Summary: When Miss B was living in a homeless centre, the Council failed to deal with her request to be moved to suitable accommodation and failed to properly follow its procedures for dealing with disputes between residents. It then failed to carry out a review of the suitability of the accommodation it subsequently offered to Miss B. The Council has agreed to make a payment to Miss B and to offer her suitable temporary accommodation. It has also agreed to make service improvements.

The complaint

1. Miss B complains that when she was homeless, the Council failed to move her to suitable accommodation when she provided evidence to show the accommodation it had provided was not suitable for her disability. She also complains that the Council failed to take appropriate action when she provided evidence to show that she had been assaulted by another resident. She says that instead of moving her neighbour, Miss B was evicted from the accommodation.
2. Miss B says that as a result of the Council’s failings, she is sofa surfing with her child. She says the Council’s actions have caused her avoidable distress which has impacted on her mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

5. We have limited resources and must investigate complaints in a proportionate manner, focusing on general themes and issues, rather than providing a response to every individual issue raised in a complaint.
6. 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

7. I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant;
• discussed the issues with the complainant;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council has provided; and
• given the Council and the complainant the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant law and government guidance

8. If a council is satisfied someone is eligible, homeless, in priority need and unintentionally homeless, it will owe them the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
9. Under the main housing duty, housing authorities must ensure that suitable accommodation is available for the applicant and their household until the duty is brought to an end, usually through the offer of a settled home. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 17)
10. Applicants can ask a council to review its decision that the accommodation offered is suitable. Councils must complete the review within eight weeks of receiving the review request. (Housing Act 1996, sections 202)
11. Bed and breakfast accommodation is not suitable for households with ‘family commitments’. The Order defines this as a household that includes a dependent child or a pregnant woman. Where no other accommodation is available, the Council may place a family in bed and breakfast accommodation as a last resort but only for a maximum of six weeks. (The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2003)
12. The Order defines bed and breakfast accommodation as accommodation which is not self-contained and where the household has to share a toilet, cooking or bathroom facilities with other households. It does not include accommodation which is owned or managed by the Council.

Summary of key events

13. Miss B approached the Council in September 2022 when she became homeless. The Council was satisfied that Miss B was eligible for assistance and it placed her and her daughter in bed and breakfast accommodation.
14. The Council accepted the main housing duty to Miss B in November 2022. The following month, the Council placed Miss B and her daughter in alternative accommodation. It was a homeless centre owned and managed by the Council.
15. Miss B’s legal advisor wrote to the Council about problems Miss B was experiencing in the homeless centre. The advisor provided a letter from Miss B’s doctor which said that the accommodation provided was unsuitable because Miss B could not walk the long distances to the refuse and laundry facilities due to a long-standing knee problem. The advisor asked the Council to provide Miss B with suitable accommodation.
16. In January 2023, Miss B joined the Council’s housing register and was able to bid for available properties.
17. Miss B remained living in the homeless centre. On 2 March 2023, there was an altercation between Miss B and her neighbour. Both residents complained to the homeless centre and reported the incident to the police.
18. Miss B then complained to the Council that the homeless centre was not dealing with her complaint about the other resident.
19. Miss B said that she did not feel safe and asked for the other resident to be moved. She decided to leave the homeless centre until her complaint was resolved.
20. Around a week after Miss B left, the Council sent a letter warning that if she did not return that night, she would be evicted. Miss B did not return and she was subsequently evicted.
21. The Council offered Miss B alternative temporary accommodation around two weeks later. Miss B did not move in because it had shared facilities. She told the Council that she was suffering with PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) and needed to be placed in self-contained accommodation.
22. The Council has not offered Miss B any alternative accommodation. Miss B says she has been sofa surfing since March 2023.
23. Since Miss B joined the Council’s housing register, she has been bidding on available properties. She says her bidding position reduced in around May 2023 and she believes this is due to staff from the homeless centre tampering with her account. Miss B also says the Council changed the areas she wanted to live in on her account without her agreement.

Analysis

Temporary accommodation

24. The Council failed to deal with the request Miss B’s legal advisor made in December 2022 for Miss B to be moved to alternative accommodation. This was fault. I have considered what would likely have happened if there had been no fault by the Council here.
25. The medical evidence provided by Miss B’s legal advisor stated that Miss B struggled to walk any form of distance and she could not walk to the refuse area or laundry due to her disability.
26. Miss B had been placed in ground floor accommodation near to the entrance of the centre. The laundry room was around 100 yards from Miss B’s room and the homeless centre had agreed to collect Miss B’s rubbish so she did not have to walk to the refuse area. While it seems unlikely that the Council would have found the accommodation to be unsuitable, Miss B has been left with uncertainty as to whether she would have been moved to alternative accommodation if the Council had properly considered her request.
27. Miss B considers she was wrongly evicted from the homeless centre due to disability discrimination. Miss B received warnings about not taking her rubbish to the refuse area and not returning her keys to the office each time she left, which Miss B says she was unable to do because of her disability. However, the reason Miss B was evicted was because she left the homeless centre following the altercation with the other resident; it did not relate to her disability.
28. When Miss B left the homeless centre, she said that she would return when her complaint about the other resident was resolved. Staff at the homeless centre spoke to everyone involved and obtained statements. They also reviewed video evidence provided by Miss B. It was decided that the evidence was inconclusive, and staff should monitor the situation and if the families continued to clash, they should be separated. This decision was not passed on to Miss B. This was fault.
29. The licence agreement for the homeless centre states that it must be used as the resident’s main home, and residents can stay out for a maximum of two nights a week by prior agreement with the manager. After Miss B had been absent from the homeless centre for eight days, it warned that she would be evicted if she did not return that night. It then evicted Miss B three days later. The Council should have told Miss B the outcome of its investigation before deciding to evict her. This was fault. However, as it had not been decided to move the other family, I do not consider it likely that Miss B would have returned to the homeless centre even if she had been told the outcome of the investigation.
30. Around two weeks after Miss B was evicted, the Council offered Miss B alternative temporary accommodation. It was a privately owned and managed flat with shared kitchen and bathroom facilities.
31. The law states that accommodation with shared facilities which is not owned or managed by the Council is not suitable for families with children. The Council can place families in such accommodation as a last resort but only for a maximum of six weeks.
32. Miss B emailed the Council explaining why she did not consider the accommodation was suitable and she provided medical evidence to support her view. The Council accepts that it should have taken Miss B’s emails as an opportunity to undertake a suitability assessment or review of the temporary accommodation. It did not do so; this was fault.
33. The Council should have reviewed the suitability of the accommodation within eight weeks of Miss B’s email, and if it had done so, I consider it likely that the accommodation would have been found to be unsuitable. If there had been no fault by the Council, it would then have offered Miss B suitable accommodation. However, the Council may well have decided that accommodation in a homeless centre would be suitable, and Miss B has made it clear that she would not have accepted such accommodation. I consider Miss B has been left with uncertainty as to whether she would have been offered self-contained accommodation if there had been no fault by the Council. I consider the Council’s failings have also caused Miss B distress and frustration.

Housing register

34. The Council has explained that staff are unable to amend an applicant’s bidding position. There is nothing in the Council’s records which suggests Miss B’s account has been tampered with. I have found no evidence of fault here.
35. The Council’s application form requires applicants to state which areas they would prefer to live in, and which areas they cannot live in. If an applicant states they cannot live in certain parts of the city, the applicant will be unable to see properties advertised in those areas. The areas the applicant would prefer to live in are only taken into consideration when the Council is placing bids on behalf of the applicant, which the Council is not doing in this case. I have decided not to carry out any further investigation of this aspect of Miss B’s complaint because I do not consider she has been adversely affected by any alleged change to her preferred areas, and I am satisfied that she is able to bid on properties in all areas of the city.

Back to top

Agreed action

36. Within four weeks, the Council will take the following actions:
• Offer Miss B suitable temporary accommodation. It will consider the medical evidence Miss B has provided when deciding on the type of accommodation to offer.
• Make a payment of £500 to Miss B to recognise the uncertainty she has been left with as to whether she would be living in self-contained accommodation if there had been no fault by the Council, and for the avoidable distress and frustration Miss B has suffered as a result of the Council’s failings.
37. Within eight weeks, the Council will take the following actions:
• Remind staff of the importance of properly following the Council’s procedures for dealing with disputes between residents at homeless centres. In particular, it will ensure it agrees an appropriate course of action with the residents involved.
• Remind relevant officers to offer a review if they are contacted about the suitability of temporary accommodation.
38. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

39. I have completed my investigation and uphold Miss B’s complaint. There was fault which caused injustice. The action the Council has agreed to take is sufficient to remedy that injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman