Summary: Ms B complained about the Council’s actions when her mother Mrs C was threatened with homelessness due to hoarding behaviour. Ms B complained that the Council failed to take adequate account of Mrs C’s mental health needs or offer sufficient support with the hoarding situation. We have not found fault with the actions of the Council.

The complaint

1. Ms B complained on behalf of her mother Mrs C, that the London Borough of Waltham Forest (the Council), in respect of Mrs C’s housing situation:
• failed to deal with her homeless application properly;
• failed to refer her to a different council due to her connection to her daughter’s address;
• failed to offer her interim or temporary accommodation when the eviction date was known;
• failed to make an offer of suitable alternative accommodation before the eviction;
• failed to take into account her mental health issues, particularly hoarding, when considering her situation;
• failed to offer support with clearing the property of her belongings and putting them into storage, either before or after the eviction;
• failed to provide assistance with furnishing the new property; and
• delayed in dealing with the section 202 suitability review which her solicitor requested in April 2024.
2. This has caused Mrs C and Ms B significant distress and uncertainty. Mrs C has been living with Ms B in her one-bedroom accommodation, since she was evicted in February 2024, so Ms B has been sleeping on the sofa since then.

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. 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

5. I have considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant, made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided. Ms B 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

Threatened with homelessness

6. 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)

Assessments and Personal Housing Plans

7. Councils must complete an assessment if they are satisfied an applicant is homeless or threatened with homelessness. The Code of Guidance says, rather than advise the applicant to return when homelessness is more imminent, the housing authority may wish to accept a prevention duty and begin to take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness. Councils must notify the applicant of the assessment. Councils should work with applicants to identify practical and reasonable steps for the council and the applicant to take to help the applicant keep or secure suitable accommodation. These steps should be tailored to the household, and follow from the findings of the assessment, and must be provided to the applicant in writing as their personalised housing plan. (Housing Act 1996, section 189A and Homelessness Code of Guidance paragraphs 11.6 and 11.18)

The prevention duty

8. If councils are satisfied applicants are threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance, they must help the applicants to secure that accommodation does not stop being available for their occupation. In deciding what steps they are to take, councils must have regard to their assessments of the applicants’ cases. (Housing Act 1996, section 195)

The relief duty

9. Councils must take reasonable steps to help to secure suitable accommodation for any eligible homeless person. When a council decides this duty has come to an end, it must notify the applicant in writing (Housing Act 1996, section 189B)

The main housing duty

10. 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)

Protection of belongings

11. Where the council owes or has owed certain housing duties to an applicant, it must protect the applicant’s personal property if there is a risk it may be lost or damaged. A council may make a reasonable charge for storage and reserve the right to dispose of the property if it loses contact with the applicant. (Housing Act 1996, section 211, Homelessness Code of Guidance chapter 20)

Suitability of 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 accommodation and accommodation provided under the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
13. Anyone who believes their 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)

What happened

Background

14. Mrs C lived in a privately rented property. She had previously lost her job and been evicted from different accommodation due to problems arising from her immigration status, referred to as the ‘Windrush Scandal’. These traumatic events had affected Mrs C’s ability to trust authorities and organisations. She had also developed hoarding behaviour due to the worry about what would happen to her and her belongings.

Homelessness

15. In 2023 Mrs C’s landlord started possession proceedings citing concerns about hoarding in the property along with irregular rent payments. The landlord obtained a possession order requiring Mrs C to leave the property in July 2023.
16. Mrs C with Ms B’s assistance approached the Council for help. Mrs C applied to join the housing register, and the Council carried out a homeless assessment in early September 2023. The Council accepted the relief duty and drew up a Personal Housing Plan stating that Mrs C required support with securing one bedroom sheltered accommodation in the borough.
17. The Housing Team (HT) liaised with the Adult Social Care service (ASC) to see if she had any mental health or care needs and whether she was receiving any support. The team noted she would need help to clear her hoarded belongings and this would be a problem if she was moving into sheltered accommodation.
18. ASC carried out a Health and Wellbeing Assessment and formulated a plan to work with Mrs C to build up trust and draw up a consistent plan to tackle her living space and belongings, find suitable sheltered accommodation or a suitable alternative. It said Mrs C needed to ensure she acted on her plan to ship all of her belongings abroad (her stated preference) or put them into storage.
19. Ms B says the Housing Team advised her at this point to remove reference to hoarding from the sheltered accommodation application. Mrs C’s housing register application was placed in Band 4 due to homelessness.
20. The landlord obtained an eviction warrant for 29 February 2024. In December 2023 Mrs C was given priority 1 for one bedroom sheltered accommodation. The alternative was to place her in Band 3 for a one bedroom flat (general needs housing).
21. On 12 December 2023 the Council offered her a studio flat in sheltered accommodation. Mrs C said it was too small for her furniture and it had a communal laundry area which she did not like.
22. HT held a case review and decided to pursue a referral to ASC to see if it could offer support with Mrs C’s circumstances. Ms B also made a safeguarding referral to ASC as she was concerned about Mrs C’s increasingly desperate situation. She said Mrs C did not have hot water or heating in the property.
23. As a result of the safeguarding referral the Council decided to refer Mrs C for a full Care Act assessment. The case notes said:
• Mrs C was keen to address sending her items abroad, Ms B had got some quotes and was seeking funding to help with this.
• Mrs C wanted help to deal with her belongings and the repairs in her home.
• It was unclear if Mrs C had a mental health condition but would benefit from seeking help from her GP.
• An assessment would consider her capacity around her housing situation and her ability to manage it.
24. On 20 December 2023 the Council sent Ms B details of removal and storage options.
25. Mrs C was allocated to a social worker on 2 January 2024 for a care act assessment. On 12 January 2024 the Council accepted the main housing duty. It notified Mrs C by post and Ms B by email.
26. The assessment took place on 16 January 2024 at a venue, not Mrs C’s home as she did not wish anyone to visit. The Council asked Mrs C about her belongings and which she intended to send abroad. Mrs C could not answer and got upset at the questioning. The Council asked if a social worker could come and visit to see the items and help her store them, as it was a hoarding issue. Mrs C declined and said she did not want anyone seeing her flat. She said she could not afford to send the items abroad. Ms B said she would ask the HT if it could provide assistance with the cost of moving the goods abroad. The assessment concluded that Mrs C did not have any eligible care needs and that she had the capacity to make decisions. But as a preventative measure the Council had offered support with packing her belongings before the eviction.
27. On 18 January 2024 Ms B met with HT who explained that Mrs C had three options for housing: either to be placed in Band 1 for sheltered accommodation or Band 3 for general needs housing or to look for accommodation in the private sector but the timescales were tight for this. The HT said it would write to Mrs C with this information as she was not at the meeting.
28. On 30 January 2024 a meeting took place with Mrs C, Ms B, ASC and HT. HT explained that it had made a new offer of one bedroom sheltered accommodation which was bigger than the previous studio flat. Mrs C said she did not trust the property offered and wanted a two-bedroom property. The Council explained the difference between general needs and sheltered housing and the likely wait times. It also said it would need medical evidence to justify the need for a second bedroom. Mrs C said she would not go to the GP. The Council encouraged Mrs C to view the property and explained the consequences of refusing a suitable offer of accommodation (the Council would end its housing duty towards her, and she would have to find her own accommodation).
29. In respect of her belongings the following issues were discussed:
• Affordability.
• Mrs C said she did not want to store her belongings but to send them abroad.
• ASC had offered to help her pack her belongings for storage.
• If Mrs C provided details of her income and expenditure the Council could help with the cost of storage. Mrs C repeated that she did not want to store her belongings but wanted to send the abroad. She said she would do it herself.
30. In terms of capacity the ASC notes said:

“I did not have any reason to doubt her mental capacity to make decisions about her housing or storage; however, it is my observation that due to previous challenges, it impacts her willingness to take in new information about her housing options. She is mistrustful of housing services and does not believe that they will help her.”

31. On 2 February 2024 ASC said Mrs C did not have any eligible care needs based on the information obtained at the meeting on 16 January 2024. She was assessed as independent managing the activities of daily living. It noted that Mrs C had not let anyone visit her property to assess the hoarding situation, so ASC was unclear about the level or impact of the hoarding. As a preventative measure it had offered Mrs C short-term support from a care worker with organising her belongings for storage, but she would have to allow them access to the property. ASC also considered that Mrs C may benefit from support to manage her mental wellbeing and should contact her GP in this regard.
32. In February 2024 Ms B sent multiple emails to the Council asking for help with Mrs C’s belongings. The Council said it had made multiple attempts to visit and help Mrs C, but she had declined any help.
33. Mrs C and Ms B visited the sheltered accommodation on 9 February 2024. Mrs C felt the bedroom was too small as only a single bed would fit in it and she was concerned about the crack in the living room floor. HT said that the Council considered the property was a suitable size for her and the crack in the floor was cosmetic and could be repaired. In response to a query from Mrs C’s MP the Council confirmed it had requested a new floor covering.
34. On 28 February 2024 ASC visited Mrs C unannounced. Mrs C would not let them in. She said she was aware of the eviction the following day and would not accept help with her belongings. She did not want to visit the sheltered accommodation again and did not want to move there. In respect of her capacity to make that decision ASC said:

“Following our discussion, I did not have doubts regarding her capacity to make decisions about her accommodation. [Mrs C] retained the information and responded to my questions intelligibly.

However, I was unsure about her willingness to accept the concerns that were communicated to her, therefore, impacting upon her ability to weigh up the risks of her being evicted from the property.”

35. Mrs C was evicted on 29 February 2024. The locks were changed but the landlord gave her extra time to remove her belongings. She moved in with Ms B.
36. On 11 March 2024 Mrs C signed the tenancy for the new property but did not move in due to concerns about the flooring and a lack of furniture.
37. In early April 2024 the Mrs C’s solicitor submitted a request for a review of the decision that the sheltered accommodation was suitable for her. They said Mrs C needed a double bed due to a medical condition and there was some disrepair.
38. Ms B also asked the Council for financial and practical assistance with storage and removal costs for Mrs C’s belongings. Mrs C’s MP also intervened to try and secure support with moving and addressing the hoarding issue. The Council replied that Mrs C was not eligible for a package of care and she had capacity but had not consented to help with removal of her hoarded items. The Council said with Mrs C’s permission it could liaise with the landlord to arrange a time to collect her belongings with support from Ms B. It advised Mrs C to apply for local welfare assistance for furniture.
39. In May 2024 the Council ended its housing duty to Mrs C as it considered she had suitable accommodation.
40. Ms B with the help of her MP privately arranged for the removal and storage of Mrs C’s belongings from her previous accommodation. The suitability review is ongoing, and Mrs C’s solicitor has been given extra time to provide evidence.

Analysis

41. I have dealt with each part of Mrs C’s complaint under the relevant headings:

failed to deal with her homeless application properly

42. I have not identified fault in the way the Council dealt with Mrs C’s homeless application. Once she approached the Council after the possession order had been granted, the Council carried out an assessment, accepted the relief duty, identified sheltered housing would be appropriate for her and likely to be available much more quickly, drew up a personal housing plan and liaised with ASC regarding her health and social care needs. It also offered to help with the cost of storing Mrs C’s goods. But unfortunately, Mrs C refused help with sorting and packing the goods and did not wish them to go into storage. It offered her a one bedroom sheltered accommodation in early February 2024 and discharged its duty once Mrs C accepted the property and signed a tenancy for it.

failed to refer her to a different council due to her connection to her daughter’s address

43. Neither Ms B nor Mrs C requested accommodation in a different borough. Throughout the homeless assessment process Mrs C was living in the borough of Waltham Forest and officers had visited her at her flat. I do not find fault here.

failed to offer her interim or temporary accommodation when the eviction date was known

44. Mrs C was living in her privately rented accommodation when the eviction warrant was obtained. The Council then made an offer of permanent one bedroom sheltered accommodation which was a preferable option for her.

failed to make an offer of suitable alternative accommodation before the eviction

45. The Council offered Mrs C a one bedroom sheltered accommodation which it considered was suitable for her needs approximately a month before the eviction. It had made also made an offer of a studio flat in December 2023 but agreed it was not suitable for Mrs C. I have not found fault here.

failed to take into account her mental health issues, particularly hoarding, when considering her situation

46. I consider the Council considered Mrs C’s mental health and hoarding issues throughout the process. It offered support on several occasions to pack and store the belongings, but Mrs C refused any help as she wanted to send her belongings abroad. It also urged her to seek support from her GP but again Mrs C refused.
47. The Council’s HT liaised with ASC during the homeless assessment process to ascertain if Mrs C had any health needs or was receiving any services. It noted that a Health and Wellbeing assessment had just been done and that ASC was going to provide support to sort and remove her hoarded belongings.
48. In December 2023 once the eviction warrant had been obtained and Mrs C had refused the first offer of sheltered accommodation, HT carried out a case review and referred her back to ASC to see if it could provide further support. ASC carried out a care act assessment, concluding that while she had capacity and did not have any eligible care needs, it would offer short term preventative support to pack and store her belongings. Mrs C refused all help and would not let anyone visit her property to assess the hoarding. The Council held a meeting with Mrs C and Ms B at the end of January 2024 to discuss the situation. Offers of help with her belongings were again made and rejected and Mrs C made clear she would not visit her GP.
49. I realise this was a very difficult and upsetting situation, particularly for Ms B but the Council did what it could to persuade Mrs C to accept help with her belongings and consult her GP. I have not found fault with its actions.

failed to offer support with clearing the property of her belongings and putting them into storage, either before or after the eviction

50. As detailed above the Council did offer support with packing and storage of her belongings on several occasions but Mrs C declined all help as she did not want anyone to visit her property, and she wanted to send her belongings abroad.
51. After she was evicted, the Council again offered support with packing and removing the goods, but Mrs C declined. At this stage Mrs C had no diagnosis of a mental health condition.

failed to provide assistance with furnishing the new property

52. It is not the Council’s responsibility to furnish an empty property, but it did provide advice about obtaining help from a local welfare scheme. It also advised that if Mrs C had actually moved into the sheltered accommodation, she would have received help from an Independent Living Officer. I have not found fault here.

delayed in dealing with the suitability review which her solicitor requested in April 2024.

53. The review is taking some time, but it appears this has been due to the solicitor requesting extra time to submit further evidence. The matter is still ongoing and is not an issue I can comment on.

Back to top

Final decision

54. I have completed my investigation into this complaint as I am unable to find fault causing injustice in the actions of the Council towards Mrs C.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman