Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness. She says it did not properly deal with her request to review the suitability of her temporary accommodation. We find the Council at fault for failing to inform Ms X of her appeal right to the county court. This caused Ms X an injustice since she was not given the opportunity to appeal the Council’s decision. The Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X for this injustice.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness. She says it did not properly deal with her request to review the suitability of her temporary accommodation. She also says the Council housed her family in unsuitable temporary accommodation, which has caused disruption, distress and anxiety. She wants the Council to offer suitable accommodation.

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 the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. Ms X complained about a neighbouring authority’s (Council A) handling of its homelessness duty to her. However, here we are investigating the actions of Epping Forest District Council only. Any complaint about Council A is a separate matter which we will not address in this decision.
6. As of August 2025, Ms X was placed in new temporary accommodation in another authority’s (Council C) area. She is unhappy with this. However, it is open to Ms X to submit a suitability review request. She would need to complete Council C’s complaints process before we can investigate further.

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 before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Temporary accommodation

9. There are two types of accommodation councils provide to certain homeless applicants: interim accommodation and temporary accommodation.
10. 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)
11. 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)
12. If a council ends its interim accommodation duty, but then goes on to accept the main housing duty, it still has a duty to provide temporary accommodation

Suitability of accommodation

13. 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)
14. 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)

Review rights

15. The council must advise applicants of their right to appeal to the county court on a point of law, and of the period in which to appeal. Applicants can also appeal if the council takes more than the prescribed time to complete the review. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202, 203 and 204)

What happened

16. Until July 2024, Ms X had lived within Council A’s area. In July, Ms X was at risk of homelessness. Council A discharged its homelessness duty to her by placing her and her family in interim accommodation in the Epping Forest District Council’s (the Council’s) area.
17. The Council accepted its homelessness prevention duty to Ms X in August. This legal duty requires councils to take reasonable steps to work with people who are at risk of becoming homeless within 56 days and help them keep their home or find somewhere new to live. It then accepted its main housing duty to her in November. However, the Council told Ms X this was pending determination of her local connection to Council A’s borough. If she had a local connection to this borough, Council A would then owe her a homelessness duty and the Council’s duty to her would end.
18. In February 2025, the Council moved Ms X and her family to temporary accommodation within its area.
19. In the same month, Ms X requested a suitability review of her temporary accommodation. She explained the accommodation was overcrowded and its location made her children’s medical conditions worse. She also said she had to transport her children to and from school in Council A’s area, which negatively impacted their education and wellbeing as the journey was too long.
20. In March, the Council wrote to Ms X and stated that while she was owed a homelessness duty, this was owed by Council A. It said it was therefore now ending its homelessness duty to her.
21. The Council issued its suitability review outcome in May. It upheld its decision that the temporary accommodation was suitable for Ms X and her family. It disagreed that the property was overcrowded or exacerbated her children’s medical symptoms. The letter said she could seek judicial review if she disagreed but did not mention Ms X’s right of appeal to the county court to appeal this decision.
22. In August, Council A accepted its homelessness duty to Ms X and moved her and her family into new temporary accommodation in Council C’s area.

Back to top

Analysis

23. The Council’s decision to uphold its suitability decision of Ms X’s temporary accommodation is a decision it was entitled to make, and was one based on professional judgement. The Ombudsman cannot challenge a Council’s decision, if made properly and in line with policy, guidance and the law. The Council considered Ms X’s evidence, including medical information, and additional supporting documents. It explained its decision to Ms X clearly and addressed each of the points she raised in her review request. I find no fault by the Council in the way it considered Ms X’s case.
24. However, as stated in paragraph 16, if the Council decides in the suitability review the temporary accommodation is suitable, the applicant has the right to appeal to the county court on a point of law. The Council did not inform Ms X of her appeal right in its suitability decision review outcome letter. This is fault. It told the Ombudsman it omitted this in error. However, this does not detract from the fault. It was the Council’s duty to inform her of her appeal right.
25. I have considered the injustice caused to Ms X by the Council’s fault. I could not say what the outcome of the appeal would have been had Ms X appealed to the county court. However, being denied her right of appeal is, by itself, an injustice. Council A has also now accepted its homelessness duty and moved Ms X and her family to different temporary accommodation in a new area. Had Ms X still been in the accommodation subject to the suitability review, it would have been suitable to recommend Ms X be given her appeal rights. However, now she has moved, and the Council no longer owes her a homelessness duty, there would no longer be value in recommending this remedy.
26. The Council has assured the Ombudsman it has not made the same error in other letters to other homeless applicants. Therefore, I have decided not to recommend any service improvements.

Back to top

Action

27. Within one month of the final decision the Council has agreed to apologise to Ms X for her lost opportunity to appeal to the county court.
28. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above action.

Back to top

Decision

29. I have completed my investigation. I find fault causing injustice for which I have recommended a remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman