Summary: Miss X complained the Council failed to provide her with enough support or suitable interim accommodation when she applied to it as homeless. We found fault by the Council in the failure to take timely action and provide suitable interim accommodation which caused Miss X avoidable distress and uncertainty. We considered the symbolic payment already offered by the Council provided a suitable remedy to Miss X with an apology.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains the Council failed to provide her with enough support or offer suitable interim accommodation when she applied to it as homeless with her mother who has sadly since passed away. Miss X says because of the Council’s fault she lived with the threat of eviction which caused her significant distress and a deterioration in her health.

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. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), as amended)
4. We may investigate a complaint on behalf of someone who has died or who cannot authorise someone to act for them. The complaint may be made by:

• their personal representative (if they have one), or
• someone we consider to be suitable.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(2) and 34C(2), 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

How I considered this complaint

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

Relevant legislation and statutory guidance

7. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code) set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
8. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council on or after 3 April 2018:

• they are likely to become homeless within 56 days; or
• they have been served with a valid Section 21 notice which will expire within 56 days. (Housing Act 1996, section 175(4) & (5)

9. Someone is homeless if they have no accommodation or if they have accommodation, but it is not reasonable for them and anyone who lives with them or might reasonably be expected to live with them to continue to live there. (Housing Act 1996, Section 175)
10. There are two types of accommodation councils provide to certain homeless applicants: interim accommodation 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) If, having made inquiries, the council is not satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible, and in priority need, it will have no further accommodation duty.
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. 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.
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 and temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
15. 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.
16. 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)
17. Homeless applicants may request a review within 21 days of being notified about the suitability of accommodation offered to the applicant after a homelessness duty has been accepted (and the suitability of accommodation offered under section 200(3) and section 193). Applicants can request a review of the suitability of accommodation whether or not they have accepted the offer.

What happened

18. The following is a summary of key events. It does not include everything that happened.
19. During the period relevant to this complaint, Miss X was living with her mother, Mrs W in a privately rented property.
20. Miss X approached the Council on 11 February 2025 for help with their housing situation as they had been served a bailiff warrant which was due to be executed on 2 April 2025. The Council completed an initial triage assessment on 21 February and referred Miss X and Miss W to its housing solutions team on 28 February.
21. The Council completed a homelessness assessment on 21 March and completed a personalised housing plan (PHP). This noted the current address was a second floor property with no lift and Miss W was a wheelchair user and so was housebound. The Council issued a letter to Miss W on 21 March accepting a relief duty.
22. The Council also completed a suitability assessment on 21 March 2025 which stated Miss X and her mother may not be adequately housed as there was reason to believe the property was not suitable due to Miss W being housebound as there were steps to access and they had been served an eviction notice.
23. The Council has confirmed that interim accommodation was sought on 28 March 2025 due to the suitability assessment which confirmed the property was not suitable in the long term for Miss W. This request set out that Miss W was housebound and based on hospital transport requirements would require a two person crew with a stair climber to safely exit the property. It was noted the applicant was arranging transport with the hospital and asked for the relevant address to be provided as soon as possible.
24. The Council has confirmed that it was not able to secure suitable accommodation immediately due to Miss W’s accessibility needs.
25. The Council made several offers of accommodation to Miss X on 1 April. These included a two-bedroom ground floor property in Croydon as this was the only level access property available at the time. However, Miss X declined this offer as being too far away. The Council spoke with Miss X about this offer and advised her of a one--bedroom ground floor property in Haringey that slept two people. Miss X also declined this property as it did not provide two separate bedrooms. The Council arranged a hotel room in Finsbury Park on 2 April 2025.
26. The Council discussed this offer with Miss X as the hotel did not have a disabled access unit at the time but were able to offer a ground floor unit pending a search for a disabled access unit. Miss X declined this offer.
27. It was decided that, whilst Miss W’s current accommodation was not suitable for her needs, it was the most suitable accommodation available to her due to the lack of accessible properties available to the Council at the time of request. The Council has noted that the bailiff eviction was subsequently halted due to Miss W’s medical and welfare needs whilst it continued to look for suitable interim accommodation.
28. Miss X complained to the Council on behalf of her mother at the beginning of April 2025. Miss X explained her mother was disabled and receiving medical treatment and she was her main carer. Miss X complained about the lack of support they had received after her February homelessness application. Miss X explained she had contacted the Council in good time ahead of a planned eviction date to ensure arrangements could be made to find suitable accommodation and arrange accessible transport for her disabled mother. Miss X highlighted that her mother required an alarm system, a permanent address for medical correspondence, and her wound care from district nurses required two weeks notice of a change in address.
29. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint at the start of May and offered £25 for the delay in doing so. The Council accepted it had failed to respond to a query about its proof of income request and apologised. The Council explained it had started the search for a suitable property after receiving the suitability assessment at the end of March but had been unable to source a suitable two bedroom property and so had offered a hotel on a temporary basis until something more suitable could be sourced. The Council considered this unit met the needs identified in the PHP. It was noted that contact was made with the bailiffs for Miss X and Miss W to remain at the property. The Council acknowledged Miss X and Miss W faced difficult rehousing circumstances which remained unresolved due to a shortage of suitable interim accommodation. The Council apologised and offered £300 (made up of £150 for distress, £100 for inconvenience, £25 failure to reply to proof of income email, and £25 for the delayed complaint response).
30. Miss X asked for her complaint to be considered at Stage 2 of the Council’s complaint procedure in mid-May. Miss X was unhappy she had to repeatedly chase the Council before action was taken and that it had not been proactive in providing support. It was only on the day of the proposed eviction that they were offered unsuitable hotel accommodation. Miss X explained there had now been a medical emergency at the property over the weekend and it had taken ambulance crews 90 minutes to evacuate her mother who was now in hospital and unable to return home.
31. The Council wrote to Miss W ending the relief letter on 22 May 2025.
32. The Council provided a response to Miss X’s further complaint in early June. The Council apologised for the distress and inconvenience caused and acknowledged there were medical needs and a requirement for specialised housing and it had faced challenges in securing suitable accommodation. The Council also acknowledged Miss X’s efforts in seeking updates and apologised for her inconvenience and uncertainty. The Council outlined the context of a shortfall in housing stock. The Council confirmed the search for suitable interim accommodation continued. It increased the amount offered to Miss X to £750.
33. The Council wrote to Miss X accepting the main duty on 27 June 2025. This set out two decisions: that it owed the main duty under s193 and that they would remain at the current accommodation while the Council sought suitable alternative temporary accommodation. The letter set out the right of review in relation to both these decisions.
34. Miss W sadly passed away at the end of August 2025. Miss X has confirmed her mother had remained in hospital following her admission in May and did not return home.
35. The Council made an offer of accommodation to discharge the main housing duty to Miss X on 24 September. Miss X moved to this accommodation in October.

Analysis

36. Miss X contacted the Council on 11 February 2025 about her housing situation and the Council completed a homelessness assessment on 21 March. This was ahead of the proposed eviction date of 2 April.
37. Tenants have a right to remain in privately rented accommodation until a court issues a warrant to enforce possession and bailiffs carry out that warrant. It is not fault for a council to advise applicants of this right.
38. However, the Code does sets out an increasing unlikelihood that accommodation will be reasonable to continue to occupy as the possession process proceeds. This is especially the case if the applicant has children or may otherwise be in priority need and so owed interim accommodation if homeless.
39. The Council completed a suitability assessment on 21 March 2025 which stated there was reason to believe the current property was not suitable due to Miss W being housebound and as they had been served an eviction notice. The Council accepted the relief duty the dame day.
40. We acknowledge that it may be appropriate to arrange an assessment for a few weeks in the future when an applicant has just received a notice to leave a private tenancy. However, there was an opportunity here for the Council’s initial triage assessment to have identified Miss X’s specific medical needs and requirement for specialised housing and that it would face challenges in securing suitable accommodation. This should have prompted an earlier assessment and I am satisfied there was some avoidable delay here.
41. The section 188 duty to arrange interim accommodation is triggered as soon as the authority has reason to believe that an applicant may be eligible, homeless and in priority need. This is a low threshold. It is an absolute duty and the authority cannot postpone it due to a lack of available resources. It arises immediately and councils should have processes in place to find accommodation for households on the day they need it.
42. A council not being able to find suitable interim accommodation is not, of itself, a good reason for an applicant to remain in the property such that they are not yet homeless. The Code is also clear that households owed interim accommodation should not be evicted by bailiffs because of a council’s failure to provide interim accommodation. I note that arrangements were made to ensure Miss X and Miss W were not evicted from the property but it remained unsuitable due to Miss W being housebound.
43. I can see the Council made efforts to identify and source suitable interim accommodation for Miss X and Miss W.
44. The Council has confirmed it decided that, whilst Miss W’s, current accommodation was not suitable for her needs, it was the most suitable accommodation available to her due to the lack of accessible properties available to the Council at the time. This represents service failure by the Council.
45. I cannot say, even on balance, that the Council would have been able to identify a suitable property if it had started the process sooner. However, I am satisfied Miss X and Miss W were caused avoidable distress and uncertainty during an already difficult time. We are unable now to provide a remedy to Miss W as she has passed away.
46. I consider the Council’s increased offer in its Stage 2 response totalling £750 provides a suitable remedy to Miss X. The Council has confirmed this offer remains available to Miss X.

Back to top

Action

47. The Council will take the following action within one month of my final decision:

• write to Miss X to apologise for the initial delay in responding to her homelessness application and providing suitable interim accommodation; and
• make a symbolic payment to Miss X of £750 to acknowledge her avoidable distress and uncertainty.

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