Summary: Mr D complains the Council placed his family in unsuitable interim accommodation. We found fault which caused the family to be in unsuitable accommodation for about nine months. The Council has agreed to make a payment to remedy that injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr D complains on behalf of his mother, Mrs F, and himself that the Council placed his family in unsuitable temporary accommodation following their eviction and delayed dealing with his complaint. As a result, the family have been split up causing distress and anxiety.

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. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
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(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the information Mr D sent, the Council’s response to my enquiries and:
• The Housing Act 1996
• The Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (“the Guidance”)
7. Mr D 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

Relevant law and guidance

8. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
9. If someone contacts a council seeking accommodation and gives reason to believe they may be homeless or threatened with homelessness within 56 days, the council has a duty to make inquiries into what, if any, further duty it owes them. (Housing Act 1996, section 184 and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 6.2 and 18.5)

Threatened with homelessness and the prevention duty

10. Someone is threatened with homelessness if, when asking for assistance from the council:
• 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))
11. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. These steps should follow an assessment and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. This is the prevention duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)
12. Once the council has accepted it owes the prevention duty, it must help the person for at least 56 days. (Homelessness Code of Guidance, paragraph 14.11)
13. The Guidance says it is highly unlikely to be reasonable for the applicant to continue to occupy a property beyond the date on which the court has ordered them to leave the property and give possession to the landlord (i.e. the expiry date of a possession order). (Homelessness Code of Guidance, paragraph 6.36)

Relief duty and interim accommodation

14. If the person becomes homeless, the Council must help to secure suitable accommodation if it is satisfied that an applicant is homeless and eligible for assistance. (Housing Act 1996, section189B) This is the relief duty.
15. A council must secure interim accommodation for an applicant and their household if it has reason to believe the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188) Applicants in priority need may include people who have dependent children.
16. If the council decides the person is in priority need and not intentionally homeless, the relief duty ends automatically after 56 days, even if the applicant has not found accommodation. There is no discretion to extend it. Where inquiries are not completed before the end of the relief duty, the Code advises the decision should be made within 15 working days from when the relief duty ends. (Housing Act 1996, section189B(7)(c))

Main housing duty and temporary accommodation

17. When the relief period ends the authority must decide whether it owes the person the main housing duty. It will owe the main housing duty to applicants who are eligible, have a priority need for accommodation and who are not homeless intentionally. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
18. The Code of Guidance states that people owed the main housing duty should be notified the day after the relief duty ends.
19. If the authority accepts the main duty, it must then secure that suitable accommodation is available for occupation by the applicant. The accommodation a council provides until it can end this duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)

Suitability of accommodation and reviews

20. The law says councils must ensure all accommodation provided to homeless applicants is suitable for the needs of the applicant and members of his or her household. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
21. The council must therefore consider if the accommodation is:
• affordable
• in good enough condition
• in a suitable location
• the right size
• suitable for any health issues or disabilities.
22. Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the council to review the accommodation’s suitability within 21 days of the Council accepting the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 202)
23. We expect people to use their review and appeal rights and therefore we usually do not investigate when someone has these rights. However, we may exercise discretion to investigate in exceptional cases. For instance, where the Council has failed to inform someone of their right to seek a review.

Complaint procedure

24. The Council has a two-stage complaint procedure. At Stage 1 it aims to reply within ten working days; at Stage 2 the target is within 15 working days

What happened

25. I have set out the key events; this is not meant to describe everything that happened.
26. Mrs F has dependent children. They were living in a private rental property. Mrs F had been on the Council’s housing register since 2016. In 2021, the landlord told Mrs F he intended to sell the property. He issued a s21 notice but it was not valid. Mrs F contacted the Council and it accepted the prevention duty on 30 June 2021. The personalised housing plan said Mrs F was eligible for a four-bedroom property but could also bid for three-bedroom properties.
27. A valid s21 notice was issued in August 2023. In December 2023, the court issued a possession order which expired on 8 January 2024. The Council received a copy of this order on 22 December 2023.
28. The Council started searching for interim accommodation for Mrs F but no letter accepting the relief duty was sent.
29. A warrant for possession was issued and Mrs F was due to be evicted on 20 February.
30. The Council was unable to find a suitable three- or four-bedroom property. It offered Mrs F two separate one-bedroom flats, in the same block but on different floors; one was on the ground floor. The family moved in on 20 February.
31. Mr D complained to the Council on 28 March that the accommodation was not suitable. He said they required a wheelchair accessible property due to his mobility issues.
32. On 1 May, the Council changed one of the flats so that both flats were on the ground floor.
33. The Council replied to the complaint on 9 May, it apologised for the delay. The Council accepted that the interim accommodation was not suitable. It said Mrs F’s housing register band had been increased to Band A in two housing authority areas.
34. Mr D remained dissatisfied and asked for his complaint to be escalated. The Council’s final response was sent on 21 June. The Council apologised for the delay in replying and that the accommodation was not suitable. It said there were very few suitable properties available. It offered to meet Mrs F and Mr D.
35. At that meeting on 26 June, Mr D noted that following surgery he would have problems accessing the property due to a lack of turning room on the ramp.
36. Mr D complained to the Ombudsman. He said the family’s previous property had been unsuitable due to disrepair which had caused him to have an accident. Legal proceedings had been taken against the former landlord. Mr D said the Council had kept them in that property for too long, despite the hazards.
37. The Council offered Mrs F a four-bedroom property on 31 October. I have seen no evidence the Council has made a decision whether to accept the main housing duty.

My findings

38. The Council has accepted that the interim accommodation it moved the family into on 20 February 2024 was not suitable as it was two separate properties and access was difficult for Mr D.
39. I appreciate that there is a shortage of social housing and that the Council was searching for a suitable property for Mrs F. Nonetheless, the law says people should not be housed in unsuitable accommodation, so this is service failure. Mrs F, Mr D and the rest of the family were in unsuitable accommodation for about nine months, which has caused them distress.
40. I have seen no evidence that the Council accepted the relief duty, despite moving the family into interim accommodation. This is fault.
41. The relief duty should have been accepted at the point that the possession order expired, i.e. 8 January 2024 and the Council should not have waited until 20 February to move the family into interim accommodation. This is because the Guidance says it is not reasonable for a person to continue to occupy a property after the date on which the court has ordered them to leave the property.
42. As the relief duty ends automatically after 56 days, the Council should have decided by 5 March 2024 whether to accept the main housing duty. I have seen no evidence it did. This is fault which delayed Mrs F’s right to seek a review of the suitability of temporary accommodation.
43. As the Council was already searching for suitable accommodation, on balance I find it more likely than not that the family would have remained in the same flats until November 2024, even if the Council had accepted the main housing duty sooner and Mrs F had asked for a review of its suitability.
44. There was some delay in responding to Mr D’s complaints. The Council has already apologised for this, which is a suitable and proportionate remedy for the injustice caused.
45. When we have evidence of fault causing injustice, we will seek a remedy for that injustice which aims to put the complainant back in the position they would have been in if nothing had gone wrong. When this is not possible, we will normally consider asking for a symbolic payment to acknowledge the avoidable distress caused. But our remedies are not intended to be punitive and we do not award compensation in the way that a court might. Our guidance on remedies says that where a complainant has been deprived of suitable accommodation during what would inevitably have been a stressful period in their life, our recommendation for financial redress is likely to be in the range of £150 to £350 a month. Having taken into account that the family was separated, there were dependent children and that Mr D had accessibility issues, my view is that £250 per month is an appropriate amount.

Back to top

Agreed action

46. Within a month of my final decision, the Council has agreed to:
• Pay Mrs F (as the tenant) £2,250 to remedy the distress of living in unsuitable accommodation for about nine months.
• Decide whether to accept the main housing duty and issue the decision letter.
47. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

48. There was fault by the Council. The actions the Council has agreed to take remedy the injustice caused. I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman