Summary: Mr D says the Council placed his family in unsuitable interim accommodation. I have found the Council at fault because Mr D’s family remained in bed and breakfast style accommodation over the six week legal limit. The Council has agreed to apologise and pay Mr D redress.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Mr D) says the Council placed his family in unsuitable interim, bed and breakfast (B&B) style, accommodation and failed to move them within the six week limit.
2. Mr D also refers to the Council’s decision to end its main housing duty and the offer of unsuitable temporary accommodation in 2025.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
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

What I have and have not investigated

6. My investigation covers March 2025 (when Mr D applies as homeless) to 7 July 2025 when the Council made an offer of alternative temporary accommodation.
7. I am not investigating events after 7 July and the other parts of Mr D’s complaint concerning the suitability of temporary accommodation or the decision to end the main duty. That is because Mr D is already using the correct route the Ombudsman requires, namely pursuing a statutory review and progressing the case to the county court.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered evidence provided by Mr D and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
9. I shared my draft decision with both parties and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

10. On 28 March 2025 Mr D applied to the Council as homeless, he had received a notice to leave his accommodation on 15 April. His household consisted of two adults and four children including an infant. On 7 April the Council received documentation to support the homelessness application and made a referral for emergency accommodation to start on 15 April. On the same day the Council notified Mr D it had accepted a relief duty towards him and issued a personalised housing plan (PHP). On 15 April the Council offered Mr D accommodation at a hotel, it was two rooms in separate buildings. There was a shared kitchen in one building. Mr D told the Council he felt the accommodation was unsuitable, there were no cooking facilities and no space.
11. On 17 April Mr D called the Council about the accommodation, he was told the Temporary Accommodation Team (TA Team) would respond to him. On 20 April Mr D told the Council the accommodation was unsuitable, he provided photographs of how cramped the rooms were and included letters from his GP and his children’s school. On 23 April the TA Team told Mr D it recognised the impact of splitting the family between two buildings and it would “make every effort to find rooms closer together” and try to find a self-contained unit. I have no evidence of any further action being taken by the TA Team to find the family adjacent rooms.
12. On 25 April Mr D again told the Council the accommodation was unsuitable and impacting on the wellbeing of his family. On 28 April Mr D reiterated the issues about the accommodation to the Council. On 1 May Mr D complained to the Council about the interim accommodation. He wanted to be moved to suitable, self-contained accommodation. On 2 May the Council nominated Mr D for a four bedroom private rental property. On 6 May Mr D told the Council the property was unaffordable, and both parties agreed the property was not a viable option.
13. On 16 June Mr D complained to the TA Team about the interim accommodation. On the same day the Council wrote to Mr D that it had accepted a main housing duty towards him. The letter advised he was entitled to an offer of temporary accommodation and advised him about the right to request a review if he felt temporary accommodation was unsuitable. On 19 June a Council Officer asked the TA Team if the family could be placed in two adjacent rooms or ‘at least in the same building’. The TA Contracts Team said it would see if this could be arranged subject to availability of rooms. On 20 June the Head of Lettings replied to Mr D’s 16 June complaint. He apologised the Council had been unable to offer self-contained accommodation. Due to severe shortages in housing supply the Council had been unable to find alternative accommodation. On 7 July the Council offered Mr D self-contained temporary accommodation.

Events after my investigation

14. Mr D subsequently refused the temporary accommodation offer. The Council ended its main duty towards the family and sought to evict them from the temporary accommodation. Mr D pursued the review process in respect of the accommodation offer and the main duty decision and escalated the matters to the county court. In August the Council issued a stage one complaint response to Mr D which focussed on the events after 16 June.

What should have happened

Interim 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. There are two types of accommodation councils provide to certain homeless applicants: interim accommodation and temporary accommodation. 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.
17. 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. 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)
18. The Council says that it produces a daily report which flags up how long applicants have been placed in B&B accommodation. It uses a traffic light system (red/ amber/ green) to show which applicants are approaching the six week limit. The Council has a transfer list to place applicants into suitable interim/ temporary accommodation.

Was there fault by the Council

19. The Council placed Mr D’s family in B&B style accommodation and should have moved them to suitable interim accommodation within six weeks of the placement (so by 26 May 2025). Instead they remained at the property up to 7 July when the Council offered alternative temporary accommodation. That is a period of five weeks. As explained above I am not looking at what happened after 7 July because Mr D has, correctly, exercised his right to pursue a suitability review and has progressed this to the county court. There is clearly fault by the Council in this matter. I understand that it had a limited housing supply at the time of this case and did not have sufficient self-contained interim accommodation meaning applicants had to be placed in B&B style accommodation. Whilst I acknowledge the Council was facing a difficult period it still failed to meet its statutory obligations towards Mr D and his family.
20. I cannot see any evidence the Council took action to source rooms closer together in the B&B for the family. The Council said it would try to do this on 23 April. When I asked the Council about this matter it said it was unclear what I referred to or “if we did in fact say this”. I am satisfied the Council told Mr D it would “make every effort” to find rooms nearer together but I cannot see any recorded actions by Officers to explore whether adjacent/ closer rooms were available or to feed back to Mr D. I consider there is fault by the Council.

Did the fault cause an injustice

21. Mr D’s family were left in unsuitable B&B accommodation for five weeks over the six week legal limit up to 7 July 2025.

Back to top

Action

22. The Council has agreed to remedy the injustice to Mr D and will:

• Apologise to Mr D.
• Pay Mr D £150 per week for the additional five weeks in B&B accommodation up to 7 July 2025. That totals £750.

23. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions within four weeks of this case closing.

Back to top

Decision

24. I find fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman