Summary: The Council failed to provide Miss X homelessness accommodation when it should have done and when it did house Miss X, the accommodation was unsuitable. This meant Miss X accrued debt she should not have and has remained in accommodation which does not meet her needs as a Disabled person. Other fault by the Council caused Miss X avoidable frustration and uncertainty. The Council will apologise to Miss X, make a symbolic payment and take action to prevent similar fault in future.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council failed to act appropriately after she received two eviction notices. This included that the Council:
• Failed to act when she first received an eviction notice in 2023 and again when she received a second notice in November 2023. Miss X says this led to her being evicted by bailiffs;
• Placed her in unsuitable accommodation after she was evicted in May 2024 and left her there when it agreed the housing was unsuitable;
• Made an unsuitable final offer of housing in March 2025;
• Wrongly decided she was eligible for social housing with one bedroom, not two. Miss X felt she needed more room for her belongings and so someone could come and stay when she was in a period of ill health; and
• Wrongly suspended her right to bid on social housing.
2. Miss X said this meant she experienced significant upset and anxiety, which impacted her wider health.

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. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it would be, or was, reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

5. 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.
6. 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

7. 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)
8. Miss X complained about the Council’s response to both the eviction notices she received in 2023. However, Miss X did not complain to the Ombudsman until December 2024. Therefore, the period before December 2023 is late. I have seen no good reason why Miss X could not have complained sooner. Given it was the second eviction notice, from November 2023, which led to Miss X becoming homeless in May 2024, I have chosen to consider the period from November 2023 onwards. I cannot investigate the Council’s response to the first eviction from earlier in 2023 as there are no good reasons to do so.
9. We normally end our investigations at the date the council issued its final complaint response. In this case, that was in December 2024. However, I have chosen to investigate up to March 2025, to encompass when the Council made a final offer of accommodation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Miss X and the Council 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

Relevant law and guidance

Homelessness

12. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code) set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.

The prevention duty

13. If a council is satisfied an applicant is threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, it must take steps to help the applicant keep their home or find somewhere new to live.

The relief duty

14. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless and eligible for assistance, it must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. The relief duty can last for up to 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
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)

Interim accommodation and priority need

16. If a council has reason to believe an applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need, it must secure interim accommodation for them. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
17. A council may decide an applicant is in priority need if they meet certain criteria. This includes people who are vulnerable due to serious health problems or disability.
18. The threshold for triggering the interim accommodation duty is low as the council only has to have a reason to believe that the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.5)

The 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. The accommodation councils provide after they accept a main housing duty is called temporary accommodation, rather than interim accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

Accommodation suitability

20. 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)
21. Applicants do not have a statutory right of review regarding the suitability of their interim accommodation. They do, however, have a right to request a review of the suitability of temporary accommodation. If they do not agree with the Council’s review decision, they can appeal to the county court on a point of law.
22. One of the factors councils needs to take into account when deciding if a property is suitable for a homeless applicant is its state of repair and condition. The Code says accommodation which may be suitable for a short period of time can become unsuitable when used for a longer period.

Evictions

23. Where a tenant has an assured shorthold tenancy, the landlord can issue a section 21 notice asking the tenant to leave.
24. If the tenant does not leave, the landlord can move forward with the eviction process. In some cases, the landlord can evict without a court hearing – this is called “accelerated possession”. They do need to apply to the court and the tenant can challenge the application. The court will look at the papers and either:
• Issue a “possession order” – this sets a date by which the tenant has to leave; or
• Set a date for a possession hearing; or
• Dismiss the case.
25. The Code says it is unlikely to be reasonable for a tenant to stay beyond the expiry of a notice if the landlord intends to recover possession and there would be no defence to an application for a possession order (6.35);
26. It says it might be reasonable for a tenant to remain after the notice expires if a council is taking steps to persuade the landlord to let the tenant stay for a “reasonable period” to give the council and tenant time to find alternative accommodation (6.35);
27. The Homelessness Code of Guidance says it is highly unlikely to be reasonable for an applicant to continue to occupy a property beyond the date on which the court (through a possession order) has directed them to leave the property and give possession to the landlord.
28. If the tenant does not leave the property after receiving the possession order, the landlord can ask the court to issue a warrant to enforce possession. The Code says it is not reasonable for an applicant to remain in occupation of a property until a court issues a warrant. It says applicants should not be evicted by bailiffs because of a failure by a council to provide accommodation (6.37, 6.38).
29. Our March 2023 focus report, “More Home Truths – learning lessons from complaints about the Homelessness Reduction Act”, expressed our concern at the number of councils that still take a “wait for bailiffs” approach in homelessness cases. We highlighted that this approach is, “contrary to the law and guidance and causes significant and avoidable distress for people at an already difficult time in their lives”.

Household Support Fund

30. This Council has a household support fund which can provide vulnerable households with the cost of essentials for day-to-day living. Its aim is to prevent vulnerable households from falling into, or further into, crisis. The fund can be used for a wide range of purposes, including the provision of white goods. To receive help from the fund, applicants must submit an application with details of the household’s finances and why they need the support.

Housing register

31. 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))
32. When someone applies to join the Council’s housing register, it assesses their case. It allocates points depending on the applicant’s circumstances. People with the greatest need for a home have the most points. Homeless applicants who are owed the main housing duty get 200 points. People with medical conditions which are being affected by their housing get additional points. The Council also decides how many bedrooms a person should have and whether they need a home to have certain characteristics. This could be that the home is on the ground floor or with certain adaptations. When a ground floor property is available, the Council prioritises giving those homes to people with a medical need to be on the ground floor.
33. The Council operates a choice-based lettings scheme which enables housing applicants to bid for available properties which it advertises. When multiple people bid on one property, the Council normally allocates the home to the person with the highest points total. If there is more than one applicant with the highest points then the Council allocates the home to the person who has been on the housing register for the longest.
34. The Council’s scheme says applicants can ask the Council to review a decision it made under the allocation scheme within 28 days of being notified of the decision. This includes how many bedrooms a person should have, and their points total.

What happened

35. This section sets out the key events in this case and is not intended to be a detailed chronology.

Accommodation

36. Miss X received a section 21 notice from her landlord in late November 2023. She told the Council, who Miss X said told her to wait for the bailiffs to evict her. The notice expired in late January 2025.
37. In early March, Miss X’s landlord obtained a possession order from court which ordered her to leave by late March.
38. When Miss X did not move out, her landlord asked the court for a warrant to evict her. This incurred costs.
39. Miss X was evicted by bailiffs in mid-May 2024. Bailiffs have to follow a set procedure to recover a person’s debt from them. At each stage of the procedure, the bailiffs add their costs to the debt.
40. On the day of her eviction, the Council made inquiries into Miss X’s circumstances and issued a PHP. The Council accepted it owed Miss X the relief duty and the interim accommodation duty. It placed her in a hotel the day she was evicted and a hostel for the following five nights.
41. Miss X provided evidence that she had several medical conditions. The Council sought medical advice, which noted she was waiting for hospital treatment. The advisor said if Miss X did not live close enough, the hospital may decide to not give her the treatment. The advisor noted Miss X needed the treatment as other approaches had failed. The advisor recommended the Council house Miss X near the hospital.
42. The Council also spoke to Miss X to assess her housing needs. It recorded that Miss X said her health conditions caused her pain, which affected her mobility.
43. The Council moved Miss X moved into a property (accommodation A) in late May. The housing was well outside of the Council’s area.
44. In mid-July, Miss X told the Council there were issues with the interim accommodation.
45. The Council accepted it owed Miss X the main housing duty the following day. This meant her interim accommodation became temporary accommodation. A few days later, it moved Miss X to another home (accommodation B), this time in the Council’s area, but still not near her hospital. The Council owns accommodation B.
46. As accommodation B was temporary accommodation, Miss X could ask for a review of its suitability, which she did in mid-July. Her concerns included that:
• She could not wash herself as the accommodation only had a bath, which she could not get into because of her mobility needs;
• There were disrepair issues including a broken tap and radiators, a damaged toilet and toilet seat, rusty kitchen cupboard hinges and a faulty door buzzer; and
• Accommodation B did not come with a washing machine.
47. Miss X later added she had fallen in the bath and there were no handles to help her get in and out to wash.
48. In mid-September, the Council completed its review of the suitability of accommodation B. It agreed the accommodation was unsuitable on the basis that it was not near enough to Miss X’s hospital to allow her to benefit from treatment, when it began. It also decided the accommodation was unsuitable because Miss X’s pain meant she was unable to get in the bath to wash.
49. The Council made Miss X a final offer of accommodation in late March 2025. It later rescinded that offer on the basis that, after it obtained more information, the accommodation was unsuitable.
50. Miss X told the Ombudsman her tap was repaired but the issues with her kitchen cupboards, door buzzer, toilet, and radiators had not been resolved. She also said she had relied on going to a local swimming pool to take showers.

Housing register

51. The Council added Miss X to its housing register in July 2024. It assessed Miss X’s case and decided she needed a one-bedroom property. It decided she had a points total of 200 because she was homeless and owed the main housing duty. The Council told Miss X of its decision and told her she could ask for a review of its decision within 28 days.
52. The Council suspended Miss X’s right to bid on social housing between late August and November 2024, while it was considering whether medical evidence she had provided affected her priority points on the housing register.
53. During the period Miss X’s right to bid was suspended, the Council allocated several one-bedroom homes to people with the same, or fewer, priority points as her. Those people had either been on the housing register for longer than Miss X, or they had a medically assessed need for a ground floor property.

Previous Ombudsman investigation

54. Following another investigation where we found fault, in December 2024, the Council agreed to remind staff of the relevant paragraphs of the Code in relation to how councils should decide when a person with a section 21 notice is homeless.

Findings

Homelessness

55. When Miss X told the Council she had received an eviction notice in November 2023 it told her to wait for bailiffs to evict her. Miss X did that, at which point she re-applied to the Council for homelessness support. However, what the Council should have done, at each stage of the eviction, was consider whether it was reasonable for Miss X to remain in her home, and therefore what homelessness duties it owed her.
56. The Council failed to consider whether it was reasonable for Miss X to remain in the property after the section 21 notice expired. This was fault. We cannot say what the Council would have decided had it properly considered the matter. At that time the property was affordable and otherwise suitable for Miss X. It might, therefore, have been reasonable for her to stay beyond the notice at least for a short period. However, the Council’s failure leaves Miss X with avoidable uncertainty.
57. The Code is clear that it is highly unlikely to be reasonable for an applicant to continue to occupy a property beyond the date on which the court has ordered them to leave the property and give possession to the landlord. The Council did not consider whether it was reasonable for Miss X to stay in her home after her landlord obtained the possession order. This was fault. I have seen no evidence to indicate that, had the Council acted correctly, it would have decided that Miss X should stay in her home. Therefore, it is likely that had the Council acted without fault, it would have decided Miss X was homeless on the basis she could not reasonably stay in her home. This would have meant it accepted it owed Miss X the relief duty. At the same time, the Council should have considered if it needed to arrange interim accommodation.
58. The Code goes on to say that it is not reasonable for an applicant to remain in occupation of a property until a court issues a warrant to enforce possession. The possession order required Miss X to move out in late March. From late March onwards, there is no question that Miss X should not have been left to live in the property. The Council failed to take another opportunity to accept it owed Miss X the relief duty and a further opportunity to decide if she needed interim accommodation. This was fault.
59. Councils must arrange interim accommodation for people when it has reason to believe they may be in priority need. Once Miss X told the Council she had been evicted, she provided medical evidence. The Council ultimately decided that evidence showed Miss X was in priority need. Miss X’s needs were the same in early March, when the Council should have first decided if she needed interim accommodation. It is likely that had the Council acted without the fault set out in paragraphs 56 and 57, it would have decided it had reason to believe Miss X may have a priority need in early March. The Council would therefore have had to arrange interim accommodation for Miss X at that point. It failed to do this and this caused Miss X avoidable distress, meant she accrued debt from the bailiffs and may have had to pay court costs in relation to the warrant.
60. I have not recommended the Council take action to prevent similar fault in future because it recently agreed to take action in response to another investigation by the Ombudsman.
61. I have not investigated whether the hotel Miss X stayed in for one night, or the hostel she stayed in for five nights were suitable. Any fault did not cause Miss X significant enough injustice to justify investigation.
62. Before Miss X moved into accommodation A, the Council received medical advice which noted she needed to be housed near her hospital, within the Council’s area. However, accommodation A was well outside of the Council’s area, and there is no evidence to show how the Council decided it was suitable for Miss X despite not being near her hospital. This was fault. Although the Code is clear that accommodation which is not suitable as temporary accommodation, can be suitable for shorter periods of time, the risk that being housed out of area posed to Miss X’s medical treatment indicates that had the Council acted without fault, it would not have decided accommodation A was suitable and moved Miss X there.
63. The Council accepted accommodation B was unsuitable as temporary accommodation because it was not near her hospital and she could not use the bathroom facilities properly to wash herself. It was fault for the Council to house Miss X in unsuitable temporary accommodation. The Council would have been aware the accommodation was unsuitable from the day Miss X moved in, because of its location.
64. Temporary accommodation may also be unsuitable if it is in a state of disrepair. Miss X raised concerns about the condition of accommodation B in July 2024. In response, the Council only repaired the tap. This was fault. When the Council heard there were issues, it should have acted to ensure the accommodation was in reasonable state of repair. It is unlikely many of the remaining issues Miss X complained of would amount to accommodation B being unsuitable on disrepair grounds. However, lack of heating is a serious issue and the Council’s failure address it meant accommodation B was unsuitable.
65. The fault set out in paragraphs 61 to 63 means Miss X was unsuitably housed in temporary accommodation between late May 2024 and the end of the period I am investigating, March 2025. The issue with the heating also meant Miss X had to buy portable heaters, which was an avoidable expense.
66. There is no evidence the Council considered what steps it could take to make Miss X’s use of washing facilities safer through provision of equipment such as suction bath handles or a bath seat. This was fault. As the Ombudsman’s guidance “Homelessness decisions for Disabled people” highlights, councils can improve the lives of Disabled people living in temporary accommodation by providing suitable minor aids or adaptations. Provision of adaptations could have helped Miss X wash more safely, which would have reduced the likelihood she would fall in the bath, and meant she did not have to rely on public swimming facilities to clean herself.
67. Miss X told the Council accommodation B did not have a washing machine almost immediately after moving in. Despite this, the Council did not direct Miss X to its household support fund, to see if she was eligible to have a washing machine provided to her. This was fault and meant Miss X is left with uncertainty about whether she could have received additional support from that fund at the time she needed it.
68. I have not investigated Miss X’s complaint about the suitability of the home the Council offered in March 2025. Any fault did not cause her a significant personal injustice because the Council withdrew that offer shortly after. If the Council makes a further final offer to end the main housing duty, Miss X will have a right to ask for a review of the suitability of the accommodation on offer.

Allocations

69. Miss X had a right to ask the Council to review its decision that she should be able to bid on one-bedroom properties instead of two-bedroom ones. I have seen no good reason why Miss X could not have used that right of review so I will not investigate what size properties she was eligible for.
70. The Council was at fault for suspending Miss X’s right to bid on properties while it considered whether her medical information justified medical priority points. Miss X had no medical priority when she joined the housing register so her medical information could only increase her priority or leave it the same. As there was no potential for Miss X to have her priority decreased, it was inappropriate to suspend her bidding. This meant Miss X was unable to bid on properties between August and November 2024. This caused Miss X frustration, but I cannot say, even on balance, that Miss X would have successfully bid on a property if not for the fault. That is because she had lower priority than the applicants who successfully bid on one-bedroom properties during the suspended period and was not assessed as needing a ground floor property.

Back to top

Action

71. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council will take the following actions.
1. Apologise to Miss X for the impact of being placed in unsuitable housing and for the uncertainty and frustration the faults caused her. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology.
2. Pay Miss X £700 in recognition of the uncertainty and frustration she experienced.
3. Pay any court and bailiffs costs Miss X incurred between the date the possession order required to move her out in late March 2024, and the date she was evicted in May 2024. If these costs have not yet been paid by Miss X, they will be paid to the relevant agencies directly. If Miss X has already paid these, the Council will reimburse her.
4. Pay Miss X £1800 to recognise the impact of being housed in unsuitable temporary accommodation. This amounts to £180 per month, in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies.
5. Pay Miss X £180 per month for each whole month she remains in accommodation B between the date my final decision is issued and for a maximum of six months afterwards. If Miss X remains in accommodation B after six months, she can make a new complaint to the Council and then to the Ombudsman if she remains unhappy.
6. Consider what minor aids or adaptations Miss X needs in order to wash herself more safely in accommodation B. The Council will provide any equipment within one month of the date of the final decision.
7. Consider what repairs are necessary to ensure accommodation B is in a reasonable condition. The Council will complete any repairs or replacements within one month of the date of my final decision. At a minimum, this will include fixing or replacing the radiators.
8. Reimburse Miss X for the cost of the heaters she purchased because the radiators in her home are broken. This is subject to Miss X providing receipts.
9. Remind staff they must consider all the relevant evidence about a person’s needs before placing them in interim and temporary accommodation, to ensure that accommodation is suitable at the point the offer of accommodation is made.
10. Share a copy of the Ombudsman’s guidance “Homelessness decisions for Disabled people” with relevant staff, if it has not already done so.
11. Send the Ombudsman details of the steps the Council is taking to increase its stock of interim and temporary accommodation, to meet the increased demand for housing. The Council will include when it intends to complete the steps and how it will review their effectiveness.
12. Tell staff who deal with housing register allocations that before they suspend a person’s right to bid on social housing, they should consider whether a suspension is appropriate in that case. The Council will include Miss X’s case as an example of when a suspension is not appropriate.
72. The Council will provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

I find fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman