Summary: Ms B complained the Council placed her family in unsuitable temporary accommodation. The Council failed to properly consider suitability for five months, and then did not provide suitable accommodation for a further three months. This meant Ms B’s family were left in a single overcrowded room which affected their health. The Council has agreed our recommended remedy.

The complaint

1. Ms B complains the Council failed to provide suitable interim and temporary accommodation for her and her family. the Council provided a single room for five adults, four of whom had medical conditions which were affected by the accommodation. She says she asked for a review but the Council

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. 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

4. I considered evidence provided by Ms B and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Ms B 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

Legislation and guidance

The main housing duty

6. If a council is satisfied an applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance, and has a priority need the council has a duty to secure that accommodation is available for their occupation (unless it refers the application to another housing authority under section 198). But councils will not owe the main housing duty to applicants who have turned down a suitable final accommodation offer or a Housing Act Part 6 offer made during the relief stage, or if a council has given them notice under section 193B(2) due to their deliberate and unreasonable refusal to co-operate. (Housing Act 1996, section 193 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 15.39)

Interim and temporary accommodation

7. There are two types of accommodation councils provide to certain homeless applicants: interim accommodation and temporary accommodation.
8. 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)
9. 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.
10. 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)
11. 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.
12. 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)
13. The duty to provide suitable accommodation is immediate, non-deferrable, and unqualified. (Elkundi, R (On the Application Of) v Birmingham City Council [2022] EWCA Civ 601).
14. 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.
15. Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the suitability of the accommodation (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).

Back to top

What happened

16. Ms B’s mother Mrs X approached the Council as homeless in January 2024. Her family was made up of five adults, Mrs X, her son and daughters. In March 2024 the Council provided interim accommodation while it considered Mrs X’s homelessness application.
17. The interim accommodation was a single room in a hotel for the whole family. It was self-contained as it had a small shower room with a toilet and small kitchenette. However, Ms B says all the beds were pushed together and there was no room to move around, or for their belongings which they kept in suitcases.
18. In early April 2024 Ms B emailed the Council requesting more space. She said she had sent a complaint and asked the placement team to place the family I different rooms. She had seen that another family had three rooms in the hotel. She said her family was made up of four females and one male living in one room with limited space and no privacy.
19. The Council’s housing support officer replied she would pass on Ms B’s concerns to the Council’s placement team. She said that if the Council accepted the main housing duty, Mrs X could request a suitability review of the accommodation.
20. On 8 April Ms B chased the Council for a response. She explained her family had medical needs which were affected by the overcrowding in the room.
21. On 16 April the Council replied to Mrs X that the Council had a severe shortage of accommodation. It stated it had offered Mrs X the most suitable interim accommodation available. It also said that the Council would make a decision on the main housing duty, and if it accepted the duty, Mrs X could request a review of the suitability of her accommodation. The Council said if it accepted the accommodation was unsuitable, it would contact her when a suitable property became available.
22. On 26 April the Council accepted it owed Mrs X the main duty. It said that it had placed Mrs X and her family in the room in the hotel and it believed the temporary accommodation it had offered was suitable for her. It explained Mrs X could request a review of its decision including the suitability decision within 21 days.
23. Ms B emailed the Council’s housing solution support team. She said the accommodation was not suitable and she had already complained about this. She asked if they still needed to request a review. The Council advised her to do this.
24. On 29 April Mrs X requested a review. She said the room was extremely overcrowded and was having an impact on their medical conditions she asked for alternative accommodation and in the meantime asked if the Council could at least separate them into different rooms in the hotel.
25. On 7 May the Council says it placed the family on a list for longer term accommodation.
26. However, as Ms B had not heard from the Council by 5 August 2024 she emailed asking for an update. At first the Council said it could not find a suitability review on her file. It then accepted it had received a suitability review request in April after Ms B chased the matter. It said it had not registered the review and would try to conclude it as soon as possible.
27. On 29 August 2024 the Council carried out a section 202 review of the suitability of Mrs X’s temporary accommodation. It said it had overturned the Council’s decision that the accommodation was suitable. It said it had placed Mrs X’s details on its database for a move to alternative accommodation.
28. On 5 September 2024 Ms B complained using the Council’s online complaint form that the accommodation was causing her family significant distress. She said she had raised the issue several times and they had been waiting six months. In her view the Council had breached legislation and its own policies on overcrowding and suitability. She said the Council and its property agent told them they must wait but did not recognise the state of the accommodation and the severe overcrowding. She said the lack of separation between the cooking facilities and the bedroom was a fire risk.
29. The Council treated the complaint as an enquiry. Its Housing Solutions Service replied that the Council had registered Mrs X for a four bedroom temporary accommodation. It said Mrs X was number four on its waiting list. However, there was a very limited supply of properties and this led to an extended waiting time. It said it would contact her as soon as a property became available.
30. Ms B complained further requesting a stage two complaint response. She said the Council’s stage one complaint response was not satisfactory and just repeated information she already knew. She said she had complained three times since April 2024 that the accommodation was causing her family severe distress. In her view the Council had failed to take account of legislation and its own policy regarding suitable temporary accommodation. She provided details of her family’s health conditions and the impact of the overcrowded accommodation.
31. On 3 October the same Council officer responded to Ms B’s complaint as an enquiry, rather than a complaint. The Council confirmed that it accepted the accommodation was unsuitable. It repeated that it would contact Mrs X when a property became available. But it said there was a severe shortage of the yaccommodation the family required.
32. In October Ms B complained to the Ombudsman that the Council failed to provide suitable accommodation. Its response was simply that the family was on a waiting list. But it did not address the severe overcrowding or the impact on their health. She said the Council should address this urgently and at least provide additional rooms.
33. In early December the Council offered Mrs X suitable five bedroom temporary accommodation which she accepted.

Analysis

34. Based on the information I have seen so far there is no apparent evidence of the Council considering suitability before the accommodation was offered to Mrs X in March 2024. The Council accepted in August that it was unsuitable. In my view, on the balance of probability the accommodation was unsuitable from the start. This is fault.
35. Ms B asked the Council for an extra bedroom in the hotel, but there is no evidence the Council considered this. This is fault.
36. The Council stated on 16 April that the accommodation it had offered “the most suitable interim accommodation available”. However, this does not mean the accommodation was suitable for the family. The Council did not explain how it considered it was suitable. This is fault.
37. When the Council responded Ms B’s early reports regarding suitability, it appeared to suggest she could request a review if the Council accepted the main duty. However, the Council had a duty to consider the suitability of the interim accommodation and I have not seen evidence it did this. This is fault.
38. Ms B made a statutory suitability request at the end of April 2024 but the Council failed to register this until the beginning of August. It then did not complete the review until the end of August. This is fault.
39. The Council agreed the temporary accommodation was unsuitable at the end of August but it did not provide suitable accommodation until December 2024. As the Council had decided the accommodation was unsuitable its duty to provide suitable accommodation was immediate. While there is a severe shortage of accommodation available particularly in London, the Council took too long to provide alternative suitable accommodation. This is fault as it is service failure.
40. The Council’s faults in considering suitability and delay in providing suitable accommodation caused injustice to Mrs X and her family. The delay meant they lived in overcrowded accommodation without privacy for too long.
41. Ms B made two complaints in September 2024 but the Council treated these as enquiries. Ms B had clearly set out her complaint. The Council should have put her complaint through its complaints procedures and signposted her to the Ombudsman. This is fault and caused additional time and trouble for Ms B.

Action

42. I recommend that within one month of my decision the Council:
• apologises to Mrs X and her family for its failure to properly consider the suitability of the accommodation it provided from March 2024 to August 2024. The Council should also apologise for its failure to provide suitable accommodation for a further three months. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Pays Mrs X £2400 for the eight months that she and her family lived in unsuitable accommodation.
• Reminds officers to consider suitability of accommodation from the start including interim accommodation. The Council should set out the reasons it considers accommodation is suitable.
43. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

44. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed my recommended actions to remedy the injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman