Summary: We have discontinued our investigation of this complaint, about the suitability of accommodation offered to a homelessness applicant, because there was a right of review she could have used, and because there is no injustice we could seek to resolve from this anyway. There is also no evidence of fault in the way the Council responded to her reports of disrepair and vermin in her current property. The Council was at fault because it did not keep in touch with the complainant at important times, and for this the Council has agreed to write to apologise.

The complaint

1. I will refer to the complainant as Miss N.
2. Miss N is currently in temporary accommodation with her three children, but has been served with a notice to quit by the landlord which came into effect in July. She complains:

• the alternative properties offered by the Council were not suitable;
• she has found it difficult to contact the Council, and without explanation it has missed appointments it arranged for her; and
• there are serious disrepair issues in her current property, including damp, mould and vermin, and the Council has not taken effective action to address this.

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 an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. We cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I reviewed Miss N’s correspondence with the Council, the Council’s internal notes, and comments it made in response to my enquiries.
6. I also shared a draft copy of this decision with each party for their comments.

Back to top

What I found

7. The following is a summary of key events relevant to this complaint, based on a chronology provided by the Council. It will not include everything which has happened.
8. The Council accepted a main housing duty for Miss N in 2017, and shortly after this arranged temporary accommodation (TA) for her through an agency. At the date of writing, Miss N and her children remain at the TA property.
9. The Council says it inspected the property alongside the agency in June 2022 and discovered mould. The agency then scheduled some repairs.
10. In January 2023 the agency requested the property be returned to it.
11. Between January and March, the Council says the agency carried out a three-part pest control treatment at the property, following Miss N’s reports of a mouse infestation. The last report showed continued evidence of mice, so a further three-part treatment was undertaken.
12. In March, the Council says an inspector visited the property, but Miss N advised there were no repairs needed. Also in March, a Council housing officer contacted Miss N to discuss her options and to complete a suitability and affordability assessment. The Council then began looking for alternative accommodation for Miss N.
13. In April, the Council offered Miss N accommodation in a hotel in a different local authority area. Miss N declined this offer because of the distance to her children’s schools, which she said she could not travel to by public transport because of mental health problems.
14. In May, the agency informed the Council the mouse treatment was in place, but that Miss N had refused to allow it access to clean the mould since February.
15. In June, the Council offered Miss N accommodation in another hotel, again in a different local authority area. Miss N declined this for the same reason.
16. On 21 June, the Council served Miss N with a notice to quit (NTQ), effective from 23 July.
17. In July, the agency reported it had completed repairs at the property and that there was one pest control visit left to undertake. It said Miss N had not reported any further problems.
18. In August, the Council inspected the property and found it in a good state of repair, with some small areas of mould. However, it noted Miss N said she had treated the mould herself and painted and said this may explain why there was little mould evident. The Council said it has written to the agency to notify it of this.

Back to top

Legislative background

19. 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 accommodation and accommodation provided under the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and (from 3 April 2018) Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
20. Homelessness temporary accommodation must be legally suitable. (Housing Act 1996, section 206) Anyone who believes their temporary accommodation is unsuitable can ask the Council to review the accommodation’s suitability. (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)
21. Councils must consider the location of accommodation when they consider if it is suitable for the applicant and members of their household. If a council places an applicant outside its district, it must consider, among other matters:

• the distance of the accommodation from the “home” district;
• the significance of any disruption to the education of members of the applicant’s household; and
• the proximity and accessibility to local services, amenities and transport. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) Order 2012)

22. Councils should avoid using bed and breakfast accommodation. It should only be used as a last resort in an emergency and then for the shortest time possible. (Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.24 and from 3 April 2018 17.30)
23. Bed and breakfast (B&B) accommodation can only be used for households which include a pregnant woman or dependent child when no other accommodation is available and then for no more than six weeks. B&B is accommodation which is not self-contained, not owned by the council or a registered provider of social housing and where the toilet, washing, or cooking facilities are shared with other households. (Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 and from 3 April 2018 Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraph 17.32)

Back to top

Analysis

24. I will address each element of Miss N’s complaint separately and in turn.

Suitability of offers of alternative accommodation

25. Miss N complains the Council has made two offers of hotel accommodation, both of which are located in different local authority areas and some distance from her children’s schools. Miss N says she cannot drive or use public transport and there is therefore no way for her children to get to school if she moves to these areas.
26. As explained in the previous section, the law provides homelessness applicants a statutory right to request a review of the suitability of any offer of accommodation. law also says we should generally not investigate complaints, where the substantive matter carries a right of review or appeal in this manner.
27. During our initial enquiries on Miss N’s complaint, the Council told us it had not carried out a review of the suitability of the offers of hotel accommodation, because Miss N had declined the offers and therefore had no right of review. This is incorrect, because this right applies whether an applicant accepts an offer or not. For this reason, at that time we decided to begin an investigation into this element of Miss N’s complaint.
28. The Council has since clarified it understands the right of review still applies where an applicant declines the offer, and explained the comment it made to the contrary was due to a misunderstanding. I have also seen a copy of the letter the Council sent to Miss N making the second offer of hotel accommodation, and I note it clearly explained she may request a review, and that this still applied even if she declined the offer. I am satisfied, therefore, that it was reasonable to expect Miss N to request a statutory review of the suitability of the hotel accommodation the Council had offered, and for this reason we should not investigate this point.
29. Even putting this to one side, I am not persuaded there is any value in pursuing an investigation about these offers of accommodation anyway. Whether or not they were suitable, the fact remains Miss N did not actually move to either property, and nor did the Council discharge its duty to Miss N as a result of her refusal.
30. We cannot say, therefore, that Miss N was placed in an unsuitable property, or that the Council has now closed her application, as a result of these offers; and so there is no meaningful injustice which we could seek to remedy here, even if we did find fault in the Council’s decision-making process.
31. I am conscious Miss N remains in the original TA without a valid tenancy, and the Council has now begun possession proceedings. The Council must therefore continue to make arrangements to find suitable accommodation for Miss N before she becomes homeless. But any future offer of accommodation will also carry a right for Miss N to request a review. Similarly, she will also have the right to request a review if the Council decides to discharge its duty towards her.
32. This does not mean necessarily we would decline a complaint from Miss N about this in future, but as it stands these are hypothetical matters, and not something we can investigate now.
33. Taking these points together, therefore, I consider it appropriate to discontinue my investigation of this element of Miss N’s complaint.

Difficulty contacting the Council and missed appointments

34. Miss N complains she has had difficulty making contact with council officers, and in particular that she was due to have an appointment with a housing officer on 18 July, but the Council missed this without explanation.
35. The Council has provided me with a copy of its system notes, which document various messages between Miss N and council officers during the relevant period. This does not appear to include all correspondence between them.
36. I note in one message Miss N complained she had been trying to call officers but had had no response. In another message, she complained about the missed appointment on 18 July, and explained how anxious she was becoming because the NTQ was shortly due to come into effect. On the balance of probabilities therefore, I am satisfied there have been at least some incidences of the Council failing to communicate properly with Miss N.
37. This is a matter we would normally expect the Council to have addressed in a formal complaint response. In this case, however, we decided to accept Miss N’s complaint for investigation without requiring her to complain formally to the Council first. Unfortunately this means there is no comment or explanation from the Council about this matter.
38. In general we would not consider it a significant fault simply because council officers had not responded promptly to every call or other message they received from a complainant. This is because we recognise officers are usually very busy and must divide their time between different cases.
39. However, there was, and remains, an obvious urgency to Miss N’s case. For this reason, I am satisfied there is fault here, and given the impact Miss N describes, that this fault caused her an injustice.
40. I acknowledge this has not actually made a material difference to Miss N’s situation though, and so I consider a formal letter of apology to Miss N is an appropriate remedy for this. I make a recommendation to this effect.
41. I find fault causing injustice in this element of Miss N’s complaint.

Failure to address disrepair issues

42. Miss N complains the TA property suffers from damp, mould and a mouse infestation, and that the Council has not taken effective action to address these problems.
43. I will note first that councils have a legal duty to ensure TA properties they arrange are suitable and in an adequate state of repair. Therefore, while not directly responsible for carrying out remedial works to a property, councils should work with landlords and/or property agents to ensure such works are completed properly.
44. However, it is often not a straightforward matter to resolve matters such as damp, mould and vermin. We expect councils to respond promptly to reports of disrepair, and liaise properly with the landlord or agent to address the problem, but the simple fact a problem persists does not mean we may find a council at fault.
45. In this case, the Council has explained it inspected the property in June 2022 alongside the agency, which then arranged some repairs. Following Miss N’s reports of mice, in early 2023 the agency arranged a three-part pest control treatment. It then repeated the treatment because there was still evidence of mice. In July, the agency told the Council it had completed repairs, although there was still one pest control visit to complete.
46. In August the Council completed an inspection of the property. I have seen a copy of the inspection report, which includes several photographs, and which said the property was overall in a good state of repair, with some small areas of mould remaining. However, the Council noted Miss N said she had recently cleaned and painted areas of mould herself, and for this reason, it referred the matter back to the agency to consider carrying out more work.
47. I am satisfied the Council has responded appropriately to Miss N’s reports of disrepair. I acknowledge the work the agency has undertaken may not have completely resolved the problems; but as I have said, this fact alone does not mean I can find the Council to be at fault.
48. I find no fault in this element of Miss N’s complaint.

Back to top

Agreed action

49. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to write a formal letter of apology to Miss N for failing to keep in touch with her at important times, acknowledging the impact this has had on her.
50. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

51. I have completed my investigation with a finding of fault causing injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman