Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to move him to alternative accommodation after it identified the property he was living in was unsuitable. We find the Council was at fault for its delay in moving Mr X to alternative suitable accommodation. This caused Mr X distress, and he was deprived of living in unsuitable accommodation. The Council has agreed to make a further financial payment to Mr X to reflect his injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to move him to alternative accommodation after it identified the property he was living in was unsuitable. Mr X says he has experienced a significant decline in his mental and physical health while living in unsuitable 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 recommend a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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

4. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Temporary accommodation

6. 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)
7. 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)

What happened

8. Mr X is homeless. The Council accepted the main housing duty for Mr X in December 2023.
9. The Council moved Mr X to temporary accommodation in a hotel in June 2024.
10. Mr X contacted the Council in May 2025. He said the accommodation was unsuitable for him. He said he had a shared kitchen, he was not allowed to have visitors, and his room was too small for him. He said his mental health had declined since living in the property.
11. The Council registered the matter as a suitability review request. It completed the review in July and decided the accommodation was unsuitable for Mr X. It said it had placed him on the temporary accommodation transfer database.
12. Mr X complained to the Council in December about its delay in moving him to suitable alternative accommodation.
13. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint in mid-January 2026. It upheld his complaint and said it had failed to move him to alternative accommodation. It apologised for this. It said it was experiencing a shortage of available temporary accommodation, and it could not provide a timeframe for when it could offer a suitable property. It offered Mr X £900 (£150 per month) to reflect that he had been living in unsuitable accommodation for six months.
14. Mr X referred his complaint to stage two of the Council’s complaints procedure. He said the hotel environment had continued to negatively affect his wellbeing due to restricted cooking facilities and a strict no-visitors policy. He also said he had a recent diagnosis of diabetes, which he linked to living in unsuitable accommodation.
15. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint in early March. It offered its sincere apologies for its delay in moving him to alternative accommodation. It offered Mr X a further £150 on top of the £900 it had previously offered to reflect that Mr X had now lived in unsuitable accommodation for seven months. Its total offer was £1,050.
16. Mr X accepted the Council’s offer. However, he said he did not consider it had resolved the matter.
17. The Council offered Mr X alternative accommodation in mid-March. Mr X refused and early April. Mr X refused the properties and said it was not suitable for him because of the location and that he would be at risk. He also said the properties were not suitable because of his mental and physical health.
18. The Council made another offer to Mr X in early May. Mr X accepted the offer.

Back to top

Analysis

19. The Council has a duty to provide homeless households with suitable temporary accommodation. The Council decided Mr X’s accommodation was unsuitable in July 2025. While it placed him on the transfer list, he did not move to alternative accommodation until early May 2026. This significant delay is fault.
20. I recognise the Council made two offers of alternative accommodation in March and April 2026. Mr X said they were not suitable. In response to my draft decision, the Council said its offers were suitable. It made its offer in April after it had completed a housing needs assessment which detailed the geographical area that would be suitable for Mr X to live in.
21. If the Council considered its offers were suitable, it should have put them in writing and provided Mr X with the right to request a suitability review. If the outcome of that review was its offers were suitable, and Mr X disagreed, the Council could have then discharged its homelessness duty to Mr X. The Council did not follow this process. Its continued effort to look for alternative accommodation gave the impression it agreed with Mr X’s concerns.
22. The Council’s fault has caused Mr X distress, and he was deprived of living in suitable accommodation. Mr X has described the impact living in unsuitable accommodation had on his mental and physical health.
23. The Council has apologised to Mr X and paid him £1,050 to reflect that he was living in unsuitable accommodation for seven months (from 10 July 2025 to 24 February 2026). I welcome the steps the Council has taken to remedy Mr X’s injustice. However, given that Mr X did not move to alternative accommodation until May 2026, I have made a further recommendation to reflect his injustice.

Back to top

Action

24. By 7 October 2026 the Council has agreed to pay Mr X £375 (£150 per month) to recognise the impact of living in unsuitable temporary accommodation from 24 February 2026 to 4 May 2026.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above action.

Back to top

Decision

26. There was fault by the Council, which caused Mr X an injustice. The Council has agreed to my recommendation and so I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman