Summary: Ms Y complains the Council has failed to ensure her temporary accommodation is kept in good repair. She complains about the length of time she has been on the Council’s housing register. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault for failing to ensure Ms Y’s temporary accommodation is kept in good repair. This caused Ms Y and her family distress and uncertainty. To remedy the injustice to Ms Y, the Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Ms Y as well as to review its Nightly Let policy.

The complaint

1. Ms B complains on behalf of her mother, Ms Y, that the Council:
1. has failed to ensure her temporary accommodation is kept in good repair; and
2. has failed to move her to alternative temporary or permanent accommodation.
2. Ms B also complains that there had been occasions when the maintenance team came to the house unannounced when Ms Y was by herself. She says Ms Y was unable to communicate with the maintenance team in English and usually Ms B or her sister would be present to assist with interpreting for Ms Y.
3. Ms B says Ms Y is living in terrible conditions and she is struggling with the lack of ventilation and disrepair. She says the accommodation is not suitable for Ms Y and her family, and they have suffered because of this. The poor living conditions have caused Ms Y and her family distress, and affected their physical and mental health.
4. Ms B says the living conditions, particularly rat and mice issues, have made Ms Y concerned about her and her family’s health and safety. She has also gone to time and trouble pursuing repair issues and her complaint.

Back to top

What I have investigated

5. I have investigated the part of Ms Y’s complaint about the condition of her temporary accommodation from October 2018 onwards. The last section of this decision statement explains my reasons for not investigating further back than that.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

6. 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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
7. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
8. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
9. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered the information and documents provided by Ms B and the Council. I spoke to Ms B about her mother’s complaint.
11. Ms B and the Council have both had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered all their comments before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What should have happened

Main housing duty

12. If a council is satisfied an applicant is not intentionally homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need, the council owes the applicant the main housing duty (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
13. Under the main housing duty, the council must make sure suitable accommodation is available for the applicant and their household until the council brings the duty to an end.
14. Generally, councils carry out the duty by arranging temporary accommodation until it makes a suitable offer of social housing or private rented accommodation. 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. 
15. Many accepted homeless households remain in temporary accommodation with limited security of tenure for a long time while they bid for permanent housing through the authority’s housing allocations scheme.

What happened

16. In 2013, Ms Y made a homelessness application with the Council.
17. In 2014, the Council accepted the main housing duty towards Ms Y. The Council wrote to Ms Y to tell her it would discharge this duty by offering her a tenancy in the private rented sector when a suitable one became available.
18. In the meantime, Ms Y was housed by the Council in temporary accommodation. The Council told her about her right to request a review of the suitability of the temporary accommodation when it accepted the main housing duty. Ms Y’s complaint concerns this temporary accommodation. Ms Y was housed in this property until November 2020 with her three children, one of whom is her representative Ms B.
19. Managing agents, on behalf of the Council, are responsible for handling and resolving disrepair and maintenance issues with Ms Y’s temporary accommodation.
20. In December 2018, Ms B wrote to the Council to say the managing agent had failed to deal with various repair issues. She said these issues had been ongoing for almost one year and were causing the family health and safety concerns.
21. The Council followed up the issues raised by Ms B with the managing agent. The managing agent confirmed it would change the broken window handles and hinges, as well as address the mould issues in the bathroom and bedrooms.
22. A week later, the managing agent contacted the Council to say its contractors had completed the repairs.
23. In January 2019, Ms B wrote to the Council to say the managing agent had not resolved the repair issues. She reported issues with mice in the property. She said she had chased the managing agents several times.
24. The Council arranged for a visiting officer to inspect Ms Y’s property. Following this visit, it wrote to the managing agent with a list of outstanding repairs, which it had previously reported to the managing agents in October 2018. The Council said there were the following disrepair issues with the house:

• missing glass in the front door;
• boiler maintenance issues;
• kitchen redecoration needed due to leak from the bathroom above;
• mould on the ceiling of the bathroom and two bedrooms;
• bathroom improvements needed (including replacement sealant);
• broken handles of windows in lounge and two bedrooms were preventing windows closing properly;
• broken bedroom window pane; and
• garden maintenance required (including clearing overgrown areas and repairing a fallen dividing wall).

25. The managing agent told the Council it would address the outstanding repairs the same week.
26. At the end of January, Ms B chased the Council as she said the repairs had not been completed and there were now issues with the consumer unit.
27. In February, a Council officer visited Ms Y’s house. It confirmed the boiler issues were resolved, but contacted the managing agent during the visit to ask them to address the remaining outstanding repairs.
28. The following day, the managing agent fixed the problem with the consumer unit.
29. In March, Ms B complained to the Council.
30. The Council contacted the managing agent to say that it would suspend rental payments if the repairs were not complete within the next seven days.
31. Ms B contacted the Council two weeks later to say the repairs had not been completed. In response, the Council chased the managing agent and said rental payments would be suspended if repairs were not completed.
32. The managing agent wrote to the Council with an update on the repairs. It said it had completed the following works by the end of April:

• garden had been weeded;
• walls affected by mould had been treated and the family were asked to keep the windows open to help with ventilation, which can cause mould; and
• the kitchen had been redecorated.

33. The managing agent said the remaining outstanding repairs did not justify a suspension of rental payments as they were minor and did not “affect the lifestyle of the tenant”. It also responded to two disrepair issues raised by the family:

• carpets – new carpets would not be provided as they were in good enough condition and, in any case, any wear and tear was due to the tenants; and
• pest control – it would investigate reports of mice and, as a first step, had asked the family to make sure surfaces are clear of food.

34. In April, Ms B chased the Council on the outstanding repairs and pest control issues. She reported the following new issues:

• leaking toilet;
• broken back door meaning anyone could gain access;
• cracks on a bedroom ceiling;
• broken extractor fan in the kitchen; and
• electrical sparks coming from the electricity box causing power outages.

35. In May, Ms B complained to the Council saying the repairs and pest control issues were still outstanding and only the toilet leak had been fixed.
36. The Council responded to say it had received confirmation from the managing agents that all works had been completed and there were no longer any outstanding works.
37. At the end of May, Ms Y complained to the Council that certain repairs and pest control issues had not been resolved. She said she was concerned for her and her family’s health and safety. Ms Y said that she did not feel safe in her home, particularly because of the issues with the electricity box. Ms Y asked the Council to reassess and review the property. She raised the following new issues:

• incomplete tiling in bathroom following works to the toilet; and
• broken shower head holder and bathroom blind, which she said was caused by the contractors carrying out the repairs.

38. On the same day as Ms Y’s complaint, pest control treatment began.
39. In June, Ms Y emailed the Council to chase outstanding works. She said issues with the electricity box had not been fixed. She reported the following new issues:

• skirting repairs carried out by the managing agents’ contractors were causing a hazard due to sharp edges;
• the same contractors had removed some wallpaper, but failed to properly paint over it to an acceptable standard; and
• the managing agents had falsely accused the family of leaving out food that attracted the mice and rats. She said the family keep the house clean.

40. In November, Ms Y complained to the Council about its handling of the disrepair and pest control issues. She said she and her family were living in terrible conditions and the Council was failing to make sure the managing agents resolved issues in a timely manner. She complained she had contacted the Council regularly about the issues with the property, but it had failed to take action.
41. Ms Y complained about the length of time the family had been housed in the temporary accommodation. She said that the Council originally told her in 2014 she would stay there three or four months.
42. In December, the Council replied to Ms Y’s complaint.
43. The Council said it had contacted the managing agents and a Council officer had inspected Ms Y’s property. The Council provided Ms Y with the managing agent’s response and a list of the repairs identified during the Council officer’s inspection.
44. In November 2020, Ms Y accepted an offer from the Council to move to alternative temporary accommodation.

Analysis – was there fault by the Council causing injustice

Alleged failure to ensure Ms Y’s temporary accommodation is kept in good repair

45. Ms B complains on behalf of her mother, Ms Y, that the Council has failed to ensure her temporary accommodation is kept in good repair (part a of the complaint).
46. I have considered the Council’s management of general repair issues and communication with Ms Y and the agent. Ms Y made several complaints about repair and pest control issues. Notes from the Council demonstrate that the Council sent an officer to inspect the property on five occasions between January and December 2019. On one occasion, the officer made a joint visit with a representative from the managing agent.
47. Following the visits, the Council officer sent a list of repairs to the managing agent and asked it to complete the works. On two occasions, the Council threatened the managing agents with suspension of rent if it failed to carry out repairs. This shows the Council made efforts to make sure the managing agent carried out the repairs.
48. The Council is responsible for ensuring that Ms Y’s accommodation is suitable under the Housing Act 1996. Therefore, it has a duty to ensure that the managing agent is completing the necessary repair works to make the property suitable. However, I find that the Council failed to comply with this duty based on the following:

• the Council’s policy on the Provision of Nightly Let Accommodation (its “Nightly Let policy”) provides the property standards and timescales for repairs it expects managing agents to meet for temporary accommodation such as Ms Y’s. This states repairs classed as Priority A, the highest priority, should be made safe in two hours and completed within 24 hours. This includes issues such as no heating or hot water and dangerous electrical faults. Priority B repairs should be completed within five working days and include repairing defective extractor fans in kitchens, broken glazing and minor leaks from toilets. Priority C repairs should be completed within 28 working days and include replacing fittings to windows, repairing or replacing fencing or gates, dry lining condensation treatment and repairing or replacing tiling. When the Council detailed the repairs it expected the managing agent to complete, it failed to provide the specific timeframes for completion of the works and detail the relevant part of its policy. It failed to identify the priority type of each repair and consistently follow up with the managing agents to satisfy itself repairs, including Priority A repairs, were completed in time. This is fault. This caused Ms Y distress and uncertainty as it was not clear if and when the repairs would be completed. She experienced significant delays in the managing agent completing repairs. Both Ms Y and Ms B went to time and trouble complaining to the Council about this;
• the Council failed to consistently ensure the managing agents were maintaining Ms Y’s property to the standards specified in its Nightly Let policy. For example, I have seen evidence the managing agents refused to replace a shower head holder as “[n]ot all bathrooms have shower holders”. However, the Council’s Nightly Let policy states that, for showers above the bath, a wall bracket should be provided for shower attachments;
• the Council failed to ensure the managing agent met its pest control standards in its Nightly Let policy and make sure treatment began in a timely manner. Ms Y first reported issues with mice and rats in January 2019. However, pest control treatment arranged by the managing agent did not begin until May 2019. This delay is fault. The Council’s Nightly Let policy says managing agents should keep a log of periodic pest control treatments and keep it available for inspection by the Council. Based on the evidence I have seen, the Council failed to inspect the managing agent’s logs of the treatments carried out and satisfy itself the pest control issue had been resolved following the third and final treatment in July 2019;
• when responding to Ms Y’s complaints about the quality of the managing agent’s repairs and delays in it completing repairs and pest control issues, the Council responded on several occasions by simply forwarding her the managing agent’s reply. Following Ms Y’s formal complaint in November 2019, the Council’s reply largely consisted of forwarding her the managing agent’s response. It was not clear whether the Council agreed with the managing agent’s reply. I asked the Council to comment on this and it said it did not agree with the managing agent’s claims. Specifically, the Council said it did not agree all repairs had been completed on the days specified by the managing agent, certain repairs were not completed to the standard the Council expected and it did not agree that certain repairs were the fault of Ms Y and her family. The Council failed to provide Ms Y with its position on the managing agent’s response to her complaint. This fault understandably added to Ms Y’s distress and uncertainty. It suggested the Council had accepted the managing agent’s position without assessing if it had complied with what the Council expected.

49. This fault has caused Ms Y and her family significant injustice. The Council’s failure to make sure the managing agent completed the necessary repair and pest control works in a timely manner caused Ms Y and her family distress, and affected their physical and mental health. Ms Y was, understandably, concerned about her and her family’s health and safety.

Alleged failure to move Ms Y to alternative temporary or permanent accommodation

50. Ms Y complains about the amount of time she has been on the Council’s housing register. She says the Council has failed to move her to alternative temporary or permanent accommodation (part b of her complaint).
51. In response to questions I asked the Council, it said Ms Y is on its housing register in priority group four. It said this group is for homeless families in accommodation provided by the Council who are owed the main housing duty. It said Ms Y has 200 points as she has been placed in temporary accommodation until she is made an offer of private rented home at which point the Council will discharge the main housing duty. This is in line with the Council’s Housing Allocations Policy.
52. I have reviewed Ms Y’s bidding history that the Council provided. This evidence shows that, between February 2019 and February 2020, the successful applicants during this period had been awarded a higher number of points than Ms Y (ranging between 400 and 1000 points). I find that this explains why Ms Y was not successful on the properties she bid on. I do not find the Council at fault here.
53. However, between December 2018 and May 2019, Ms Y and Ms B wrote to the Council five times to say they had concerns about their health and safety due to the condition of the property. In May 2019, Ms Y asked the Council to reassess and review the property due to the level of disrepair and pest control issues. She said she had concerns for her and her family’s health and safety.
54. I find that the Council failed to respond to Ms Y’s request for a review of the property. This caused Ms Y distress and uncertainty. In such circumstances, I would have, for example, expected the Council to provide the family with information on how and whether they could apply for a review of their priority group under the Council’s housing allocations scheme.
55. In December 2019, the Council responded to Ms Y’s complaint about the length of time she had been in her property. It told her to look for accommodation in the private rental sector as there was no set timeframe that she would remain in ‘emergency accommodation’. It also said that it had passed on Ms Y’s details to its home finders team to assist her in her search as she had reduced her rent arrears.
56. I do not find the Council’s response properly answers Ms Y’s complaint:

• the Council incorrectly told Ms Y she was in emergency accommodation when she was in temporary accommodation. ‘Emergency accommodation’ usually means interim accommodation, which councils provide before it decides whether it owes an applicant the main housing duty. Once a council decides it owes the main duty, it must provide temporary accommodation, for which there are suitability review rights; and
• the Council suggested Ms Y had rent arrears that had affected the amount of assistance the Council would provide her in her search for alternative accommodation.

57. I find the Council at fault here as it should have made sure it provided Ms Y with accurate, clear advice on her type of accommodation and any effect rent arrears could have on her housing register position. This caused Ms Y confusion and uncertainty.
58. In response to questions I asked it, the Council has confirmed Ms Y’s priority under its housing allocations scheme has not been reduced due to any rent arrears. I find that the Council’s response confirms that Ms Y’s bidding history was not affected by any rent arrears Ms Y may have had. I do not find the Council at fault here.

Ms Y’s language needs

59. Ms B complained, on behalf of her mother, that there had been occasions when the managing agent’s maintenance team came to the house unannounced when Ms Y was by herself. Ms Y was unable to communicate with the maintenance team in English and usually Ms B or her other daughter would be present to assist with interpreting for Ms Y.
60. In response to questions that I asked, the Council said it was not aware of this issue. However, now that it is aware, the Council has said it will make sure:

• all contact with Ms Y is made with Ms B or her sister; and,
• Ms B or her sister are present when a home visit is needed.

61. I find that the Council’s response sufficiently addresses the issues raised by Ms B. The action taken by the Council provides a suitable solution and I do not recommend any further action from the Council.

Agreed action

62. Since complaining to the Ombudsman, Ms Y and her family have moved to alternative temporary accommodation. However, I do not find this remedies the injustice Ms Y has experienced.
63. Within four weeks of my decision, therefore, the Council has agreed to:
1. apologise to Ms Y in writing for failing to ensure her temporary accommodation is kept in good repair, and for providing incorrect information about her accommodation and housing register status;
2. write to Ms Y to confirm her current priority group and points. This letter should include information on how to request a review of her priority group should she still wish for this to take place;
3. make a payment to Ms Y of £800 in acknowledgment of the avoidable stress, uncertainty and undue significant distress caused by the delays in the repairs being completed and uncertainty as to if they would be. I have considered the Ombudsman’s published guidance on remedies. This usually recommends a payment of between £100 and £300 for such injustice. However, I have recommended a higher payment to acknowledge the prolonged avoidable distress Ms Y has experienced and the impact this had on her daughters who were living with her; and,
4. make a payment to Ms Y of £200 for the time and trouble she and Ms B were put to complaining and reporting issues. This recommended payment is in line with the Ombudsman’s published guidance on remedies.
64. Within three months of my final decision, the Council has also agreed to make the following service improvements:
1. review its Nightly Let policy to ensure there is a clear system in place on the steps Council officers should follow when checking necessary works are properly done when reported and deciding to take action against managing agents if works are not completed to their satisfaction. The policy should clearly specify that the Council is responsible for ensuring temporary accommodation is suitable under the Housing Act 1996. This means it has a duty to ensure that managing agents complete the necessary repair works to make the property suitable; and
2. share a copy of this decision with relevant staff members, including those at Ms Y’s managing agent.
65. The Ombudsman will need to see evidence that these actions have been completed.

Back to top

Final decision

66. I have completed my investigation. I have decided to uphold parts a and b of Ms Y’s complaint as there is fault causing her injustice. The Council has agreed to the above recommendations, which are suitable ways to remedy the injustice Ms Y has suffered.
67. I do not uphold the part of Ms Y’s complaint that concerns accommodating her language needs. This is because I do not find the Council at fault and it took action to resolve the issues raised once it became aware of them.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

68. Ms B says the issues with Ms Y’s temporary accommodation have been ongoing since 2013 when the family moved to the property.
69. In line with paragraph eight above, we cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us. Ms B has explained why she did not complain sooner than December 2019 and I have considered her reasons.
70. In Ms B’s case, I think that she could have complained sooner. I, therefore, do not consider there are good reasons to investigate further back than October 2018.
71. I have decided that it is necessary to investigate from October 2018 as a Council officer inspected the property in October and provided details to Ms Y’s managing agent about repairs identified during the inspection that are significant to Ms Y’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman