Summary: Mr X complained that the Council failed to deal effectively with a mice infestation in his homelessness temporary accommodation. We found the Council was at fault in failing to take action to resolve the matter. In recognition of the injustice caused, the Council has agreed to apologise to Mr X and make a payment to him. It has also agreed to take action to ensure the infestation is eradicated.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council has failed to deal effectively with a mice infestation in his homelessness temporary accommodation. He has young children and is worried about the impact on their health and safety.

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 an injustice, 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 have considered all the information provided by Mr X, made enquiries of the Council and considered its comments and the documents it provided.
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

Legal and administrative background

6. If a council is satisfied someone is eligible, homeless, in priority need and unintentionally homeless it will owe them the main homelessness duty. Generally, councils carry out the duty by arranging temporary accommodation until it makes a suitable offer of social housing or private rented accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
7. 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. This duty applies to interim accommodation and accommodation provided under the main homelessness duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
8. Accommodation is not suitable if it falls below certain minimum standards. The Council must have regard to the standards set in the Housing Act 2004. The Homelessness Code of Guidance recommends that any accommodation should, as a minimum, be free of category 1 hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Councils should explicitly consider a building’s condition and risks to the health and safety of occupiers.
9. Councils have a duty to keep the suitability of accommodation under review.

Key facts

10. Mr X and his family were placed in temporary accommodation by the Council when they were homeless. The property is outside the Council’s area and is owned by a private landlord and managed by an agent.
11. On 9 September 2022 Mr X complained to the Council about the landlord’s failure to deal with a mice infestation in the property. He said he had contacted the managing agent in early August and he had visited and used drops of peppermint oil to repel the mice. Mr X said this did not resolve the matter and he contacted the agent again. The landlord then visited and took some photographs. Mr X later sent the agent photographs of damage caused by the mice. The landlord returned, took more photographs and promised to resolve the issue but nothing had been done.
12. A pest control treatment was carried out on 23 September.
13. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint on 11 October advising him to contact the managing agent. Mr X replied the same day saying he had already done so, and asked the Council to intervene. The Council responded on 20 October saying it had contacted the agent and hoped they would resolve the matter. It closed Mr X’s complaint. Mr X responded saying the issue had not been resolved and the agent had not contacted him.
14. On 2 November a further pest control treatment was completed.
15. On 24 November Mr X escalated his complaint to stage 2 of the Council’s complaints process. He said the family had been experiencing issues with mice since moving into the property. He said they often saw mice and found gnawed packets of food which had to be thrown away. He said he had contacted the agents many times but nothing had been done. Mr X said he had young children and was concerned about their health and safety. He requested a review of the suitability of his temporary accommodation and asked to be moved to alternative accommodation.
16. The Council responded at stage 2 on 21 December. The complaints investigator apologised for the impact on Mr X and his family and said the Temporary Accommodation team manager had contacted the agent on 16 December asking him to investigate the issue urgently.
17. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman in January 2023. He said that, despite contacting the Council about the matter, nothing had been done and he had received no contact from his landlord.
18. In response to my enquiries, the Council contacted Mr X in May 2023 to discuss the matter. He accepted the agent had arranged for pest control treatment on two occasions, but said the problem was ongoing. The Council then instructed the agent to carry out further pest control treatment and wrote to Mr X confirming this.
19. A pest control treatment was carried out on 6 May.
20. The Council says it has also arranged for officers to inspect the property.

Analysis

21. As the temporary accommodation is outside the Council’s area, its environmental protection and public health duties regarding control of pests are not relevant. However, in accordance with the Council’s homelessness duties, it must ensure that temporary accommodation provided to a homeless household is suitable even if the accommodation is owned by a private landlord.
22. Mr X’s landlord and the managing agent have not taken adequate action to resolve the mice infestation. However, the Council is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the accommodation meets appropriate standards.
23. I find the Council failed to take effective action to resolve the matter. When Mr X complained at stage 1 on 9 September 2022, the Council simply referred him back to the managing agent despite him having explained that he had contacted the agent and the landlord several times. This was fault. The Council should have taken some action to intervene at this point. However, treatments were completed on 23 September and 2 November, so I do not consider the Council’s failure to take action caused Mr X a significant injustice as it could not have achieved more than this.
24. Following Mr X’s stage 2 complaint on 24 November, the Council contacted the managing agent asking them to resolve the matter but took no action to follow this up and ensure action had been taken. This was further fault and resulted in Mr X and his young family having to live in mice invested accommodation for several months longer than necessary causing them avoidable distress and inconvenience. No further treatment was carried out until May 2023 after the Ombudsman raised Mr X’s complaint with the Council.
25. I am pleased that the Council has now agreed to inspect the property and liaise with the agent to resolve the issue. However, I do not consider this is an adequate remedy for the injustice suffered by the family. So, I have made recommendations below.
26. 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. Our guidance on remedies suggests a payment of between £150 and £350 a month to recognise distress.

Back to top

Agreed action

27. The Council has agreed that, within one month, it will:
• send a written apology to Mr X;
• pay Mr X £750 in recognition of the avoidable distress and inconvenience his family has suffered by living in accommodation infested with mice for five months longer than necessary (December 2022-May 2023);
• arrange for officers to visit Mr X’s property and ensure the mice infestation has been eradicated;
• review any similar problems being reported about properties it uses for temporary accommodation that are managed by the same agent; and
• issue a reminder to relevant staff to ensure they are aware that the Council is ultimately responsible for the actions of landlords/agents of temporary accommodation.
28. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I find the Council was at fault in failing to take action to resolve the mice infestation in Mr X’s temporary accommodation in accordance with its homelessness duties towards him.
30. I have completed my investigation on the basis that the Council has agreed to implement the recommended remedy for the injustice suffered by the family.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman