I told Brent Council I was pregnant, scared and abused – they left me in a B&B so bad I ended up in hospital

A mum from North London claims she was hospitalised twice due to “damp, mould, and a lack of ventilation” at a B&B, whilst also raising concerns about the impact on her unborn baby.

She had been moved into emergency accommodation by the council after being the “victim of assault” and unable to return to her home.

An investigation by the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) found Brent Council to be “at fault” for failing to provide the mum with suitable temporary accommodation. The local authority has agreed to pay her £2,850 in recognition of the “impact and upset” caused by the failure, according to the LGO report.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad
Brent Council has apologised and paid out £2,850 in compensationplaceholder image
Brent Council has apologised and paid out £2,850 in compensation | Google/LDRS

The mum, referred to in the report as Miss Y, complained about the way in which Brent Council dealt with her homelessness application and for moving her into “unsuitable temporary accommodation.” She requested that the local authority find her to someplace more appropriate “as a matter of urgency” over concerns the living conditions were affecting her health, as well as being scared about its impact on her – at the time unborn – baby.

In August 2023, a youth organisation working with Miss Y made a homelessness application on her behalf. It informed the council that she had been assaulted, was unable to return to her home, and needed to be provided with emergency accommodation whilst her application was assessed. The council housed her in a B&B later that month.

Miss Y’s suitability of accommodation form stated that she needed self-contained accommodation, it also included information about the abuse she had been subjected to and stated that she was still “at risk of violence”, according to the report. The council accepted the main housing duty for Miss Y In October 2023 but she was still living in the B&B in April, 2024.

In May 2024, Miss Y requested to be moved to new temporary accommodation as it was not suitable, she told the council she was experiencing abuse, was now pregnant, and needed to move away from areas where she was “at risk of violence”. The council subsequently moved her to an undisclosed self-contained property – referred to as X House – outside of the borough, however, Miss Y was unhappy with it.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

She complained that it had “no ventilation”, other than a skylight which could only be partially opened, and was having an “adverse effect” on her health – including claiming that it had already made her pass out. Miss Y also highlighted issues with damp and mould, which were also raised by her social worker and midwife.

The council offered her alternative housing in July, 2024 but Miss Y later declined it, telling the local authority it was “worse than her current accommodation” and returned to X House. Following a complaint by Miss Y in August 2024, the council acknowledged her concerns about the suitability of X House and proposed helping her to find somewhere in the private rented sector. Although, due to housing shortages, it had not yet been able to identify a suitable property.

Miss Y later escalated the complaint to the LGO, after which the council said it would request different accommodation in X House and look for a large studio in the private rental sector. At the same time it was also contacted by a medical professional working with Miss Y regarding their concerns about her wellbeing.

Miss Y then told the council she was hospitalised twice – once in September and again in October, 2024 – with an infection due to the condition of her accommodation. She said it was “too hot, had no ventilation and would be unsuitable for a baby”, according to the LGO report.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The baby was born at the end of November but Miss Y was still not moved to an alternative property. All professionals who visited her had raised issues about damp, mould, and the room’s temperature. It wasn’t until March 2025, that she was eventually found more suitable housing.

The LGO stated: “In my view the evidence seen shows the accommodation at X House was not suitable for Miss Y. The council’s records confirm health professionals working with her contacted it a number of times from May 2024 about its unsuitability for Miss Y, and also her baby.”

The investigator recommended that the council pay Miss Y £2,500 “to recognise the impact of its failure” to provide suitable accommodation between May 2024, and March 2025, as well as a further £350 for the “upset, frustration and uncertainty” that this caused.

A spokesperson for Brent Council said: “We sincerely apologise to Miss Y for the failure to provide suitable temporary accommodation. We have acknowledged this error and agreed to offer compensation in recognition of the inconvenience and distress caused. In response, we are reviewing and strengthening our internal procedures to prevent a recurrence. Our priority remains delivering timely, fair, and compassionate support to all residents in housing need.”

Comment Guidelines

National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.

Follow us
©National World Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.Cookie SettingsTerms and ConditionsPrivacy notice