Summary: Ms X complained the Council left her and her children in unsuitable accommodation. She also complained the Council failed to respond to her emails and requests for a review of the accommodation. We find the Council was at fault for its significant delay in dealing with Ms X’s request to review the suitability of the accommodation. This caused Ms X frustration, upset and uncertainty. The Council has agreed to make a payment to Ms X and implement a service improvement.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council left her and her children in unsuitable accommodation. She also complained the Council failed to respond to her emails and her requests for a review of the accommodation.
2. Ms X says the matter has caused significant distress and upset to her and her children.

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 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)
5. 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

6. Ms X referred her complaint to us in March 2025. Events before March 2024 are caught usually caught by the restriction in paragraph four of this statement. I have exercised discretion to look at events from October 2023 (when Ms X made her review request) because of the Council’s continual delay in dealing with the review request. However, I am satisfied there are no good reasons why Ms X did not bring her earlier concerns to us before October 2023 sooner. However, I will reference them in this statement for contextual purposes.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Ms X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Ms 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

Homelessness

9. 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)
10. 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)
11. 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)
12. Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability. The Council should complete the review within eight weeks. (Housing Act 1996, section 202) 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)

What happened

13. Ms X and her children are homeless. The Council provided them with interim accommodation in a hostel in June 2023.
14. The Council accepted the main housing duty towards Ms X in August. It said if she was unhappy with the accommodation it provided to her, she could ask for a review.
15. Ms X asked the Council to complete a suitability review in October. She said the accommodation did not meet her and her children’s needs. She sent further emails chasing a response in November and December. The Council did not complete a review.
16. Ms X sent the Council various text messages about repair issues with the accommodation throughout December. She sent further messages in January and October 2024.
17. Ms X complained to the Council in November 2024. She said the hostel was an unsuitable living environment for her children due to the lack of private bathroom facilities. She had sent over 50 emails to the housing officer and the emergency housing team, but the Council did not respond. The Council had also failed to respond to her review request. Finally, she said there was a safeguarding issue where her daughter unlocked the door and was found halfway down a flight of stairs.
18. The Council responded to the complaint in December. It said Mrs X could send an email detailing why she believed the hostel was unsuitable. Its reviews team would consider it. It said it was upholding her complaint because of the limitations of living in a hostel.
19. Ms X referred her complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaints procedure. She said the Council had ignored her safeguarding concerns for her young children. She also said it had failed to resolve the issue and move her to suitable accommodation.
20. The Council issued its final response to the complaint in mid-January 2025. It said it had failed to log her review request from 2023. It apologised for this. It said it had now logged the request, and an officer would carry out a review. It said the demand of properties in London outstripped the supply. Therefore, it could not guarantee it could provide her with alternative accommodation in her preferred area.
21. The Council responded to Ms X’s review request in April. It said the accommodation was suitable for Ms X and her children. The room was acceptable, and they had access to basic facilities. There was also no medical reason why the accommodation was unsuitable. It said before it finished the review it wanted to give Ms X an opportunity to comment on the letter and provide further representations.
22. Ms X responded the following week and provided further representations on why the accommodation was unsuitable.
23. The Council moved Ms X and her children into alternative accommodation in May. Therefore, it did not issue its final decision on her review request.

Back to top

Analysis

24. Councils should complete suitability review requests within eight weeks. The Council failed to adhere to this timescale in Ms X’s case and was at fault for its significant delay in dealing with her review request. She made her initial request in October 2023 and sent chasers in November and December 2023. She prompted the Council again when she complained in November 2024. The Council did not issue its initial response until April 2025.
25. The Council’s faults have caused Ms X frustration and upset. The Council did not issue its final decision on Ms X’s review request as it moved her to alternative accommodation. However, Ms X has some uncertainty about what the outcome may have been if the Council had acted without fault and responded to the review request in December 2023. If the Council had decided the accommodation was unsuitable, Ms X would have also had appeal rights to the county court. The Council’s fault has deprived Ms X of this process.
26. The Council apologised to Ms X, which I welcome. However, I made a financial recommendation to address Ms X’s injustice. This is inline with our guidance on remedies. I have also made a service improvement recommendation to prevent a recurrence of the fault in this case.

Back to top

Action

27. By 16 December 2025 the Council has agreed to:

• Pay Ms X £200 to reflect her injustice caused by the fault in this statement.
• Remind staff who deal with suitability review requests that they should respond to the requests within eight weeks. If there are going to be delays, they should keep the person who requested the review informed.

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

Back to top

Decision

29. There was fault by the Council, which caused Ms X an injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendations and so I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman