Watchdog - Council housing

The Shoulder family share their tale of their uninhabitable home.

Louise and Tony Shoulder moved into their two-bedroom council flat in Greenwich, south-east London, 11 years ago. But, three children later, the flat became very cramped. So, in 2007, they were put onto the council's priority list for somewhere more suitable.

After a two-year wait, and with baby number four now well on the way, the council finally offered the Shoulders a house. The family was told it did need a bit of work, and when Louise was shown around the property in December 2008, the windows were still boarded up and there were no lights.

"It was really bad. It was very cold, every room needed decorating and it smelt," said Louise. The house also had no mains gas or electricity supplies.

Louise was also worried that if she did not accept the house, the family would be put right back to the bottom of the waiting list. And with husband Tony in the building trade, the family felt they could smarten it up.

"I thought I could look at it as a blank canvas," said Tony.

The council said that the electricity and gas would be connected before they moved in. So, with the new baby due in only a few weeks, Louise said she would take it.

"It was in a bad state. But it was a house," she said.

A few days later the council contacted them to say the house was ready for them to move in.

"The house was handed over to us by a team who said it was safe and liveable in for a family. I walked through the door, and I was shocked," said Tony. So shocked, he made a video of what he saw.

"Daylight was coming through holes in the wall. The walls were damp. The smell was awful. The radiators were broken. The stair rails were rotten. I couldn't let our two-year-old go up and down the stairs," he said.

On top of everything else, the house was freezing. The council had not connected the electricity or the gas as they had promised. So there was no heating and no lighting.

And by offering a house without a valid gas safety certificate, Greenwich council had even broken the law.

Tony was disgusted: "Would they live in that house with their family? I don't think they would."

The council offered the Shoulders £235 in vouchers to buy paint to redecorate. But we showed Tony's footage to Stephen Battersby, president of the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health. He thinks the house will need more than lick of paint before it's fit for habitation.

"I'm appalled that it could be offered to anybody, never mind a family with young children. It's the young children who are most vulnerable to dampness and mould. It can cause respiratory infection and - at the very least - lots of runny noses," he said.

"Under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System there are almost certainly category 1 hazards. If this was in the private sector the landlord would be required to carry out repairs."

The Shoulders gave the keys back the same day they got them. They feel they have no choice but to stay put, even though that means six of them living in a two-bedroom flat.

"I would rather be cramped up in here with all the children than be in there. It was that bad," said Tony.

This story doesn't involve a rogue landlord. It involves Greenwich Council - the ones with the responsibility to provide a secure, warm home for those who really need it. But the house they offered the Shoulders was dangerous and in such a state no one should be expected to live in it.

When Watchdog contacted Greenwich Council they said:

"Greenwich Council would like to apologise to Mr and Mrs Shoulder for the distress caused.

"We spent over £12,000 installing a brand new bathroom and kitchen and upgrading the electrics, but we did not carry out a gas check and redecoration works had not been carried out at [the property]. As a result we failed to renew the central heating system and therefore the property did not meet our normal standards. These mistakes were rectified within two weeks.

"We have refunded the family's rent, and we are continuing to work with them to find a suitable home.

"The property was not habitable when Mr and Mrs. Shoulder were offered it. The family didn't move into it so it never was inhabited in that state."

Regarding the suitability of the decoration vouchers they said:

"Clearly we do not believe vouchers for decoration can address issues like damp. There was no evidence of damp, nor was there water on the floor when we inspected the property on 2 December, the day Mrs Shoulder accepted the tenancy. We can only assume there was a further leak between the 2 December and 5 December when the Shoulder family were given the keys. We treat problems like leaks or damp very seriously, and they have now both been fixed at the property. Had the Shoulders chosen to stay at the house, we would have agreed a moving in date with them and would have ensured the repairs were carried out before that date."

"We issue Dulux Vouchers to tenants so they can redecorate to their own choice and we are aware the property did require decoration - hence issuing the vouchers."

In response to the hole in the wall the council said:

"Although it looks like there is a hole in the wall it is in fact an external airbrick, with the internal vent cover missing - this has now been replaced."

Greenwich Council say that someone else has now chosen to move into the house:

"The new tenant has accepted the property and is expected to move into the property on 16 February."