Bexley mum asked to leave her home within a month by council

Dare Olaifa-Oyeniyi, 43, has lived in her Erith home with her husband and three children since 2021, after being placed there under emergency accommodation by Bexley Council .

The mother claimed that since moving in, she has frequently raised concerns to the authority on issues in the property relating to leaks and mould.

A doctor’s note from June 2024 claimed all members of Ms Olaifa-Oyeniyi’s family had allergic rhinitis, with her seven year old son’s symptoms being particularly severe.

The mum told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS): “All the time we are sick, we think we have Covid. We have all the symptoms all the time, so I thought that it has to be something.”

A report from an independent surveyor sourced by Ms Olaifa-Oyeniyi in April 2022 that was seen by the LDRS claimed ceilings in the mum’s property had been damaged by water ingress, possibly from the roof being defective.

The mother forwarded this report to the authority and asked for the mould in her home to be urgently resolved.

However, a response from a council officer seen by the LDRS said that the authority’s surveyors felt there were no major issues in the property and that the mould in the home ‘did not seem excessive’. The council claimed the works suggested in the independent survey were unnecessary, but that a slipped roof tile on the building would be repaired.

The mum had also asked for changes to her home to make the property safer for her son, Abdul-Quddus, who has autism spectrum disorder and sensory processing difficulties. She said uneven paving in the back garden meant it was not suitable for the seven-year-old to play outside without hurting himself, making him a ‘prisoner in his own home’.

She said: “I keep telling them that these things need to be sorted and not be left laying around. It I take my eyes off him [Abdul-Quddus] for a second or something will happen. It’s not sustainable for me to be with him 24/7.”

Works to level the back garden at the mum’s property began in July this year.

However, an email received by Ms Olaifa-Oyeniyi from a Bexley Council officer on August 14 seen by the LDRS included an offer for a 12 month tenancy at a three-bedroom property based in Sittingbourne, Kent.

The offer stated that whether Ms Olaifa-Oyeniyi accepted the offer or not, the council had met its requirements to secure accommodation for her and would end its housing duty to her. This required the mum to vacate the temporary accommodation property she was currently living in.

She said: “They didn’t even give me a choice. They said there was this property in this area, Sittingbourne, and whether I accept or don’t accept they were going to end their duty.”

She added: “I can’t even think about it because we haven’t ever been there before. We don’t know anybody there.

"We don’t have any family, friends or connection to that area… When I was looking at the distance, my oldest kid, if she has to go to school, she would have to be getting up at maybe 6am to get to school for 8.30am.”

The email stated Ms Olaifa-Oyeniyi was required to give a response to the offer by 3pm the next day, when the initial email was sent at 4pm.

The mum responded the next morning shortly before 10am to say that she would accept the property but was challenging the suitability of the offer given factors such as the location having no local connection to her family and being inappropriate to serve her family’s medical, educational and professional commitments.

Ms Olaifa-Oyeniyi also asked to be able to remain in either her current temporary accommodation or a new property while the review was underway. However, the council officer responded that same morning at 10.30am to inform her the Sittingbourne property’s agent would meet her at the new address at 12.30pm that day to sign the tenancy agreement.

She said: “It was 10.30am and they are expecting me to be somewhere that is two and a half hours away. They gave me a time to collect the key. The guy kept calling me and I said my son was having tuition and I didn’t know when I could leave.”

She added: “I told them that I needed a review of the decision so I was just thinking in my head that obviously when someone asks for a review they would give time. But they just wanted me to go there and get started moving.”

The mum claimed it was not reasonable or feasible for her to be able to get to Sittingbourne by the required time after receiving notice only two hours beforehand. After Ms Olaifa-Oyeniyi did not meet the agent, the council officer recalled the tenancy offer and sent a letter informing the resident that the authority had ended its duty to house her.

The letter, seen by the LDRS, claimed the mum had refused to meet the managing estate agent and failed to make a clear formal decision on the offer. It claimed that Ms Olaifa-Oyeniyi must now vacate her emergency accommodation and the authority had made a referral to social services given she has children under 18 years old.

She said: “It happened on August 15, I haven’t been able to sleep [since then] because I’m not sure what to do.”

The mum then received a letter on August 21 from the council asking her to vacate her current home by September 29 or the authority would seek possession of the property. The letter, seen by the LDRS, claimed that the reason for the action was due to Ms Olaifa-Oyeniyi refusing an offer of suitable permanent accommodation.

She said: “I don’t even know what I’m going to do. Where do they expect me to go with the kids? Are they going to put us on the streets? Because I’m not sure.”

The mum claimed she is worried she was given a limited amount of time to accept her offer due to damages in her current property from Abdul-Quddus over the years.

An email from a council officer in May this year, seen by the LDRS, claimed that if the mum was found responsible for damage in the home, she would be issued a warning letter and potentially served notice to leave the property.

She said: “A couple of times, he has done some things in the property like when he has broken the windows. All those times, they would tell me that it was my responsibility and if he keeps doing this, then they were going to have to tell me to move. I would always reply to them and say, ‘You are aware of my son’s disabilities. So you’re telling me you’re blaming him for his disabilities and his needs?’.”

Bexley Council was approached for comment, but claimed it was not able to comment on individual cases.