Summary: Miss Y complained about the Council’s handling of her homelessness and housing applications. We have found fault by the Council, causing injustice, in failing to: provide Miss Y with suitable interim and temporary accommodation from March 2024 to November 2025; properly consider her medical information before making a decision about her priority in January 2025; and tell her about her right to ask for a review of the decision. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice by: apologising; making payments to recognise the impact of the failures to provide suitable accommodation, and when making and notifying Miss Y about its medical priority decision; and service improvements.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains about the way the Council dealt with her homelessness and housing applications. She says the Council failed to:
1. provide her with suitable interim and temporary accommodation when she approached it as homeless in February 2024;
2. properly assess her housing needs; and
3. properly consider her medical information and circumstances when assessing her priority band on the housing register.
2. Miss Y says she was provided with unsuitable bed and breakfast accommodation from March 2024 to May 2025. The accommodation was so unsuitable it affected her medical condition leading to hospital stays. She and her child could not continue to stay at the temporary accommodation because of its impact on her health and had to sofa surf with family and friends.
3. She also says the failure to properly assess her housing register application and priority band affected her opportunity to bid successfully for permanent social housing.
4. Miss Y wants the Council to: apologise for its failings; provide her and her child with suitable temporary accommodation; and properly assess her priority band taking account of her circumstances and medical information.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these.
6. 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)
7. 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

8. I have investigated what happened from February 2024, when Miss Y approached the Council for homelessness assistance, until May 2025 when she brought her complaint to us following the Council’s final response.
9. I have taken into account the continuing injustice caused to Miss Y by any faults during this period.
10. I have not investigated any issues which arose after May 2025, as these were not part of Miss Y’s complaint to us.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I considered evidence provided by Miss Y and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
12. Miss Y 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

What should have happened

Homelessness – the law

13. Councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness are set out in Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities.
14. These duties include the:

• prevention duty: if a council is satisfied an applicant is threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, it must take steps to help the applicant keep their home or find somewhere new to live. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)
• relief duty: a council must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)
• main housing duty: if a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need it has a duty to make accommodation available. The main duty continues until one of the situations in the Housing Act applies. This includes when an applicant becomes intentionally homeless from accommodation provided under the main duty.

Duty to provide Interim and temporary accommodation

15. 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)
16. When it goes on to accept the main housing duty, the accommodation it provides until it can end this duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)

Suitability of accommodation and use of bed and breakfast accommodation

17. 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 temporary accommodation.
18. 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.
19. Wherever possible, Councils should avoid using bed and breakfast (B&B) accommodation. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.33)
20. B&B accommodation can only be used for households which include a pregnant woman or dependent child when no other accommodation is available and then for no more than six weeks.
21. B&B is accommodation which is not self-contained, not owned or managed 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)

Review procedure

22. Homeless applicants have the right to request a review within 21 days of being notified of certain decisions, including:

• suitability of temporary accommodation; and
• intentional homelessness

23. Councils must complete reviews of these decisions within eight weeks of the date of the review request.

The Council’s housing allocations scheme

24. Every local housing authority must publish an allocations scheme that sets out how it prioritises applicants, and its procedures for allocating housing. 
25. The Council’s published scheme sets out its priority banding system. There are three priority bands:

• Band A: emergency and top priority
• Band B: urgent need to move
• Band C: identified housing need

26. The scheme says:

• applicants who have a medical illness or disability can be considered for medical priority banding A, B or C;
• the Council’s medical adviser will assess the applicant’s medical evidence and information and make a recommendation to the Council;
• the Council will consider the medical adviser’s recommendation together with the information and decide what the priority band should be; and
• applicants have the right to ask the council to review certain decisions about their applications, including decisions about their housing priority.

What happened

27. I have set out a summary of the key events below. It is not meant to show everything that happened. It is based on my review of all the evidence provided about this complaint.

Background

28. Miss Y was living in hostel accommodation. She applied to join the Council’s housing register and was placed on the register in December 2023 in Band C, with medical priority. Her housing need was assessed as ground floor or lifted accommodation because of her medical condition.
29. In February 2024, Miss Y’s accommodation provider served her with notice to leave by March 2024. She was pregnant and approached the Council for homelessness assistance.
30. She provided the Council with evidence about her medical condition. This included a midwife’s letter confirming information about Miss Y’s medical issues and that she had a high-risk pregnancy.

February to March 2024 – Miss Y’s homelessness application

31. Miss Y had an appointment with the homelessness team on 27 February. The Council sent her a letter confirming it had accepted the prevention duty and included her Personal Housing Plan.
32. The Council asked its medical adviser for advice on Miss Y’s housing needs. They advised, on 5 March, Miss Y needed first floor maximum or lifted accommodation, due to her medical issues, and recommended self-contained accommodation.
33. The Council completed an assessment of suitability of accommodation form for Miss Y on 5 March. This noted:

• her medical conditions;
• she was pregnant. Her baby was due in May 2024;
• medical evidence confirmed she had difficulty with steps and needed first floor maximum or lifted accommodation; and
• she required her own bathroom due to her medical condition and self-contained accommodation was recommended.

34. On 14 March, the Council told Miss Y it accepted it owed her the relief duty and that she was in priority need.

March to May 2024: interim accommodation

35. Miss Y had to leave her hostel accommodation on 14 March.
36. On 15 March the Council provided Miss Y with interim accommodation – a room at Property A. This was B&B accommodation for men and women with shared kitchen and bathroom facilities.
37. In April Miss Y provided a letter from medical professionals supporting her with her pregnancy. This said:

• Miss Y had medical complications which required close monitoring;
• her current accommodation was unsuitable because she had to share bathroom and kitchen facilities with a large number of strangers. She was vulnerable if exposed to infections transmitted in shared environments due to her complex medical conditions; and
• she would be especially vulnerable post-labour. She was struggling, in shared accommodation, to access the support she needed to manage her medical needs.

38. On 8 May the Council moved Miss Y to new interim accommodation at Property B. This property was managed by the Council. Miss Y had her own room and bathroom but shared kitchen facilities with other residents.
39. The kitchen facilities were in a separate building to Miss Y’s room. She had to walk some distance outside, from her room to the kitchen.

May 2024: Main housing duty and provision of temporary accommodation

40. The Council notified Miss Y on 9 May it had accepted it owed her the main housing duty. She asked for a suitability review of her temporary accommodation at Property B.
41. The Council told Miss Y’s representative on 23 May it accepted her accommodation was unsuitable.

June to October 2024: further contact about temporary accommodation

42. In June Miss Y completed a change of circumstances form explaining why her current accommodation was unsuitable for her and her baby’s needs.
43. In August the Council offered Miss Y private rented accommodation to discharge its main housing duty. It later accepted the accommodation was unsuitable and withdrew the offer.
44. In October 2024 the Council told Miss Y she was on the list for a transfer to more suitable accommodation.

September to October 2024: Miss Y’s complaint to the Council

45. Miss Y complained to the Council about the way it had dealt with her homelessness application and its failure to provide her with suitable interim and temporary accommodation.
46. In its stage one response the Council said it had properly assessed her housing needs and offered accommodation it considered suitable in the interim. Its accommodation team were trying to find her suitable accommodation but there was a shortage of available alternatives to move her to.
47. Miss Y was not satisfied with the response and asked the Council to escalate her complaint to stage two.

January to February 2025: further contact about Miss Y’s complaint

48. The Council had not yet moved Miss Y to suitable temporary accommodation. She made a further request for a stage two review of her complaint.
49. She also asked again for a suitability review of her accommodation at Property B, and that the Council change her medical priority from Band C to Band B.
50. The Council sent her medical information to its medical adviser and asked them what her priority should be. The adviser told it medical priority Band C applied.
51. In its final response to Miss Y’s complaint in February 2025, the Council said it:

• accepted her current accommodation was not ideal for her needs. It was taking longer than expected to move her due to the lack of available properties; and
• had considered her medical needs. She would remain in Band C medical priority unless there was reason to reconsider this.

March 2025: Information about Miss Y’s medical condition

52. Miss Y and her baby were moved to another room at Property B.
53. She provided the Council with a letter from medical professionals dated 24 March. This said Miss Y had recently experienced a crisis in her medical condition and been admitted to hospital. The crisis had been precipitated by frequent exposure to cold weather through having to walk outside for some distance from her room to use the kitchen. This was detrimental to her health and Miss Y should be supported with suitable accommodation.

April 2025: Council ends the main housing duty

54. On 29 April the Council told Miss Y it had ended the main housing duty because she had voluntarily ceased to occupy her temporary accommodation.
55. Miss Y asked for a review of this decision. She said she could not continue living in the unsuitable temporary accommodation at Property B because of its severe impact on her health. She and her baby had had to move out of the B&B accommodation and were sofa-surfing with family and friends.

Miss Y’s complaint to us

56. Miss Y brought her complaint to us in May 2025.

Events from May 2025

57. In September 2025, in response to our enquiries, the Council told us it accepted it had wrongly ended the main housing duty in April 2025. It said it would issue a decision on Miss Y’s review request confirming it had overturned this decision.
58. In October 2025 the Council notified Miss Y it had reviewed and overturned its decision to end the main housing duty on the grounds she had voluntarily ceased to occupy the temporary accommodation made available to her. It accepted Property B was not suitable because of the shared facilities. It confirmed it had restored the main housing duty.
59. On 12 November 2025 the Council moved Miss Y to self-contained temporary accommodation.
60. In February 2026 the Council discharged its main housing duty to Miss Y by arranging private rented sector accommodation it said was suitable for her and available for at least 12 months.

My decision – was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

a) Failure to provide Miss Y with suitable accommodation

61. Miss Y had to stay in B&B accommodation, while she was pregnant from 15 March 2024 to 7 May 2024, a total of 8 weeks and 4 days. B&B accommodation is never suitable for young people aged 16 or 17, families with children or pregnant women. It can only be used for a maximum of six weeks when no other accommodation is available.
62. She then had to live at Property B from 8 May 2024 until April 2025. Although this property was not B&B accommodation because it was managed by the Council, she had to share facilities, including the kitchen, with other residents.
63. Miss Y’s medical professionals told the Council from the outset about the impact of the shared facilities on her health. It accepted the accommodation wasn’t suitable for her. It said it did not have any alternative suitable accommodation available to move her to. But it has not shown what action it took to find her other suitable accommodation.
64. The Council did not provide Miss Y with suitable self-contained accommodation until 12 November 2025.
65. The Council’s continued failure to provide Miss Y with suitable accommodation while she was homeless was fault.

Impact of this fault

66. Where a complainant has been deprived of suitable accommodation while homeless, our recommendation for symbolic financial redress is likely to be in the range of £150 to £350 a month. But where they have stayed in B&B beyond the point where they should have been moved, we are likely to recommend a weekly payment in the range of £100 to £200.
67. Miss Y spent 8 weeks 4 days in B&B accommodation, 2.5 weeks more than the maximum allowed. I consider a payment at the top of the range is appropriate, taking into account that she was pregnant at the time and the impact of shared facilities on her health.
68. She and her young baby then spent nearly a year in unsuitable accommodation with shared facilities at Property B. Taking into account the length of time and the impact of shared facilities on her health, I consider a payment at the top of the range is appropriate.
69. The Council did not provide Miss Y with any alternative accommodation after April 2025, while she remained homeless, until 12 November 2025 – a period of some 6.5 months. I understand Miss Y and her baby had to stay with family and friends during this time. I consider a payment towards the lower end of the range is appropriate.

b) Assessment of Miss Y’s housing needs

70. The Council obtained advice from its medical adviser and considered the medical and other information Miss Y had provided before assessing her housing needs.
71. My view is it properly assessed Miss Y’s needs when completing her suitability of accommodation form in March 2024.
72. In my view there was no fault in the way the Council assessed her housing needs for accommodation – its fault, as explained above, was in failing to provide suitable accommodation to meet her assessed needs.

c) Assessment of Miss Y’s priority band on the housing register

73. The Council obtained advice from its medical adviser before placing Miss Y in medical priority Band C on the housing register, in December 2023. It confirmed she remained in Band C, in May 2024 when it accepted it owed her the main housing duty. I don’t consider the Council failed to properly assess Miss Y’s priority band at this stage.
74. But it failed, in my view, to follow the proper process when reviewing Miss Y’s medical information and priority band in January 2025, in response to her request it reassess her priority.
75. The decision about priority is one for the Council to make, not its medical adviser. The Council should have asked its medical adviser for a recommendation and considered their report about this with the supporting medical information, before deciding Miss Y should remain in Band C.
76. There is no evidence here the Council properly considered the medical information before telling Miss Y she would remain in Band C. Instead, it seems to have simply asked its medical adviser to make this decision for it.
77. There is also no evidence that, when the Council told Miss Y in February 2025 she would remain in Band C, it also told her she had the right to ask for a review of this decision.
78. My view is the Council failed, in January/February 2025, to properly consider Miss Y’s medical information and circumstances before deciding she should stay in Band C, and to tell her about her right to ask for a review of this decision.
79. This failure was fault.

Impact of this fault

80. I can’t say whether the Council would have made a different decision about Miss Y’s medical priority had it properly considered the relevant information in January 2025. And I can’t say what the outcome would have been had the Council told Miss Y she had the right to ask for a review of its decision.
81. Miss Y is not on the housing register now the Council has discharged its main housing duty, so her priority band is not currently an issue.
82. But the Council’s failures in January 2025 caused Miss Y uncertainty and upset about whether her medical priority had been properly assessed and if the outcome would have changed following any review.

Complaint handling delay

83. The Council says in its published complaints procedure, someone unhappy with a stage one response to their complaint can ask for a final, stage two review. It will then acknowledge this request within 5 days and aim to respond within a further 20 working days.
84. Although Miss Y has not specifically raised this, during my investigation I noted the long delay by the Council in responding to Miss Y’s request in October 2024 for a stage two review of her complaint. It did not issue its final response until February 2025 – a delay of three months.
85. The Council has not explained the reason for this delay.

Back to top

Action

86. To remedy the injustice caused by the above faults, and within four weeks from the date of our final decision, the Council has agreed to:
1. apologise to Miss Y for its failure to: provide her with suitable accommodation from 15 March 2024 to 12 November 2025; properly consider her medical information when deciding her priority band; and tell her about her right to ask for a review and the upset caused by these failures. This apology should be in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology
2. pay Miss Y a total of £6,000 comprising £500 to recognise the upset and distress caused by living in unsuitable B&B accommodation for 2.5 weeks more than the maximum allowed, £4,200 for the 12 months living in unsuitable accommodation from May 2024 to April 2025, and £1,300 for the upset caused by the failure to provide her with any accommodation from May to November 2025. This is based on our guidance on remedies; and
3. pay Miss Y £150 to recognise the upset and uncertainty caused by its failure in January 2025 to properly consider her medical information and tell her about her review right. This is a symbolic payment based on our guidance on remedies
87. And within three months from the date of our final decision, the Council should:
1. review its homelessness procedures and make any changes needed to ensure:

• homeless applicants: with dependent children; aged 16 &17; or pregnant are only placed in B&B accommodation when no other accommodation is available, and for a maximum of six weeks;
• it actively searches for suitable alternative accommodation for those households placed in B&B accommodation or unsuitable accommodation; and
• it records and monitors the length of time households remain in B&B accommodation and the action being taken to move them to suitable accommodation.
2. review its housing allocation procedures and make any changes needed to ensure:
• its officers properly follow the process set out in its published scheme when making decisions about an applicant’s medical priority band – in particular that medical advisers give recommendations which the Council should consider together with the information provided before making a decision;
• officers record their decisions about medical priority; and
• when applicants are notified of a decision about their priority band they are also told about their right to ask for a review of the decision.

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

Back to top

Decision

89. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to take the above action to remedy this injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman