Ombudsman report reveals the town hall “has allowed the matter to drift for almost 18 months and the injustice is ongoing”, reports Nick Clark, Local Democracy Reporter
A disabled teenager and their family were left living in unsuitable housing by Barking and Dagenham Council, a watchdog’s ruling has revealed.
The Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman said the council had failed to consider whether the family were legally homeless.
The ombudsman, Amerdeep Clarke, said the case was “deeply troubling” and showed “what can happen when processes fail a vulnerable child”.
A council spokesperson said the authority “fully accept the ombudsman’s findings and apologise unreservedly to the family”.
They added that the town hall is “working closely with the family to secure suitable accommodation”.
The teenager, named in the ombudsman’s report as Y, lived in a three-bedroom council flat with their family. However, the council had agreed the family needed a four-bed adapted home, and placed them on a waiting list.
Y, who is unable to walk and has extensive needs, needed a significant operation in July 2024. Ahead of the operation, the hospital asked the council to complete an occupational therapy assessment on the family’s services.
A representative for the family, Ms Z, asked the council to move them urgently, as Y uses wheelchairs, and there was no room in the family’s flat to use or store these.
She said there was also no room for a mobile hoist, meaning Y’s father had to lift them into their wheelchair and into the flat.
Y also shared a room with their siblings, and there was no room for their equipment.
The council delayed carrying out an occupational therapy assessment until December 2024 – after Y’s operation.
It also delayed responding to the request to be prioritised for more suitable housing until August. It then refused the request, saying there were twelve other families waiting.
Ms Z complained to the council in November 2024, then escalated it in December when the council’s response addressed only one of her points.
The council didn’t respond to this until September – eight months later than it should have.
The ombudsman ruled that the delays had caused the family injustice.
It said the council should also have considered whether the family was legally homeless after being told the flat was not suitable. This would have meant it had a duty to find them suitable accommodation, possibly in the private sector.
The ombudsman’s report says the family did not want to be considered homeless, as they didn’t want to go into privately rented housing. It also says the council believed that temporary or emergency homelessness housing would have provided a better solution.
Nevertheless, the ombudsman ruled that if the council had considered whether the family was homeless in July 2024, it might have “gone on to offer suitable interim accommodation”.
It added: “The council has allowed the matter to drift for almost 18 months and the injustice is ongoing.”
The ombudsman said the council should pay the family £1,200 and arrange a meeting to explore housing options with the family.
A council spokesperson said the authority is using the case to see how it can improve.
They said: “This fell short of the standard of service we expect, particularly for a vulnerable young resident with significant care needs.
“We have provided the agreed compensation and are working closely with the family to secure suitable accommodation, including offering temporary housing under our accepted homelessness duty. They are now being supported by a dedicated officer.”
They added: “We have already taken steps to improve our services, including significantly reducing occupational therapy waiting times and strengthening processes to ensure potential homelessness is identified much earlier.”
