Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s actions after she and her family became homeless, including placing them in unsuitable temporary accommodation. She said this significantly impacted on the family’s wellbeing and the children’s education. We found the Council at fault for failing to assess and consider the location of the children’s school with accommodation it provided. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a symbolic payment to recognise the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the support provided by the Council after she and her family became homeless. She says it placed them in various unsuitable temporary accommodation, including issues of disrepair and one very far from her daughter’s school. This caused significant frustration and distress, which impacted on the children’s education and her family’s health and wellbeing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)
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

5. In late October 2023, the Council responded to Miss X’s complaint about historic issues before August 2023 and concerns about her current property (referred to as “Property 1” later). Miss X did not escalate this at the time. She made another complaint in May 2024 and received the Council’s final response in June 2024.
6. Miss X complained to us in November 2024. The matters before August 2023 and leading up to November 2023 are older than 12 months before coming to us. I consider these late (see Paragraph 3). I am satisfied she could have complained about this specific earlier period sooner. I have briefly referred to some of these events for relevant background context.
7. In Miss X’s complaint to us in November 2024, she referred to new events from earlier that month and ongoing matters stemming from that. I am not investigating events after June 2024. We expect councils to have the opportunity to formally consider new or ongoing matters under its complaints procedure first before we investigate. Miss X is entitled to make a new complaint if she is dissatisfied with the Council’s actions after this point.
8. Therefore, the scope of my investigation is from November 2023 (12 months before coming to us) to June 2024 (the Council’s final response).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

9. I discussed the complaint with Miss X and considered her views.
10. I made enquiries of the Council and considered its written responses and information it provided, as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and administrative background

Homelessness law and guidance

12. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)

Suitability of accommodation

13. 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 (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
14. 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.
15. When securing accommodation for families with children housing authorities should be mindful of their duties under section 11 of the Children Act 2004 to discharge their functions with regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. This would include minimising the disruption to the education of children and young people, particularly (but not solely) at critical points in time such as leading up to taking GCSE (or their equivalent) examinations. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, Paragraph 17.53)

Background

16. In August 2023, Miss X and her family (she lived with her daughter and niece) were evicted from their property by their landlord. After difficult personal circumstances, Miss X had built up significant rent arrears. The Council provided interim accommodation (Property 1).
17. Miss X made a formal complaint, including historic events and the unsuitability of Property 1. In late October 2023, the Council responded at Stage One. It was satisfied with its actions and service.

What happened – summary of key relevant events within my consideration

18. At the start of November 2023, the Council contacted Miss X to move her that day to another interim accommodation. This was out of the district (Property 2). Miss X said this happened at very short notice. Miss X also said Property 2 was too far from the children’s school but reluctantly accepted. She said the manager at Property 1 switched off the gas and electricity and they had to rush to pack their belongings in the dark. The Council later said this was due to a flood and electrics had been turned off for the safety of other residents.
19. In late November 2023, the Council accepted the relief duty to her.
20. Miss X wrote to her MP several times, mainly about the significant journey times to take the children to school and how this was severely affecting them all. They were in their GCSE year, preparing for exams and could not move school during such an important year. She wanted the Council to move them closer.
21. In February 2024, the MP forwarded her concerns to the Council for it to respond.
22. In late March 2024, the Council responded to the MP. It understood Miss X’s current accommodation was a longer journey to the children’s school, but Miss X had a car. It said it may not be suitable long term but there was no reason to prioritise a move for her. It would keep it under review and if it did have anything suitable it could try to bring her back to its district.
23. At the end of March 2024, the Council noted Miss X raised some disrepair matters. The Council contacted the Managing Agent (“MA”) about the issues.
24. The MA said it fixed one issue when Miss X first moved in, and it did not receive further reports on it. It was not aware of any other issues and had tried to contact Miss X.
25. At the end of May 2024, Miss X wrote to the Council to complain. She added internet connectivity issues in Property 2 were affecting the children’s schoolwork and exam preparations.
26. In mid-June 2024, the Council sent Miss X a final response to her complaint. It was satisfied it had responded to her points and provided advice to resolve the issues. It contacted the MA who confirmed she raised an issue with the boiler the previous week, the plumber attended and confirmed it was working as it should. The MA had tried to contact Miss X to investigate the other issue, but this was not successful. It would provide her further advice about the internet options. The Council said it had reserved another temporary accommodation (Property 3) which was in district, and undergoing some works. It was unfurnished, and it would let her know when it was ready.

Events since the Council’s final complaint response

27. A few days later, the Council accepted the main duty to Miss X.
28. Between July and August 2024, the Council made arrangements with Miss X regarding Property 3. In September 2024, Miss X moved into Property 3.
29. In early November 2024, Miss X complained to us. Within this, she referred to a serious disrepair incident at Property 3 that week and said the Council had not dealt with it, and her family were not safe. She has mentioned ongoing issues about Property 3.

The Council’s response to my enquiries

30. The Council said it had since made improvements to its service, not in direct response to this complaint, but wider improvements to help prevent issues such as those in this case from happening again. This included improving its approach to those placed out of area to identify who needed to move back to district urgently and created new forms to look in-depth about the suitability of a property for applicants.
31. The Council offered to make a payment for the time Miss X spent in Property 2. It proposed £1,500 at £150 per month, for the 10 months she spent there.

Analysis

Move to Property 2

32. After a flood at Property 1, the Council acted promptly to find alternative accommodation for Miss X. While Miss X was put to inconvenience with very short notice; this was outside of the Council’s control and depended on availability on the day. With the location of Property 2, the Council said at the time, it relied on a previous suitability assessment which noted Miss X had a car to transport the children to school. Given the circumstances, on balance, I do not find the Council at fault for how the events played out that day and where it moved Miss X to initially.

Property 2

33. However, Miss X raised concerns about the distance of Property 2 from the children’s school when it was offered to her. This is a relevant factor when assessing the suitability of accommodation. After the move because of the flood, the Council then should have pro-actively re-reviewed its consideration of suitability with Property 2. I cannot see evidence the Council did this.
34. The Council later, in response to Miss X’s MP, said it recognised Property 2 it might not be suitable for the long term, but it was suitable in the short term as she had a car. However, at this point, this was not adequate consideration of her family’s needs and circumstances.
35. The Council did not act in line with the Homelessness Code of Guidance – see Paragraphs 14 and 15. This refers to councils needing to consider the location of accommodation it offers and assessing any disruptions to children’s education, particularly for critical years such as GCSEs (which applies here). The Council gave a view that the property was suitable at that point but there is no evidence it considered the distance, the length of time journeys took to and from school, or the impact it was having on the children’s education and the family. This is fault. It did not turn its mind to the question of whether Property 2 was suitable for Miss X’s household’s needs when it moved them.
36. I cannot say whether the Council would have decided Property 2 was suitable, had it turned its mind to these relevant factors. But this creates a significant level of uncertainty for Miss X about what could have happened if it had been properly considered, whether it would have made a difference to Miss X’s living situation at the time. This uncertainty is injustice. I have recommended a remedy for this below. I also appreciate the Council has also offered Miss X £1,500 to recognise her family’s time spent in Property 2. This is in line with our Guidance on Remedies.
37. Additionally, the Council accepted it had no evidence it had a plan to review Miss X’s case for the short or long term, or if it considered prioritising her as she was out of district. It accepted it did not take action to try and find alternative accommodation during this time for Miss X. This is fault, causing frustration to Miss X.
38. I do not find the Council at fault for the disrepair issues in Property 2. It did not have evidence of Miss X raising these with the MA until late March 2024. The records show the MA then took steps to try and resolve the issues up until June 2024. Matters about further disrepair issues after this are outside the scope of my investigation (see Paragraph 7).
39. It is positive the Council has recognised shortcomings in its service and has taken steps to make improvements. I am satisfied with these, but I recognise this will need time to embed and so have not made further service recommendations. We can monitor this should we receive further complaints in future.

Back to top

Action

40. To remedy the injustice set out above, the Council has agreed to carry out the following actions within one month of the final decision:
• Apologise to Miss X for the injustice caused by the faults identified (in line with our guidance on making an effective apology);
• Pay Miss X a symbolic payment of £200 to recognise the frustration and uncertainty caused by not properly considering the suitability of Property 2 for her family’s needs; and
• Pay Miss X the £1,500 it offered to recognise her family’s time spent in Property 2.
41. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

42. I find fault causing injustice. The Council agreed to the recommended actions to remedy the injustice. I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman