Summary: Miss D says the Council left her in unsafe temporary accommodation. I have found the Council at fault and Miss D was left in unsuitable accommodation for 22 months. The Council has agreed to pay Miss D redress.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Miss D) says the Council left her in unsuitable temporary accommodation for over two years, delayed progressing her case and failed to provide updates. Miss D says she was left at risk of violence after previously experiencing domestic abuse. Her former partner knew where she lived. Whilst at the property it was broken into, and Miss D was followed.

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 future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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

4. I have exercised discretion and looked back to February 2023 when Miss D asked the Council to move her to suitable temporary accommodation through to March 2025 when Miss D moved to secure accommodation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Miss D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. I shared my draft decision with both parties and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

2023

7. On 2 February 2023 Miss D called the Council and reported two recent incidents of violence near her home (temporary accommodation) linked to previous domestic abuse. She provided a police reference number. The Council asked for an Accommodations Solutions Officer (ASO) to call Miss D. Miss D called again on 10 February and said no-one had been in touch. No further action is recorded in this case until August.
8. The Council says the case was allocated to an ASO in August. It has not explained what prompted this action. On 8 August the Brent Domestic Abuse Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferencing (MARAC) considered a referral by a professional about Miss D. It found she was at ‘high risk’ of domestic abuse and recommended Miss D be provided with housing that was safe and be moved ‘as soon as practicable’. Miss D told me she took the decision letter from MARAC to the Council offices in person a few days later. The ASO took a photocopy. The Council says it did not receive a copy of the MARAC letter until 2024 as part of Miss D’s complaint. On the balance of probability I find Miss D’s recollection to be likely.
9. On 25 August the ASO contacted Miss D and filled out a suitability assessment form. The ASO noted Miss D’s child had a disability. Miss D submitted medical information for her child to the Council, and this was referred to the Housing Health and Disability Team (HHD Team) for an assessment. The HHD Team sent Miss D its decision on 25 September. It said the Council could make Miss D a direct offer of suitable accommodation, but she should also bid for advertised social housing properties. It found the household needed a property within a thirty minute drive of the child’s school and not above the fourth floor with a lift.
10. On 13 October Miss D asked the Council for an update. The ASO said there were limited temporary accommodation properties available. In November Miss D told the Council she wanted it to reserve a property for her (this would appear to relate to a ‘pipeline property’ as set out below).

2024

11. On 8 January 2024 the ASO told Miss D there were still no available alternative temporary accommodation properties available. On 12 June Miss D complained to the Council. She was unsafe in her home and a perpetrator of domestic abuse knew where she lived. She had been told she would be moved in 2023 but that had not happened and the ASO dealing with her case was not responsive. On 17 June the ASO checked if there were any alternative accommodation available. No suitable properties were found. On 27 June the ASO carried out a second suitability assessment and noted additional medical needs for Miss D’s child. On 1 July the Council offered Miss D alternative temporary accommodation which was within the area identified as ‘at risk’ because of the perpetrator. The Council withdrew the offer a few days later.
12. On 22 July the Council replied to Miss D’s complaint. It said the Council was trying to find a home and the ASO had recently contacted the Procurement Team. The Council offered emergency B&B accommodation if Miss D felt at significant risk. It advised there was a severe shortage of temporary accommodation. It also explained it could help Miss D access permanent social housing outside of the area with other housing providers. Miss D should discuss this with her ASO. The Council upheld the complaint and apologised for the level of ‘responsiveness and support’. It accepted Miss D remained in unsuitable temporary accommodation and the ASO would contact her when a property was identified. On 5 August the ASO made a referral to a housing provider outside the area on behalf of Miss D. On 6 August Miss D told the Council she remained at risk and her property had previously been broken into and this was linked to previous domestic abuse. On 15 October Miss D called the Council and the ASO called her back. They said Miss D had been added to the Transfer List.
13. On 28 October Miss D complained to the Council and sent a copy of the MARAC letter from August 2023. She had been told she was still not on an Urgent Moves list despite contact from the Police, Social Workers, MARAC and advocates. She had also been told by the ASO she was next on the list to be moved in 2023, but this had not happened. On 11 November the Council replied to the complaint. It said the ASO apologised for ‘erroneously causing you to feel this way’ and she had hoped for a ‘swift solution’ but no properties had become available. The Council said it appreciated Miss D felt her household’s safety had been neglected and offered £300 as an apology. On 13 November the Council added Miss D to the Urgent Moves list. On 25 November Miss D asked the Council to reconsider her complaint. She said she was ‘living in constant fear’. The Council responded on 20 December. It said the Council had tried to find suitable temporary accommodation but without any success due to property shortages. It reiterated the offer to move Miss D to B&B accommodation. It also increased the redress offer to £500.

2025

14. On 6 February the Council shortlisted Miss D for alternative temporary accommodation. Miss D told the Council she was waiting for an offer from a social housing provider and was on a shortlist. In March Miss D received a permanent offer of social housing outside of the area and moved at the end of the month.

What should have happened

Temporary accommodation

15. 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) 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. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)

Domestic Abuse

16. Where a person is in temporary accommodation and experiences domestic abuse An ASO will carry out a suitability assessment of the current temporary accommodation. If the property is unsuitable the Council will check if it has alternative temporary accommodation that meets the applicant’s assessed needs. The Council says it also kept a list of ‘pipeline properties’ which might be available to let in the near future and those properties could be reserved for the highest priority applicants in unsuitable temporary accommodation. The Council ranks applicants needing alternative temporary accommodation in order of priority. Applicants who have experienced domestic abuse have the highest priority. The Council can also offer an applicant emergency B&B accommodation. In addition it can refer applicants to other housing providers to secure a social housing property, usually outside of London.
17. The Council says that it restructured its Accommodations Solutions Team in March 2024. It appears that part of that restructure meant eligible applicants could be added to a Transfer List and an Urgent Moves list. The Council holds weekly meetings to consider applicants who are accepted as needing urgent rehousing.

Health and Disability Assessment

18. If an applicant says they have medical needs that impact on the type of housing they should occupy the Council will send medical evidence to the HHD Team to assess. The HHD Team can advise on the type of accommodation the applicant will need for future temporary and long-term housing.

Was there fault by the Council

19. The Council failed to take any action on this case until August 2023. That was despite Miss D notifying it in February that she was at risk of violence and in unsuitable accommodation. This failure to take any action is unacceptable. It meant there were seven months where the Council failed to make the necessary suitability assessment and start looking for alternative accommodation for Miss D and her child. Had this fault not occurred the Council could and should have started actively looking for alternative temporary accommodation in March 2023, instead that did not happen until September.
20. I cannot see any evidence of the Council advising Miss D about the option of a referral to other social housing providers until July 2024. This should have been explained to her soon after she advised the Council about the unsuitable temporary accommodation. A referral to the housing provider could have been made well over a year earlier than the August 2024 referral.
21. I have not seen evidence of the Council considering Miss D’s request for a ‘pipeline property’ in November 2023. At a minimum the Council should have advised Miss D if this had been taken forward, but I have seen no evidence of the Council responding to Miss D on this matter.
22. It is unclear to me why Miss D was added to the Transfer List in October 2024 and not sooner. This also applies to the Council adding her onto the Urgent Moves list in November. Both of those actions could have happened soon after the Team restructure in March 2024.
23. The Council has already accepted in its complaint responses to Miss D that it failed to provide a reasonable level of service and the ASO was not as responsive as she should have been.
24. The Council says it actively tried to find Miss D alternative temporary accommodation, but it had severe housing shortages. There is evidence the Council was looking for a property for Miss D in 2024 and 2025 although there were also administrative failings during this time. The Ombudsman recognises that councils are not always able to meet their statutory duty to provide suitable temporary accommodation, but this is still a service failure because the statutory duty has not been met.

Did the fault cause an injustice

25. Miss D had to remain in unsuitable temporary accommodation. Had the faults above not occurred the Council could have assessed and accepted the accommodation was unsuitable by March 2023. This means Miss D remained in unsuitable accommodation because of fault by the Council from March 2023 through to the start of February 2025 when the Council identified suitable alternative temporary accommodation (totalling 22 months).

Back to top

Action

26. The Council has previously offered Miss D £500 for the poor handling of her case. This does not address the 22 months Miss D spent in unsuitable temporary accommodation where she had been assessed as being at ‘high risk’ of domestic abuse. To remedy the injustice caused to Miss D the Council has now agreed to pay her £4,400 (£200 per month for 22 months).
27. The Council will also set out any service improvements it will make as a result of this case. It will consider whether additional guidance or training is needed for officers to prioritise cases where domestic abuse has taken place.
28. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions within four weeks of this case closing.

Back to top

Decision

29. I find fault causing injustice. I have completed the investigation because the Council has agreed to remedy the injustice to Miss D.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman