Summary: Mr X complained that the Council failed to ensure the temporary accommodation it provided him with, remained available to him, failed to provide him with suitable alternative accommodation and failed to safeguard his personal data. There were some faults by the Council which caused injustice to Mr X. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to ensure that the temporary accommodation it provided him with, remained available to him. In particular, Mr X complained the Council failed to:
1. protect him from an unlawful eviction from his previous temporary accommodation
2. provide him with suitable alternative accommodation after the eviction from his temporary accommodation
3. safeguard his personal data.
2. Mr X said the matter caused him significant distress, financial loss, severely impacted and worsened his mental health and it affected his physical 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. 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, sections 24A(1)(A), and 25 (7) as amended)
6. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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(i), as amended)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

8. I have investigated matters from February 2024 to February 2025. This covers the 12 months period from when Mr X made a complaint to the Ombudsman in February 2025.
9. I have not investigated complaint point ‘c’ about the Council’s alleged breach of Mr X’s personal data. This is because there is another body (the Information Commissioner Office) better placed to consider the matter.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
11. Mr 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

Homelessness

12. 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)
13. The Main Housing Duty - 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 (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). The accommodation a council provides until it can end the main housing duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193). But councils will not owe this duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer.
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. Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability (Housing Act 1996, section 202). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.
16. 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)
17. Priority need - 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.

18. Property Repossession by Receivership – is when a creditor appoints a receiver to manage the company’s assets to liquidate them and recoup their debt.

Protection of belongings

19. Where the council owes or has owed certain housing duties to an applicant, it must protect the applicant’s personal property if there is a risk it may be lost or damaged. A council may make a reasonable charge for storage and reserve the right to dispose of the property if it loses contact with the applicant. (Housing Act 1996, section 211, Homelessness Code of Guidance chapter 20)

Bed and Breakfast accommodation

20. Bed and breakfast (B&B) is accommodation which is not self-contained, not owned by the council or a registered provider of social housing and where the toilet, washing, or cooking facilities are shared with other households. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.35)
21. From 31 May 2023, the Order was amended to include accommodation with no cooking facilities. So, a room in a hotel that has a toilet and bathroom for the household’s exclusive use, but no cooking facilities is B&B.
22. Wherever possible, Councils should avoid using B&B accommodation. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.33)

Key events

23. Mr X was homeless, and the Council decided it owed Mr X the main housing duty.
24. In July 2024, the Council provided Mr X with an out of borough, private rented temporary accommodation (TA) through a registered Provider / a property letting agency. The TA was booked on a nightly paid basis, and the Provider was responsible for the management of Mr X’s TA.
25. In early October, Mr X said when he returned home on the day, he found that the locks to his TA had been changed, and he was unable to gain entry to the property. Mr X said he found a note with the alleged TA landlord’s contact details and when Mr X called, the landlord advised him that the property had been repossessed which was why the locks had been changed.
26. Mr X said the landlord did not allow him access to the property to retrieve his belongings such as his medication, clothing and bank card. Mr X informed the Provider that he had been evicted from his TA.
27. On the same day, the Provider informed the Council that Mr X’s TA had been repossessed by a receivership company and so Mr X required a new TA. The Provider said it had not received any communication from the landlord about the repossession of the TA and therefore it had no prior knowledge about the matter which was why it had not informed the Council about it sooner.
28. The Council provided Mr X with an emergency accommodation at a hotel on the same day he was evicted from his TA. The Council did not issue Mr X with a formal offer letter for the hotel accommodation, and it did not inform Mr X of his right to request suitability review of the accommodation.
29. Mr X stayed at the hotel until early November, when the Council provided Mr X with permanent accommodation.
30. Mr X said despite several attempts to retrieve his belongings; the landlord of his previous TA only allowed him access to collect his belongings in late October.
31. Mr X said after he collected his belongings from his previous TA, he could not take them to his hotel accommodation, so he had to move his belongings to a storage facility. Mr X said from late October to early November when he moved to his permanent accommodation, he incurred storage costs. Mr X also said he incurred costs for moving his belongings from his previous TA to the storage facility and then from the storage facility to his permanent accommodation.
32. Mr X complained to the Council about how he was unlawfully evicted from his previous TA and that he was denied access to his belongings despite the arrangement he made with the landlord on two occasions. Mr X also complained there were bed bugs at the hotel and that he was forced to rely on takeaways as the hotel had no cooking facilities. He said these caused him distress, financial loss and affected both his physical and mental health.
33. In its response to Mr X’s complaint, the Council said:

• Mr X’s previous TA was still active on its system as of October 2024 when the repossession of the property took place. It said neither the Provider nor the Council had prior knowledge of the repossession of the property until the day Mr X was evicted in October
• the Provider attempted to regain access to property via the receivership company and had hoped to engage with the company to enable Mr X return to his previous TA, but it was refused by the receivership
• because Mr X’s previous TA was privately owned and it was also an out of borough placement, the Council was unable to take any action directly and it did not have any details or working relationship with the landlord or the property owner
• it had, however, contacted the out of borough council and asked for assistance in pursuing the matter further
• although it had no control over the repossession situation, the Council said it was able to quickly provide Mr X with emergency accommodation the same day he was evicted and subsequently provided him with permanent accommodation
• that the hotel placement may not have been completely ideal, but the Council said the hotel was considered suitable for the purpose of TA for Mr X and that there was no limit to how long the stay could have been. It also said there was no evidence that Mr X raised any concerns about the hotel to the Council during his stay at the hotel
• it was not responsible for ending Mr X’s previous TA, so it did not uphold his complaint, but the Council acknowledged and apologised to Mr X for the experience he had with how the TA was repossessed.

34. Mr X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response, and he made a complaint to the Ombudsman.
35. In its response to our enquiries, the Council said:
1. it did not have a contractual relationship with the owner of Mr X’s previous TA or with the receivership, only the Provider did. So, the Council had limited scope to intervene in the process.
2. the Provider was not made aware of the repossession before the locks of the TA were changed and so it had no control over the belongings in the property. But Mr X was advised to contact the receivership company directly to make arrangements to retrieve his belongings.
3. the out of borough council advised it was unable to investigate the matter or take any further action because Mr X’s previous TA was nightly paid accommodation and there was no assured short hold tenancy in place. The Council said it confirmed to the out of borough council that Mr X was provided with the TA under the main housing duty, but it indicated that that did not change its approach.
4. it subsequently discharged its main housing duty when it provided Mr X with permanent accommodation.
5. said it had no reason to believe Mr X’s belongings were at risk of loss or damage. The Council said this was because there was no evidence Mr X contacted/informed it that he had any issues storing his belongings. The Council said it was aware Mr X contacted the receivership company and moved his belongings to a storage facility during the period he resided at the hotel and therefore he was able to protect his belongings.
6. it will ensure hotel accommodation is treated as formal TA offers and will issue applicants with formal letters when offering hotel accommodation. The Council also said it will ensure suitability assessment is completed before a hotel accommodation offer is made to an applicant and it will inform applicants of their rights to request suitability review of the hotel accommodation.

Analysis

Mr X’s eviction from his previous TA

36. In this case the Council commissioned the Provider that supplied and managed Mr X’s previous TA which was an out of borough property. I note the Council’s point that it had no contractual relationship with either Mr X’s previous TA landlord or the receivership company. And that as a result the Council was unaware of the repossession of Mr X’s previous TA in October 2024, and it could not directly get involved in the process.
37. However, where an organisation or private company provides services on behalf of a council, 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.
38. Therefore, the Council was ultimately responsible for the TA it provided to Mr X under the main housing duty. There was no evidence to show how the Provider or the Council kept an oversight of the management of Mr X’s previous TA as it related to the repossession process. This was fault. The Council’s failure to keep abreast of the actions and management services rendered by the Provider in this case caused distress, shock, worry and confusion to Mr X when he got evicted from his previous TA. The Council does not accept this finding of fault. The Council said it acted in good faith and that it had no way of knowing that the landlord of Mr X’s previous TA was taking action to secure the property back. Despite the disagreement with the finding, it has accepted our recommendations.
39. I find the injustice caused to Mr X was mitigated as the Council provided Mr X with emergency accommodation at a hotel the same day he was evicted from his TA. The Council acted promptly to secure an emergency placement for Mr X when the Provider notified it of his eviction. This was not fault.
40. As regards Mr X’s belongings, where a council owes a person certain housing duties which includes the main housing duty, the council must protect the person’s belongings if there is a risk it may be lost or damaged.
41. While there was no evidence to show Mr X’s belongings were damaged when he eventually retrieved them from his previous TA in November, there was no evidence to show the Council took reasonable actions to protect Mr X’s belongings after he was evicted from his previous TA. I note the Council said Mr X was advised to contact the receivership company directly to arrange how he could retrieve his belongings. These were faults as it was the Council’s responsibility to ensure Mr X’s belongings were protected. This caused Mr X distress, inconvenience and deprived him of his belongings from when he was evicted in early October to when he retrieved his belongings from his previous TA in late October 2024. It also caused Mr X uncertainty in not knowing what would happen to his belongings after he was evicted from his previous TA.
42. Mr X did not inform the Council after he retrieved his belongings from his previous TA that he couldn’t protect, and that he was at risk of losing them. Therefore, I find the Council had no reason to believe Mr X couldn’t protect his belongings. This was not fault.
43. I note Mr X said he also incurred moving costs because of the repossession of his previous TA. While I acknowledge how distressing the experience might have been for Mr X, applicants are responsible for the cost of moving between TAs and/or to permanent accommodation. Therefore, I find no fault by the Council.

Alleged failure to provide suitable alternative accommodation after Mr X’s eviction from his previous TA

44. Where someone believes their TA is unsuitable, they have a right to ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability. Mr X said the hotel accommodation was unsuitable for him due to the bed bug issues which affected his physical and mental health.
45. The Council failed to issue Mr X with a formal offer letter for the hotel accommodation, and it failed to advise him of his right to request suitability review of the hotel accommodation. This was fault and as a result, Mr X was not aware, and he was denied his rights to have requested suitability review to address his concerns at the time. Mr X was also denied his appeal right to the county court on a point of law.
46. Mr X said the hotel lacked cooking facilities which caused him financial loss due to the amount he spent on takeaways during his stay at the hotel. While I acknowledge Mr X’s point, the Ombudsman recognises that the demand for social housing far outstrips the supply of properties in many areas. The Council prioritised Mr X and acted promptly to provide him with an emergency accommodation the same day he was evicted, albeit in a hotel. And within one month of Mr X’s eviction from his previous TA, the Council moved him to permanent accommodation when it discharged its main housing duty. These were not faults.

Back to top

Action

47. 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/service of the organisation and make the following recommendations to the Council.
48. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, the Council has agreed to complete the following within one month of the final decision:

• apologise in writing to Mr X and make him a symbolic payment of £150 to acknowledge the injustice caused to him by the Council’s faults as identified above. The apology should be in accordance with our guidance, Making an effective apology
• by training or otherwise, remind relevant staff of the Council’s overarching responsibility of providing temporary accommodation to applicants under the main housing duty. This includes having oversight of the management of the properties where the Council secures the temporary accommodation through a registered provider / property letting agency
• ensure the Council issues formal offer letters including details of the right to seek suitability review of the accommodation, when the Council has to move an applicant from temporary accommodation to new temporary accommodation even in an emergency
• ensure the Council discharges its duty by completing suitability assessments before interim or temporary accommodation is offered to an applicant
• remind relevant staff that where the Council owes or has owed the main housing duty to an applicant, the Council has a duty to protect the applicant’s personal belongings if there is a risk it may be lost or damaged in situations.

49. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

50. I find some faults by the Council causing injustice to Mr X. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman