Summary: Mrs X complained the Council placed her and her family in unsuitable accommodation and wrongly assessed her household as needing only two bedrooms. We find no fault in the Council’s decision on bedroom entitlement. However, we find fault in its failure to properly assess suitability at the outset, delays in addressing serious hazards, and delay in completing a suitability review. This caused the family prolonged distress and uncertainty, and meant they lived in unsuitable accommodation for an extended period and continue to do so. We recommend the Council apologise, make a financial payment to Mrs X, and take further action to address hazards.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council failed to provide her and her family with suitable interim accommodation and delayed moving them to suitable accommodation. She says the property they are living in is affected by mould and disrepair, which caused her child to develop asthma and resulted in hospitalisation. And exacerbated other family members’ physical and mental health.
2. Mrs X also complained the Council wrongly assessed her household as requiring two-bedroom accommodation. She considers that, due to the family’s medical needs, they require a four-bedroom property. She says that as a result of this incorrect assessment, the Council has failed to offer suitable interim or temporary accommodation.

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. 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.
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

How I considered this complaint

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

Legislation and statutory guidance

Homelessness

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

The relief duty

9. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

The main housing duty

10. 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 (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

Interim and temporary accommodation

11. 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)
12. 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)
13. Interim and temporary accommodation can be the same physical property. What changes is the legal duty under which a council provides it. This is important because there is a statutory right to review the suitability of temporary accommodation. This then carries a right of appeal to county court on a point of law. There is no statutory right to review the suitability of interim accommodation.

Suitability of accommodation

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 accommodation and accommodation provided under the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
15. Homelessness temporary accommodation must be legally suitable. (Housing Act 1996, section 206) Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability. (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)

Hazards and disrepair

16. The legal duty lies with a council to ensure an applicant is in suitable accommodation which is free from disrepair or hazards. The council is responsible for the actions of providers of temporary accommodation because they are acting on its behalf.
17. Accommodation is not suitable if it falls below certain minimum standards. The Homelessness Code of Guidance recommends any accommodation should, as a minimum, be free of “Category One” hazards assessed under the Housing Health and Safety Rating system (HHSRS). A category one hazard is a hazard that poses a serious threat to someone’s health or safety, such as excessive cold, damp, and mould.
18. If a council considers a Category One hazard exists, it must take the appropriate enforcement action. If there is a Category Two hazard, the Council has the power to take enforcement action.

What happened

19. In 2024, Mrs X approached the Council for homelessness assistance.
20. In November, the Council assessed Mrs X’s application and accepted the relief duty. As a part of its assessment, it carried out a medical assessment which found no need for additional bedrooms. The Council offered Mrs X and her family nightly paid emergency accommodation. Mrs X initially refused the offer because she considered it too small and unsuitable for her family’s needs. The following day, facing eviction and with no alternative offer available, she accepted the property.
21. On the day she moved in, Mrs X raised concerns about the property’s suitability, including its condition, size, location, noise levels affecting her child with sensory difficulties, and access difficulties due to her husband’s mobility problems. The following day she reported further issues, including the presence of rodents. Mrs X asked for urgent support to find a more suitable and accessible property. She also told the Council the family required four bedrooms due to medical needs.
22. In December, she continued to raise concerns and provided supporting evidence from her child’s school about the impact of the property’s size and location. She asked for a review of both suitability and bedroom need.
23. In mid-December, the Council inspected the property and identified two Category One hazards, including non-functioning fire alarms and the absence of a fire door.
24. Mrs X continued to request a transfer and submitted supporting evidence from healthcare professionals, her other child’s school, and a social worker, all supporting her request for alternative accommodation.
25. In March 2025, the Council completed a medical assessment. While it concluded the household required two bedrooms, it also identified a number of specific property features that significantly narrowed the range of accommodation that would be suitable for the family. These included restrictions relating to the type and layout of the property, safety features within the home, and environmental characteristics of the surrounding area. The evidence shows the current accommodation did not meet several of these requirements.
26. Later that month, following a multi-agency meeting involving housing, education, health, and social care professionals, the Council accepted that the property was unsuitable for the family’s needs and placed Mrs X on the transfer list. It did not provide a timescale for a move.
27. In April, Mrs X raised a stage one complaint raising concerns about damp and mould, rodents, safety issues, overcrowding and the impact on her children’s health. The Council’s stage one response stated the managing agents were responsible for repairs and delays were due to Mrs X cancelling appointments. The Council agreed the property was unsuitable but could not say when a suitable property would become available. Mrs X immediately escalated her complaint dissatisfied with the response.
28. In May, Mrs X’s child was admitted to hospital with breathing difficulties, she says was caused by the damp and mould in the property. The Council was informed and raised repair issues with the managing agents, and works were completed shortly afterwards.
29. Later that month, the Council identified a potential suitable property and discussed this with Mrs X. She declined the property because she considered it did not meet her preferred bedroom requirement. The Council decided not to proceed to make a formal offer and paused further action while it reviewed her bedroom entitlement.
30. In June, the Council completed that review and confirmed the household required a two-bedroom property.
31. The Council issued its final complaint response. It acknowledged that only one repair appointment had been arranged and that this had been cancelled by the managing agents. It confirmed that most of the works identified during the December inspection had been completed, except for the fire door. It also stated it was awaiting further evidence regarding the request for a four-bedroom property and would consider this once received. Shortly afterwards, the Council accepted the main housing duty.
32. In July, Mrs X was formally offered a two-bedroom property. She refused the offer stating that she required a four-bedroom property due to medical needs. The Council withdrew the offer while a medical assessment was pursued to determine her correct bedroom entitlement.
33. In December, after Mrs X brought her complaint to the Ombudsman, the Council completed a further medical assessment. It concluded there was no essential need for additional separate bedrooms and confirmed the household’s entitlement remained at two bedrooms. The Council also offered Mrs X a temporary move to alternative two-bedroom accommodation to allow works to be completed at the current property. Mrs X declined this offer, in part because it did not meet her preferred bedroom requirement.

My findings

Bedroom need

34. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
35. The Council assessed Mrs X’s household as requiring two bedrooms in November 2024. Mrs X believes the family requires four bedrooms and provided medical and professional evidence in support of this.
36. The evidence shows the Council considered the relevant guidance, its allocation policy and the information provided, including updated medical evidence. It carried out a review of bedroom need in March 2025 and reached a decision it was entitled to make. There is no evidence of fault in the way that decision was reached.
37. If Mrs X disagrees with the outcome of the most recent bedroom need decision (December 2025), she must use the statutory review process. If she considers there is fault in how the review is conducted, she may bring a further complaint to the Ombudsman.

Suitability of accommodation

38. The Council has a duty to ensure any accommodation it provides to a homeless household is suitable at the point of placement.
39. There is no evidence the Council properly assessed the suitability of the property before placing Mrs X and her family there. This was fault. When the property was inspected in December 2024, Category One hazards were identified. These hazards were present from the point of placement. I therefore find, on balance, the property was unsuitable from the beginning.
40. Although some remedial works were completed, the evidence shows that at least one Category One hazard, relating to fire safety within the property, remained unresolved for a significant period. This was fault. Mrs X reports that this issue remains outstanding.
41. Despite Mrs X raising consistent concerns from the day she moved in, the Council failed to complete a proper suitability assessment until March 2025. This delay was fault and caused Mrs X distress and uncertainty.
42. Following this, the Council accepted that the property was unsuitable as it did not meet the family’s medical requirements. It then owed an immediate, non-deferrable and unqualified duty to secure suitable accommodation.
43. Mrs X and her family continue to remain in the same accommodation. The continued use of accommodation that does not meet the identified requirements for the household amounts to ongoing fault. This is particularly concerning as the evidence shows that aspects of the property’s environment are having a significant negative impact on the family’s health and wellbeing.
44. I find that Mrs X and her family have been living in unsuitable accommodation since their placement in November 2024, initially due to the presence of Category One hazards. From March 2025 onwards the accommodation was also unsuitable because it did not meet the household’s assessed medical and environmental requirements.
45. However, the evidence shows the Council has taken steps to identify and offer alternative accommodation. From mid-2025 onwards, Mrs X declined offers and potential moves because they did not meet her preferred bedroom requirement, which exceeds her assessed need. This contributed to the length of time the family has remained in the current accommodation. I have taken this into account when assessing the level of injustice and the appropriate remedy.

Back to top

Action

46. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults, within four weeks of the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• apologise to Mrs X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology;
• pay Mrs X £3,700 to recognise the time her family has time spent in unsuitable accommodation. This has been calculated as £300 a month from November 2024 (when the family moved into the property) to July 2025 (when a suitable formal offer was made but declined), and £150 a month from August 2025 to April 2026;
• pay Mrs X £150 a month until the Council provides suitable alternative accommodation, otherwise ends its duty to Mrs X, or six months have passed. If Mrs X remains in the accommodation after six months, she can bring a new complaint to the Ombudsman; and
• carry out a Housing Health and Safety Rating System assessment of the property and ensure any Category One hazards are remedied.
47. I have not made further service improvement recommendations. This is because the Council has already accepted and implemented recommendations made in previous Ombudsman investigations to improve how it assesses, reviews and keeps the suitability of accommodation under consideration. Those improvements were made after the events in this case.
48. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

49. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman