Summary: Miss X complains that the Council failed to deal with pests and disrepair at her temporary accommodation and failed to support her with moving to another area. The Council took sufficient action to deal with Miss X’s complaints of pests and disrepair. But the Council is at fault as it delayed in moving Miss X to suitable temporary accommodation which meant she and her children lived in unsuitable temporary accommodation for two months. The Council is also at fault as it did not provide sufficient support to Miss X to help her move to another area which caused distress and uncertainty to her. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice by apologising and making a symbolic payment of £700 to her.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council:
1. Failed to take sufficient action to deal with pests, disrepair and mould at her temporary accommodation.
2. Failed to provide sufficient support to enable her to move to a different area of the country to be close to family.
2. Miss X considers that as a result she and her young children have had to live in unsuitable temporary accommodation and with disrepair and pests for longer than necessary. This has caused distress to them and had an impact on their health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
5. 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)
6. Service failure can happen when an organisation fails to provide a service as it should have done because of circumstances outside its control. We do not need to show any blame, intent, flawed policy or process, or bad faith by an organisation to say service failure (fault) has occurred. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1), as amended)
7. When considering complaints we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
8. 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

What I have and have not investigated

9. I have investigated how the Council dealt with Miss X’s complaints about disrepair and pests at her property from January 2023 to October 2024.
10. I have not investigated the suitability of Miss X’s temporary accommodation when it was offered to her in 2021. This is because Miss X would have had the right to seek a review of the suitability of the temporary accommodation followed by an appeal to the county court. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to have sought a review of the suitability at the time the property was offered to her. Furthermore, a complaint about the suitability of the property in 2021 is out of time and there are no good reasons to investigate it now.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I have:

• Considered the complaint and the information provided by Miss X;
• Discussed the issues with Miss X;
• Made enquiries of the Council and considered the information provided;
• Invited Miss X and the Council to comment on the draft decision. I considered the comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

12. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
13. 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).
14. 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)
15. The duty to provide suitable accommodation is immediate, non-deferable, and unqualified. (Elkundi, R (On the Application Of) v Birmingham City Council [2022] EWCA Civ 601
16. Under Section 213 of the Housing Act 1996, a council can ask for assistance from another council to provide temporary or settled housing for homelessness applicants. The council receiving the request for assistance must “cooperate in providing such assistance as far as is reasonable in the circumstances”.

What happened

17. The following is a summary of the facts relevant to my consideration of the complaint. It does not include everything that happened.
18. Some years ago, Miss X made a homelessness application to the Council. It accepted the main housing duty and placed Miss X in temporary accommodation. Miss X and her children lived in the temporary accommodation which is the subject of this complaint from 2021.
19. In January 2023, Miss X contacted the Council to report a pest infestation at her property. The Council referred Miss X’s concerns to the landlord of the property. The landlord arranged for pest control to visit Miss X’s property.
20. The Council’s records note pest control visited Miss X’s property but were unable to treat it due to the risk to Miss X’s pets and due the amount of belongings in the property. The landlord advised the Council that Miss X had agreed to move her pets for a period of time to enable the property to be treated. The Council’s records note Miss X contacted the Council following the pest control visit. She said the pest control company informed her the pests could not be treated unless she moved. Miss X requested the Council transfer her to alternative accommodation.
21. The Council’s records note the pest control company carried out a further visit but Miss X would not allow access. The pest control company informed the landlord that it was willing to treat the property if it could gain access.
22. The Council’s records note that the pest control company tried to gain access on four further occasions but were unable to do so. Following the last visit, the Council telephoned Miss X and left a voicemail requesting contact from her.
23. Miss X made a complaint to the Council about the condition of her temporary accommodation. She indicated that the property was infested with rats and bedbugs and there was damp and mould in the bedrooms which was affecting her children’s health. Miss X also said she wanted assistance with moving to another part of the country to be closer to family.
24. The Council considered Miss X’s complaint through its two stage complaints procedure. The Council partially upheld Miss X’s complaint. It considered the Council had taken appropriate action to resolve the pest and disrepair issues at Miss X’s property. But it acknowledged delay when Miss X reported her concerns in January 2023. It offered a payment of £200 to acknowledge the delay.
25. The Council referred Miss X to Westlets which finds private rented accommodation for housing applicants. Westlets contacted Miss X in early 2024 to discuss her housing options. It then contacted another organisation to see if it could offer any properties outside the Council’s area. Westlets identified a property but it was a significant distance from Miss X’s preferred areas so she declined the offer.
26. The Council’s records note that it and the landlord tried to contact Miss X to gain access to the property but were unable to do so. The landlord wrote to Miss X asking her to contact them to arrange the outstanding works. Miss X did not respond so the Council sent a warning letter to her to advise she was in breach of her occupational agreement by not allowing access for repairs. The Council sent a second warning letter when Miss X did not respond.
27. Miss X then contacted the Council to arrange access to her property in March 2024. The Council carried out a joint inspection with the landlord. The record of the visit notes the repairs required. These included removing flooring and stripping walls due to mould. The record notes Miss X and her children could not be in the property when the flooring works were undertaken. The inspection report also notes that Miss X had been referred to Westlets for a move out of the area and this needed to be completed as the pest issue could not be fully resolved.
28. The Council’s records show it offered to arrange storage so Miss X could clear her belongings to allow access for the works. Miss X sent an email to the Council saying that she did not want to place her belongings in storage. She also considered the landlord would not fix the problems. The Council advised Miss X that the repairs identified could be dealt with if she allowed access.
29. The Council’s records also note Miss X contacted the Council again and said she did not want to move to alternative temporary accommodation as her children would not cope. She was also concerned that the pest control treatment would be a risk to her children. The Council again asked Miss X to allow access for the landlord to complete the repairs. It also arranged for food vouchers to be sent to Miss X while the works were undertaken and she could not use the kitchen
30. In April 2024, Miss X allowed the landlord access to the property to carry out the repairs. The landlord told the Council they were unable to carry out the repairs as Miss X had placed her white goods in the hallway to protect them from the pests.
31. Miss X continued to complain to the Council that it had not taken sufficient action to deal with the repairs and pests at the property and she wanted to be moved.
32. The Council arranged a further inspection of the property in August 2024. It concluded that the property was no longer suitable as it had not been possible to complete the repairs.
33. Approximately two months later, the Council offered alternative suitable temporary accommodation to Miss X which she accepted. The Council’s records show it identified one property for Miss X but this was withdrawn by the landlord. Officers also chased the temporary accommodation team on a number of occasions for a placement.
34. In response to my enquiries, the Council has said:

• It did not consider Miss X’s property to be unsuitable when she raised concerns about disrepair in January 2023. This is because the information provided by the landlord following their inspection indicated pest control could resolve the initial issue
• The Council considered the condition of the property had significantly deteriorated when it inspected in summer 2024 due to mould caused by condensation and other pest infestations. It therefore considered the property was no longer suitable for Miss X.
• Westlets had been unable to offer a property in Miss X’s preferred area.
• It did not consider Miss X’s property was unsuitable for her in March 2024 following its inspection as the pest issue could be resolved. But officers considered it would be sensible to move Miss X at that time so the works could be carried out.
• It acknowledged that it should have made a referral under Section 213 of the Housing Act 1996 to the councils in Miss X’s preferred area to see if they would agree to house Miss X in their areas. The Council said it would contact Miss X to confirm if she still wanted to move outside its area and, if so, would contact the councils in her preferred areas for a reciprocal agreement. The Council has also said it would ensure efforts are made to contact other councils sooner about any request to be housed in other areas.

Analysis

Did the Council take sufficient action to deal with the disrepair and pests

35. On balance, I consider the evidence shows the Council took sufficient action to deal with Miss X’s concerns about disrepair and pests in her property. The Council referred Miss X’s concerns about pests to the landlord who arranged for pest control visits. The Council offered storage for Miss X’s belongings when pest control could not treat the property due to her belongings. The Council also carried out inspections with the landlord in response to Miss X’s complaints of pests and disrepair, including mould, to establish what repairs were required.
36. I also consider the Council took appropriate steps to facilitate the repairs needed following its inspection in March 2024. It again offered storage to Miss X to enable the property to be cleared for the works to be carried out. There is no evidence to show the Council offered a temporary move to Miss X to enable the works to be carried out. But the Council’s records note Miss X told the Council shortly after the inspection in March 2024 that she did not want a temporary move. I therefore consider, on balance, the Council discussed a temporary move with Miss X to facilitate the works.
37. I am mindful that the repairs and pest control treatments were not completed. But the evidence shows this was due to Miss X not allowing access or not clearing the property to enable the repairs and pest control treatments to be carried out. I therefore cannot conclude the repairs and treatments were not carried out due to fault by the Council.
38. The Council considered Miss X’s property to be in unsuitable in August 2024. I have considered if the Council delayed in making this decision. The Council has explained it initially considered the property was not unsuitable as the repairs could be carried out. It has also explained that it did not consider the property to be unsuitable following the inspection in March 2024. Its suggestion for Miss X to temporarily move was to enable the works to be carried out. The Council had inspected Miss X’s property so it was in a position to make a judgment on whether the property was suitable. It has also explained why it considered the pest and repairs issues could be dealt with and why it changed its position in August 2024. I therefore do not consider there is evidence of fault in how the Council decided the property was suitable for Miss X.
39. But the Council should have formally notified Miss X of its decisions that it considered her property remained suitable and notified her of her right to seek a review of these decision. Its failure to do so is fault. I cannot know, even on balance, if Miss X would have been able to successfully challenge the Council’s decisions that the property remained suitable. But Miss X lost the opportunity to seek a review and appeal to the county court. The Council should remedy this injustice by making a symbolic payment of £150 to Miss X to acknowledge the missed opportunity.
40. The Council took two months to offer alterative temporary accommodation to Miss X. I am mindful of the significant challenges faced by councils in procuring temporary accommodation. The Council has also provided evidence to show officers were seeking alternative temporary accommodation for Miss X. But the courts have established that the Council’s duty to provide suitable temporary accommodation is immediate. So, the delay of two months in offering alternative temporary accommodation is service failure which is fault.
41. As a result, Miss X and her children lived in unsuitable accommodation with disrepair for two months longer than they should have done. The Council should make a symbolic payment of £150 per month for two months to acknowledge the distress caused to Miss X. This payment is in accordance with our Guidance on Remedies.

Did the Council provide sufficient support for Miss X to move to another area

42. I consider the Council did not provide sufficient support to Miss X to help her move to her preferred areas. The Council has acknowledged it failed to make a referral to the councils in Miss X’s preferred areas under Section 213 of the Housing Act 1996. Its failure to consider this option is fault. The Council referred Miss X to Westlets for assistance with finding a property in her preferred area. But there is no evidence to show the Council advised Miss X on her wider housing options, such as signposting her to housing associations or other providers. This is fault.
43. I cannot say, even on balance, what would have happened if the Council had made a Section 213 referral or provided more advice to Miss X on moving areas. This is because I cannot know if the councils in Miss X’s preferred areas would have accepted the referrals, whether they would have been able to offer accommodation or if Miss X would have accepted any offers. But the failure to make the referral will have caused distress and uncertainty to Miss X. The Council should make a symbolic payment of £250 to Miss X to acknowledge the distress caused.
44. Miss X has said she no longer wishes to move areas so it not necessary for the Council to now make a Section 213 referral.
45. The recommended payments are in addition to the payment of £200 offered by the Council when responding to Miss X’s stage two complaint. In commenting on my draft decision, Miss X has said she had not received this payment from the Council. The Council should therefore send this payment to Miss X.

Back to top

Agreed action

46. That the Council will:
1. Send a written apology to Miss X for the missed opportunity, distress and uncertainty caused by failure to issue a formal decision on the suitability of her temporary accommodation, the delay in moving her and her children to suitable temporary accommodation and failure to provide sufficient support with helping her move areas. 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.
2. Make a symbolic payment of £300 to Miss X to acknowledge the distress caused to her by living in unsuitable temporary accommodation for two months.
3. Make a symbolic payment of £400 to Miss X to acknowledge the missed opportunity, distress and uncertainty caused to her by failing to provide a formal decision on the suitability of her temporary accommodation and failing to make a Section 213 referral.
4. By training or other means remind officers that they should issue a suitability decision and rights of review when deciding if temporary accommodation remains suitable following concerns raised by the applicant.
5. By training or other means remind officers of the provisions in Section 213 of the Housing Act 1996 for requesting a reciprocal agreement from another council for assistance with housing a homelessness applicant and when officers should consider making a referral.
47. The Council should take the action at a) to c) within one month and the action at d) and e) within two months of my final decision. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

48. I have completed my investigation. I have partially upheld complaint a) and upheld complaint b).

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman