London Borough of Southwark

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: The Council accepted Mr X, Mrs Y and their children were living in unsuitable temporary accommodation but failed to offer them alternative accommodation for 15 months. This was fault causing the family the distress of living in unsuitable accommodation. The Council also accepted it did not communicate properly with Mrs Y when she complained. The Council has agreed to apologise and make a payment to Mr X and Mrs Y.

The complaint

Mr X and Mrs Y complained the Council placed them in unsuitable temporary accommodation and then failed to rehouse them after accepting the property was in an unsuitable condition. Mr X and Mrs Y say this has forced them to live in a hazardous property with three young children, impacting their health and causing severe distress. They want the Council to place them in suitable accommodation and compensate them for the distress caused.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 recommend a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) 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(1), as amended)

How I considered this complaint

I considered evidence provided by Mr X, Mrs Y and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.

Mr X, Mrs Y and the Council have had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered their comments before making a final decision.

What I found

Temporary Accommodation If a council is satisfied an applicant is unintentionally 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. The accommodation a council provides until it can end this duty is called temporary accommodation. (Housing Act 1996, section 193) 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.  (Housing Act 1996, section 206 and Homelessness Code of Guidance 17.2) What happened The Council accepted a main housing duty to Mr X and Mrs Y in 2020 and placed them in temporary accommodation.

In September 2024 Mrs Y emailed the Council saying the property had become unsuitable. She said poor glazing meant the property was damp, noisy and cold with severe water leaks and a rodent infestation. The Council inspected the property and concluded it was unsuitable.

Mrs Y complained to the Council in December 2024. She said the Council had not responded to her email from September 2024 and the property remained unsuitable.

In early January 2025 the Council said it had not responded to Mrs Y’s complaint as it had been sent to the wrong department. It responded at stage one of its complaint procedure on 21 January 2025. It confirmed its inspection of the property had concluded it was unsuitable and it had added the family to the urgent transfer list.

There is no record of any further action from the Council, and Mrs Y escalated her complaint to stage two in April 2025. The Council responded on 5 June 2025. It again upheld Mrs Y’s complaint. It said the family remained on the urgent transfer list and it continued to look for suitable properties. It said its communication with Mrs Y had not been acceptable and offered £100 for her time and trouble complaining. Mrs X remained unhappy and complained to the Ombudsman.

The Council offered Mr X and Mrs Y new temporary accommodation in January 2026. The family moved into the property but were unhappy with its suitability and asked the Council for a review.

My findings

The Council was under a duty to ensure Mr X and Mrs Y’s temporary accommodation remained suitable. The Council accepted the property was unsuitable following its inspection in September 2024. Despite this the Council did not relocate Mr X and Mrs Y, and they remained in the property. This was fault, causing Mr X, Mrs Y and their children to live in unsuitable accommodation for 15 months.

The Council also accepted fault with its complaint handling and communication. It apologised and offered Mr X and Mrs Y £100 to reflect their time and trouble complaining. This is in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies and I am satisfied with the Council’s actions.

Mr X and Mrs Y’s complaint about their new temporary accommodation is a new complaint that arose after they came to the Ombudsman. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. It is open to Mr X and Mrs Y to make a new complaint to the Council if they remain unhappy with their new temporary accommodation.

Action

Within one month of the final decision the Council has agreed to: Apologise to Mr X and Mrs Y for the distress caused by living in unsuitable temporary accommodation. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology.

Pay Mr X and Mrs Y £5,600 to recognise the impact of living in unsuitable accommodation. This is £350 a month for the 15 months since the Council identified the accommodation as unsuitable and is in line with the Ombudsman’s guidance on remedies.

The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Decision I find fault causing injustice which the Council has agreed to remedy.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman