Summary: The Council was at fault for failing to provide suitable interim and temporary accommodation when Miss X was homeless. It failed to keep oversight of the managing agent acting on its behalf to provide the accommodation. The Council also communicated poorly and delayed accepting the main housing duty. As a result, Miss X experienced avoidable frustration and lived with extensive disrepair. To remedy this injustice, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Miss X and act to improve its services.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council's handling of her homelessness. In particular, that the Council:
1. provided unsuitable interim accommodation;
2. delayed accepting the main housing duty;
3. failed to deal with disrepair in her accommodation, including damp and mould; and
4. communicated poorly with her.
2. As a result, Miss X says she and her children lived in unsuitable accommodation for almost a year, which caused them distress and affected their physical and 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 investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(1)(A) and 25(7), as amended).
5. 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

6. I considered the complaint and the information Miss X provided.
7. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
8. I referred to the Ombudsman's Guidance on Remedies, a copy of which can be found on our website.
9. Miss X and the organisation 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

Homelessness law and guidance

10. Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities (the Code) set out councils’ powers and duties to people who are homeless or threatened with homelessness.
11. A council must secure interim accommodation for applicants and their household if it has reason to believe they may be homeless, eligible for assistance and have a priority need. (Housing Act 1996, section 188)
12. 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. This is called the main housing duty. (Housing Act 1996, section 193)
13. Temporary accommodation is accommodation provided to homeless applicants as part of a council’s main housing duty.
14. 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 and temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2)
15. Councils must assess whether accommodation is suitable for each household individually. Whether accommodation is suitable will depend on the relevant needs, requirements and circumstances of the homeless person and their household. (Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.4 & 17.9)
16. Interim and temporary accommodation can be the same physical property. What changes is the legal duty under which a council provides it. This is important because there is a statutory right to review the suitability of temporary accommodation. This then carries a right of appeal to county court on a point of law. There is no statutory right to review the suitability of interim accommodation.
17. Homeless applicants must request a review within 21 days of the decision. However, applicants can ask a council to reconsider its decision about the suitability of temporary accommodation at any time. This might be necessary, for example, if there is a change in the applicant’s circumstances. This new decision is open to review under s202, with a new 21 day timescale. R(B) v Redbridge LBC [2019] EWHC 250 (Admin)

What happened

18. Miss X approached the Council in September 2023. She was fleeing domestic abuse from her private tenancy. The Council accepted the relief duty and placed Miss X and her children in a hotel.
19. At the end of September, the Council provided Miss X with self-contained interim accommodation (the property). A private landlord owns the property. A Managing Agent (the agent) manages the property. The agent has a service agreement with the Council to provide accommodation to homeless households.
20. There is no evidence to show whether or how the Council considered if the property was suitable for Miss X before offering it in September 2023. This was fault.
21. In early October, Miss X told the Council the property was unsuitable. She said it was in a state of extensive disrepair, including damp and mould, mice, and a broken window. There is no evidence the Council responded to or acted on this report. Failure to do so was fault.
22. Miss X complained to the Council a week later. She said she called both the Council and the agent to report the disrepair. She complained she kept being told someone would call her back, but no one did. Miss X said she could not live in the property.
23. Throughout October, Miss X made three calls to the Council about the property. There is no evidence the Council responded to these calls. Failure to do so was fault.
24. In late October, the Council contacted the agent and asked it to address the disrepair Miss X had reported. There is no evidence it followed up to ensure the agent inspected and carried out works. Failure to do so was fault.
25. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint in mid-November. The Council said:
• it was sorry for the delay responding to the complaint;
• it considered the property suitable when it offered it to Miss X;
• it was looking into the issues she raised and would offer alternative accommodation if it decided the property was unsuitable; and
• its failure to respond to Miss X’s calls in October was fault.
26. The same day, the Council contacted the agent with details of Miss X’s complaint. It asked the agent if it was aware of the issues and to set out the action it had taken. The agent confirmed it was aware and arranging for works.
27. There is no evidence the Council reviewed the suitability of the property, despite telling Miss X it would do so in response to her complaint. This was fault.
28. In late December, Miss X contacted the Council again. She said neither the agent nor the Council had done anything to address the disrepair. The same day, the Council asked the agent what it had done to address the issues.
29. The Council contacted the agent but then took no action to ensure the agent addressed the disrepair. There is no evidence of any action at all between November 2023 and May 2024, despite continuing reports from Miss X. Failure to act on these reports was fault.
30. In April 2024, Miss X contacted the Council to ask for a transfer to alternative accommodation because of the disrepair. The same day, in an internal email, the Council asked if Miss X was on the transfer list or if its position was Miss X could remain in the property while the agent completed any repair works. I have seen no evidence of the response to show the Council made a decision at this time. Failure to do so was fault.
31. In mid-April, the Council wrote to Miss X telling her it owed her the main housing duty. The Council accepted the relief duty to Miss X in September 2023. It should have decided whether it owed her the main housing duty by early November. This delay of over five months was fault.
32. In May, Miss X complained to the Council again. She said:
• Nothing had changed since her previous complaint
• She had contacted the agent and the Council several times
• There was still mould and mice in the property
• The floors were so uneven that furniture was falling over
• The agent said it was a two-bedroom property but it was only had one-bedroom
• The Council kept telling her someone would contact her and no one ever did
• It took one hour and forty minutes to get her child to school, which was negatively affecting her child’s special education needs.
33. In mid-May, the Council carried out a suitability assessment with Miss X. It said the property was a suitable size for Miss X. It noted that Miss X disputed this, both because the property did not have two bedrooms and because she was pregnant. The Council told Miss X it would address the disrepair with the landlord.
34. There is no evidence the Council wrote to Miss X with the result of its suitability assessment. It should have told her its decision and set out her statutory right to review and then appeal to court. Failure to do so was fault.
35. At the end of May, the Council asked the agent to inspect the property urgently and to confirm the size of the property. The agent told the Council it had tried to visit but Miss X would not grant access. In response, Miss X told the Council the agent had made an appointment between 10am and 1pm, when she was in, but did not attend until after 3pm, when she was out. The agent provided a video showing the attempted visit. The video shows it was recorded at 3.20pm. I do not, therefore, find that Miss X denied the agent access on that day. It failed to attend at the arranged time.
36. The Council responded to Miss X’s complaint in early June. It said:
• The agent accepted the property had a roof leak and mould. The agent could not complete the necessary works while Miss X remained in the property.
• The agent reported issues gaining access to the property.
• Miss X could ask for a review of the suitability of the property.
37. In mid-June, Miss X again asked the Council for a transfer due to disrepair. Miss X called the Council again in early July to say nothing had changed and she still needed to move. The Council should have considered Miss X’s repeated requests for a transfer and reports the property was unsuitable as a request for a review. Failure to complete a review was fault.
38. In August, Miss X told the Council the property was unsuitable and may have a gas leak. The Council contacted the agent the same day to ask it to address the matter urgently. It said the agent should tell the Council if Miss X needed a transfer. The Council had already accepted in its complaint response in June that Ms X needed to move. Failure to act on this earlier was fault.
39. The agent replied the next day. It said it had tried to get access to the property on 22 March and 23 May, but Miss X was not in and did not answer the phone.
40. At the end of August, the agent told the Council Miss X needed to move. It said she could not remain in the property while it did the necessary repairs.
41. Miss X moved to alternative temporary accommodation in early September 2024.

The agent

42. The agent is acting on behalf of the Council in delivering interim and temporary accommodation to homeless people. The Council has a service agreement with the agent. This says the agent must:
• Keep a record of reported disrepair and action taken in response and provide this to the Council if asked.
• Before supplying accommodation, ensure any works to address structural issues, damp or other remedial works are complete and the premises is fit for habitation.
• Address repairs within set timescales:
1. Emergency repairs, including gas leaks, within 24 hours
2. Urgent repairs, including roof leaks, within 48 hours
3. Minor repairs, including to external windows and doors, within 20 working days
4. Major repairs, including extensive roof repairs, within two months
43. In response to my enquiries, the Council asked the agent for records of Miss X’s reported repairs and the agent’s visits to the property. The agent said it did not have records of the dates of its visits to the property or records of Miss X’s communication with it. This is not in line with the service agreement. In the absence of records, I do not accept the agent’s assertions that Miss X refused access.
44. Miss X told the agent and the Council the property had damp and mould and a pest infestation from the outset. This is not in line with the service agreement for ensuring properties are good repair when offered.
45. Miss X told the agent and the Council the property was not suitable in October 2023. It took another 10 months for the agent to acknowledge that the extent of the works meant Miss X needed to move out. This is not in line with any of the timescales for repairs in the service agreement.
46. The failure of the agent to follow the service agreement was fault. The failure of the Council to ensure it had proper oversight of the agent providing accommodation on its behalf was fault.

Conclusions and injustice

47. The Council was at fault for:
• Poor communication with Miss X
• Failing to consider whether the property was suitable before offering it to Miss X
• Failing to review its suitability when Miss X reported disrepair
• Failing to address the disrepair
• Delay accepting the main housing duty to Miss X
• Failing to keep proper oversight of the agent acting on its behalf
48. These faults caused Miss X significant injustice:
• She experienced avoidable frustration and distress over almost a year because of poor communication from both the Council and the agent
• She lived for 11 months with extensive disrepair which, on balance, made the property unsuitable
• She did not have access to her statutory review rights for five months

Back to top

Action

49. When a council commissions or arranges for another organisation to provide services, we treat actions taken by that organisation as actions taken on behalf of the council and in the exercise of the council’s functions. Where we find fault with the actions of the service provider, we can make recommendations to the council alone. Here we have found fault with the actions of the managing agent and make recommendations to the Council.
50. To remedy the injustice to Miss X from the faults I have identified, the Council has agreed to:
• Apologise to Miss X in line with our guidance on Making an effective apology
• Pay Miss X £250 a month for the 11 months she lived in unsuitable accommodation, for a total of £2,750
• Pay Miss X a further £500 in recognition of her prolonged frustration and delayed access to her statutory rights.
51. The Council should take this action within four weeks of my final decision.
52. We have made recommendations in previous decisions to address the Council’s poor communication and delays making homelessness decisions. I have not repeated those here.
53. The Council should also take the following action to improve its services:
• Ensure the Council considers the suitability of temporary accommodation in response to complaints of disrepair, including damp and mould, and issues a written decision setting out the applicant's right to ask for a suitability review. Provide training or guidance as needed.
• Arrange a meeting between a senior Council manager responsible for procurement and management of temporary accommodation and a senior representative from the managing agent to discuss our findings. They should identify ways to improve liaison, information-sharing and performance monitoring to ensure the agent meets the timescales and service standards in the agreement.
• The Council should also monitor the managing agent’s performance against the service level agreement for three months from the date of our final decision. It is up to the Council how it chooses to conduct this monitoring. If the Council decides not to physically inspect all properties, it should consider identifying and inspecting properties with repeated reports of disrepair from occupants.
54. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions within three months of my final decision.

Back to top

Decision

55. I have completed my investigation. There was fault by the Council. The action I have recommended is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman