Summary: We found fault by the Council on Miss Y’s complaint about it failing to move her to suitable alternative accommodation after accepting she was homeless, despite her former abusive partner knowing she remained there. It failed to move her and her large family to suitable accommodation, plan for the possibility of larger families needing larger properties, failed to show it explored the private rental sector, and failed to provide her with the help initially offered. The Council agreed to send her a written apology, pay £3,750 for the distress caused, make £250 monthly payments up to six months until she is suitably rehoused, and explore options for finding her accommodation. It also agreed to find and offer her a suitable property, review how it can make provision for larger families in the future, as well as review/create a procurement policy to increase the supply of larger properties.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains that after accepting she was homeless due to domestic abuse, the Council failed to find her and her children alternative, suitable accommodation: as a result, she remains in the same accommodation which does not meet her needs, and where she does not feel safe as her former partner knows she still lives there. She obtained a restraining order and non-molestation orders against him all of which has caused a great deal of stress and anxiety as she does not feel safe.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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)

Back to top

What I have and have not investigated

5. I have investigated Miss Y’s complaint from April 2024. This was because she complained to us in April 2025. The law says we cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. I saw no good reason why I should exercise discretion to investigate the Council’s actions before April 2024. References to events before April 2024 were made solely to put her complaint into context.
6. As the Council accepted it was unreasonable for Miss Y to continue living in her current accommodation, she had no reason to challenge its decision through the courts. This meant we had jurisdiction to investigate this complaint.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered evidence provided by Miss Y, the notes I made of our telephone conversation, the Council’s response to my enquiries, as well as relevant law, policy, and guidance. I sent a copy of my draft decision to Miss Y and the Council. I considered the Council’s response.

Back to top

What I found

8. All eligible and qualifying applicants are placed in one of the priority bands. These range from Band A (includes homeless households, for example, as well as those who need to move as a result of violence, or threats) which is for those with the most urgent need for moving, to Band D, for those who have the lowest need. Applications are also assessed for bedroom need.
9. At the end of the advertising period for each property, bidders are shortlisted by the respective Registered Provider by band order. The Registered Provider will review bids based on their own lettings policy. In most cases, the property is offered to the bidder in the highest band who has waited the longest.
10. Where possible, all lets are made through the choice based lettings process. A small number of applicants may meet a reasonable preference, but their circumstances mean they have an overriding urgent need for a ‘direct offer’. The Council will negotiate a direct offer where an applicant has been accepted as homeless and failed to bid or been unsuccessful in securing accommodation. This is also the case where an urgent move is needed because of violence, or its threat.

Homelessness law and guidance

11. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority, it has a duty to make accommodation available (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198).
12. Under the interim accommodation duty, a council is required to secure accommodation is available for an applicant where it believes they may be homeless, eligible for assistance, and have a priority need. (section 188 (1) Housing Act 1996)
13. If there is evidence that would give it reason to believe the applicant may be homeless as a result of domestic abuse, it should make interim accommodation available to the applicant immediately while it investigates. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, paragraph 21.25)
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, paragraph 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) 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)
16. Wherever possible, councils should avoid using bed and breakfast (B&B) accommodation. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, paragraph 17.33)
17. B&B accommodation can only be used for a maximum of six weeks for households with a ‘family commitment’ where no other accommodation which is not self-contained exists. This includes an applicant who is a pregnant woman or an applicant with dependent child. 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)

What happened

18. In 2023, Miss Y presented herself and her six children to the Council as homeless. This was because she was fleeing domestic abuse. She was unhappy because despite accepting her as homeless, the Council failed to move her from her four bedroom accommodation. This meant her former partner knew where they lived. Since making the application, Miss Y and the police got court orders preventing him from harassing or approaching her.
19. The Council wrote to her, accepting it owed her the main housing duty as it was satisfied she was homeless because of domestic abuse. It would offer her temporary accommodation until this duty ended. It also confirmed she was on its housing register, and it would review her banding as she would likely now be in Band A.
20. The letter went on to explain as she was in temporary accommodation, and it owed her the full duty, it would help her find suitable alternative accommodation. It would place bids for her under its choice based lettings scheme after 12 weeks. It would also actively seek to secure suitable accommodation for her through the private rental sector. It urged her to look for accommodation through the private rented sector too.
21. It confirmed she was now in Band A. It awarded her an extra six months in this band because she was homeless due to domestic abuse. It said it offered her temporary accommodation as an option at the time which she did not wish to pursue.
22. It also placed Miss Y on a list of households who needed larger accommodation that could not be met through the bidding process. At the time, she was already working with specialist support services and allocated an independent domestic violence advocate. Other options, including refuge accommodation, had been discussed with her but she wished to remain in her accommodation. It contacted her landlord to see what help could be given to improve safety there.
23. The Council relied on accommodation advertised for rent by registered social landlords as it holds no housing stock of its own. Miss Y needed a five bedroom property but, there was a low number of such properties. It accepted there were few housing opportunities for larger families looking for accommodation. This was why it agreed to her request to be considered for four bedroom properties. It accepted it was ‘very unlikely’ she would receive an offer of a property through the bidding system. It also accepted it was not reasonable to expect Miss Y to continue to live in her current accommodation because of the ongoing threat of domestic abuse.
24. From January 2023 to May 2023, she placed no bids for properties and no bids were placed for her either. In June, two bids were placed for her on new build four bedroom properties. She rejected one as too small. The other was nearing completion.
25. In 2024, her bid on the other new build, which was now completed, was unsuccessful as it was offered to an applicant higher up in the short list.
26. The Council explained it was looking at securing five bedroom accommodation. One option was to work with housing developers and builders to commission these properties for families as sites became available. It could not say when one might become available due to a current lack of suitable plots. This would take years to do although there would be some properties that could be ready in 2026. It also said it could not buy a property for her due to lack of funding. It maintained a waiting list for large new build commissioned properties which Miss Y joined in May 2023.
27. The Council was unable to provide details of the number of suitably sized properties that became available before November 2024 because of a computer system change. After this date, five 4 bedroom properties were advertised but none were large enough for 7 people. In the last 12 months, no five bedroom properties were advertised.
28. It accepted it has been unable to offer her a direct let property. This was because of the size of property she needed which could sleep seven people as well as their lack of availability.
29. It offered her the option of temporary accommodation in March 2025 which remained open should she wish to accept it. This would, to start with, likely be B&B/hotel accommodation as it has no self-contained temporary accommodation at the moment. It also said other options available to her would be to make her accommodation safer, with the involvement of organisations who help women fleeing domestic abuse. It asked her to contact it if she wished to pursue them.
30. All her children living with her are currently open to Children’s Services.

My findings

31. I found fault on this complaint for the following reasons:
1. The Council accepted it owed Miss Y the full housing duty because of domestic abuse. This meant it was placed under a duty to make suitable accommodation available to her. The Council accepted her accommodation was not suitable for the needs of her and her family. This was because of its size and the risk of further domestic abuse.
2. The courts held (R (Elkundi and others) v Birmingham [2021] EWHC 1024 (Admin)) that the main housing duty owed to an applicant under section 193(2) Housing Act 1996 is an immediate and unqualified duty to secure suitable accommodation. In that case, the local authority argued it was not an immediate and unqualified duty to secure accommodation but rather a duty to secure accommodation was available within a reasonable period which depended on the circumstances of each case and what accommodation was available. The court held:

• the duty was to secure accommodation 'is available for occupation’, not that it will be at some reasonable point in time;
• if a local authority believes accommodation currently being occupied is unsuitable, it must provide other accommodation which is suitable;
• an applicant can only waive their right to be provided with suitable accommodation if they are placed in a position to give fully informed consent. If they then go on to change their mind, the council must then secure that suitable accommodation was available for their occupation; and
• the local authority had acted unlawfully because it placed applicants to whom it owed the duty, and whose current accommodation was unsuitable, on a waiting list (the ‘planned move list’) while it took a reasonable time to find alternative accommodation which was suitable. One of the applicants was not told what the list was, or how long he would have to remain on it waiting for suitable accommodation.
3. I am satisfied the Council failed to secure Miss Y suitable accommodation at the time it accepted the non-delegable duty owed to her. It accepted the accommodation was unsuitable. While it told her about the possibility of commissioning larger properties that would be built in the future, it failed to meet her immediate need.
4. While I accept it faced difficulties finding a suitably large property for her, the duty remained to find one and to find one from the point it decided it owed her the duty. Without the Council’s intervention, it was unlikely Miss Y would successfully bid for one under its choice-based letting scheme. I say this because the Council accepted this was correct.
5. Understandably, large properties that could accommodate Miss Y and her family were in short supply. Although the choice-based letting scheme may well cater for most families, the Council failed to take steps to identify properties which might be suitable for larger families. I say this because it was reasonably foreseeable that at some point in time, the Council would receive an application from a larger than average household. I consider the Council failed to take steps in advance to ensure there was a suitable property available for a larger family.
6. I saw no evidence a fully informed Miss Y waived her right to be provided with suitable alternative accommodation.
7. Miss Y was placed on a waiting list for new build larger properties as and when they get built. She was placed on this list more than two years ago. The Council was unable to tell her how long she would remain on this list.
8. There was nothing to show the Council explored the private rental sector to find a suitable property or took any of the other steps it said it would in its initial letter to her.
9. Although the Council offered her the option of temporary accommodation, this meant she would initially need to go into B&B, for example. Such accommodation was not suitable for her and her family for more than six weeks anyway. At that point, the Council would have been back in the position of needing to find her something suitable.
10. The identified failures caused Miss Y injustice. She and her family had the distress of being left in a property which was not only too small but also left Miss Y at risk of further domestic abuse. She experienced frustration and lost the opportunity of the Council moving her and her family to suitable accommodation.

Back to top

Action

32. I considered our guidance on remedies. I also considered information Miss Y provided which showed police charges and court action against her former partner for violence towards her and extended family. These did not show incidents during the period of this investigation.
33. The Council agreed to take the following action within four weeks of the final decision on this complaint:
1. Send Miss Y a written apology for the injustice caused by failing to: find her suitable alternative accommodation and move her; provide the help it said it would provide; plan in advance for the likelihood of larger families needing temporary suitable accommodation.
2. Pay £3,750 (£250 x 15 months) to Miss Y for the distress caused of remaining in unsuitable accommodation.
3. From August 2025, continue to pay Miss Y £250 for each month she remains in her unsuitable accommodation (up to a maximum of six months) until it finds her suitable alternative accommodation which she accepts or, until she refuses such an offer which it considers is suitable and meets her needs.
4. Urgently explore all possibilities of securing her suitable alternative accommodation.
5. Find and offer her a suitable property for her and her family.
6. Review how it can make provision for larger families in unsuitable temporary accommodation in the future.
7. Review/create a policy for the procurement of larger properties which would increase the supply of temporary suitable accommodation.
34. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

35. I found fault on Miss Y’s complaint against the Council. The agreed action remedies the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman