered this and responded to confirm its view Property B remained suitable. This is the action I would expect the Council to take. I have not found the Council at fault for how it considered the suitability of Property B.
49. I have seen evidence both Miss X and her representative confirmed in writing that Miss X would accept Property B on the day the Council offered it. While Miss X and her representative later raised concerns about Property B’s location and asked if the Council could find closer accommodation, I have seen no evidence Miss X or her representative rejected the Council’s offer of Property B. I have also seen no evidence Miss X or her representative told the Council Miss X had decided not to stay there.
50. The evidence therefore shows Miss X accepted Property B and did not tell the Council she was not staying there, or give notice to leave, in 2023. On the balance of probabilities, I have not found the Council at fault for believing Miss X lived at Property B until notified otherwise. I find the Council discharged its s188 interim accommodation duty in November 2023 by providing Property B.
51. The Council said it first found out Miss X left Property B when Ms D told them in June 2024. The Council said it then terminated Miss X’s accommodation at Property B at the beginning of July 2024. However, Miss X told the Council in March 2024, before it accepted the main housing duty, that she was staying with a friend. The Council sent Miss X’s main housing duty decision letter to her friend’s address, rather than to Property B.
52. When Miss X told the Council she was not staying at Property B, the Council should have taken steps to confirm Miss X no longer lived there and, if so, terminated the placement then. The Council told the Ombudsman it accepted this was a missed opportunity. I have found the Council at fault for not acting on Miss X’s notification in March 2024.

Provision of temporary accommodation

53. Had the Council taken the actions set out in paragraph 52, it is likely, on the balance of probabilities, it would have terminated the accommodation at Property B in March 2024, discharging its s188 interim accommodation duty. When the Council accepted the main housing duty, it should then have provided Miss X with temporary accommodation to satisfy its main housing duty. I have found the Council at fault for not offering Miss X temporary accommodation when it accepted the main housing duty.
54. Evidence I have seen shows the Council asked Miss X in August 2024 if she needed temporary accommodation, or whether she could continue staying with her friend. While the Council asked Miss X about temporary accommodation, it did not formally offer it. The evidence shows Miss X asked for more information about waiting times for permanent accommodation, so she could make an informed decision about her need for temporary accommodation. Around the same time, the Council issued Miss X’s PHP, which confirmed Miss X was staying with her friend. Miss X signed and returned this document to the Council, suggesting agreement with this arrangement.
55. I have seen no evidence of any further contact until November 2024, when the Council provided Miss X with temporary accommodation. The Council’s records do not show why the Council offered this accommodation then and what circumstances changed to make this offer necessary. I have found the Council at fault for its poor record keeping.

Council’s communication

56. I have seen correspondence that highlights Miss X’s difficulty speaking with the Council in December 2023. I have also seen evidence Ms D did not receive responses from the Council in June and July 2024, leading her to complain on Miss X’s behalf.
57. On the balance of probabilities, I find the Council did not consistently respond to or communicate with Miss X and Ms D. I have found the Council at fault for this.

Did the Council’s faults cause an injustice?

58. Because the Council did not terminate Property B when Miss X first said she was not staying there, Miss X continued to accrue arrears between March and July 2024. If the Council had terminated Property B when first notified, Miss X would not have accrued these arrears. I find the arrears Miss X accrued between 11 March 2024 and 1 July 2024 are an injustice.
59. The Council not offering Miss X temporary accommodation when it accepted the main housing duty potentially meant Miss X stayed sofa-surfing with her friend longer than she might have otherwise done. However, there is some uncertainty about this. When the Council raised the prospect of temporary accommodation with Miss X in August 2024, Miss X asked for more information to help her decide what to do. Miss X then appears to have stayed with her friend for a period after this. The Council’s poor record keeping means I cannot identify what led it to offer temporary accommodation in November 2024, which causes uncertainty. This uncertainty hinders investigation and is an injustice.
60. If the Council had formally made a suitable offer of temporary accommodation at any point from March 2024, I cannot say what would have happened. If Miss X thought the offer was suitable, then Miss X may have moved into temporary accommodation sooner than she did. However, Miss X’s deliberations in August 2024 suggest Miss X may not have accepted the temporary accommodation offered, depending on the specifics of the offer. There may have been a period of consideration, or rejection. If the Council had formally offered temporary accommodation and Miss X rejected it, the Council could then have discharged the main housing duty on this basis. There are too many variables to say what would have likely happened, even on the balance of probabilities. This causes uncertainty, which is an injustice to Miss X in itself.
61. The Council’s inconsistent communication with Miss X and Ms D caused avoidable uncertainty and frustration. These are injustices.

Back to top

Action

62. Within four weeks of the final decision being issued, the Council has agreed to:
1. Provide a written apology to Miss X for the faults and injustice identified in this statement. The Council should have regard to the Ombudsman’s guidance on “Making an effective apology", set out in our published Guidance on Remedies.
2. Adjust Property B’s termination date on its records to 11 March 2024, the date which Miss X confirmed in writing she was staying elsewhere, and write-off the arrears accrued after this date.
3. Pay Miss X £375 to recognise the avoidable uncertainty caused by the Council failing to offer temporary accommodation in March 2024, when the Council accepted the main housing duty, and to recognise the avoidable uncertainty and frustration caused by the Council’s inconsistent communication.
63. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

64. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault causing injustice. I have made recommendations to remedy the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman