Back in August 2025, we reported on the story of disabled resident Sophie, who was suddenly evicted from her Southampton home due to the building requiring urgent structural repairs. More than six months on, Sophie is continuing to fight for suitable alternative accessible accommodation that meets her complex needs.
The 29-year-old full-time wheelchair user who lives with cerebral palsy was suddenly told to leave her long-term adapted home due to urgent structural fire safety repairs, with only days’ notice and no suitable alternative offered.
Required adaptations like ceiling-mounted hoists and multiple lifts make finding appropriate accessible accommodation extremely difficult, and relocation firms offered inadequate solutions such as hotels or care homes.
Sophie’s struggle reveals systemic failures in accessible housing provision, where one-size-fits-all approaches overlook complex disability needs. Her MP has intervened, pushing housing providers to secure fully adapted accommodation, highlighting broader gaps in disability-inclusive housing policies.
Physical and mental health declines as a disabled writer’s life is put on hold
Returning to her family home in Birminghambrought relief, but it was not a solution. Sophie’s life in Southampton had been carefully built around her routines, her support network, and her ability to live as independently as possible. Now, everything was on pause.
In the weeks that followed, Sophie described a crushing silence from the parties responsible:
“As I’ve mentioned before, RMG (managing agents), ICAB (relocation company) and Barratt Redrow (builders) have no ****in’ idea what they were/are doing and the nature of the situation. Frustrating to say the least. My guess is, they ‘think’ as I’m back in my family home, they could wash their hands of us, that they don’t need to bother anymore.”
Determined not to be forgotten, Sophie and her father applied constant pressure through emails, repeatedly explaining that Sophie’s life had been forced into limbo. Medical appointments were delayed, plans were cancelled, and Sophie’s physical and mental health deteriorated under the strain.
At one point, Sophie was horrified to learn that the original relocation plan could have left her homeless for over a week. If her family home had not been available, she would have had nowhere accessible to go.
Despite repeated assurances that her “case” was being actively worked on, Sophie found the tone of communications patronising and dismissive. She felt that the organisations involved assumed disabled people do not work, do not have responsibilities, and do not have full lives worth preserving.
Sophie said: “I have to work remotely with my writers group and other jobs, with my Dad kindly driving me down to Southampton for other meetings, so I can keep up some resemblance of a life that I built for myself. The lack of response was frustrating, the patronising tones of the emails they did send were degrading, and I felt less than I was worth.”
False hope and repeated setbacks in the search for accessible accommodation
As time passed, offers of accessible accommodation began to appear—but none of them were suitable. Sophie was repeatedly offered flats far outside the city, locations so remote that access to a car would have been essential. That would have meant relying on personal assistants to drive her everywhere, which was not a realistic or fair expectation. Other flats were closer to the city but lacked the adaptations Sophie required.
Some properties would have forced her to use a manual hoist—something that would risk serious harm due to her scoliosis and other health conditions. Each new offer felt less like a genuine attempt to help and more like a box-ticking exercise.
Eventually, Sophie was offered accessible accommodation close to her original home. The viewing came with minimal notice, creating further stress. Travelling from Birmingham to Southampton was a major logistical challenge, but Sophie and her dad made the journey.
When they arrived, the flat was stunning. It was in a familiar area, near the marina, and it immediately felt like somewhere Sophie could live. The balcony offered breathtaking views, and crucially, Sophie could access it independently in her wheelchair. The rooms were spacious, beautifully decorated, and the flat felt like a home rather than a temporary compromise.
Praising the property agent who showed them around, Sophie said: “The property agent who showed us around was so lovely and really appreciated us both and we spoke at length while Dad measured up at the flat and I can’t divulge too many details, but she had experience and prior knowledge of those in the disabled community so completely understood everything that I was going through, and she was furious at the poor handling of the situations, listening to my views, rights and opinions and showed me how much she got it. Just to say, this means so much that there is someone outside my friend and family circle who understands! She was great and helped sell it to us.”
Although the flat wasn’t perfect, Sophie believed she could manage temporarily. She would need a shower chair instead of a bath, and she might have to use a manual standing hoist, which would be difficult. But the flat’s accessibility, location, and comfort outweighed those concerns. Sophie and her dad quickly agreed – this was the one.
They responded immediately to secure it, making clear that only minor changes were needed. For the first time in months, Sophie felt hope.
Then the silence returned.
Weeks passed with no update. Sophie and her dad clung to optimism, believing the flat was still being arranged. Just before going on holiday, Sophie’s dad emailed again to chase progress. The reply came while they were away: the flat had been pulled. The landlord had refused to remove a shower screen.
To Sophie, the reason felt absurd. A small adjustment had cost her the closest thing to stability she had been offered in months. It felt like yet another reminder that disabled people are expected to accept whatever they are given, no matter how unsafe or inaccessible.
Once again, Sophie was reassured that her “case” was being reviewed. But by now, it was clear the organisations involved were not equipped to support someone with complex needs. Sophie felt like they were scrambling, seeking advice from health professionals, and trying to pass responsibility elsewhere.
As the months dragged on, Sophie continued to be shown unsuitable accessible accommodation. Some were immediately rejected due to inaccessible bathrooms. Others were too small for her wheelchair or poorly configured, with awkward angles that made movement impossible. There was even talk of building portable bathrooms into properties, but this would have taken up space in already limited living areas, creating cramped and uncomfortable conditions.
By October 2025, Sophie had viewed four flats that seemed like possible contenders. One was near her original home, clean and spacious enough to function, but it required a gantry hoist that would restrict her independence. Another flat in the city centre was rejected immediately due to poor accessibility.
However, the same agents then showed Sophie a different flat in the same building – one that was far more promising. It was accessible, cosy, and workable. The landlord had even agreed to install ceiling hoists in both the bedroom and bathroom, a crucial adaptation that would allow Sophie to live safely. Sophie said yes immediately.
But once again, her hopes were crushed. She was later told the flat had been rented to someone else.
Furious and heartbroken, Sophie could not understand how this could happen when she had responded so quickly. The process felt chaotic, careless, and cruel.
Soon after, Sophie was offered another flat in the same building, this time on the ground floor. She worried about noise, but the agents reassured her. They also admitted that the building’s lifts frequently broke down—another alarming concern for someone reliant on accessible entry and exit.
Still, the flat itself was workable. It had a patio with level access, which Sophie could reach independently.
Sophie also mentioned some of the other positives of this property that not only would benefit her physical health, but her mental and social well-being as well:
“Another major upside to this particular complex of buildings was the extra communal spaces. It offered its residents a communal sitting area and kitchen, which they could go to, utilise and enjoy. I really liked these areas as they encourage residents to go and socialise. If that’s what they want to do, or if one feels lonely, they could go down there to see if anyone was around. More to this, the resident association also offered many events on communal gatherings for people to go to and themed evenings, which sounded really exciting. Then there was also a study/work space as part of the flat complex, which I really liked the look of; I could really see myself in there for hours at a time working and utilising the space.”
For the first time in a long time, Sophie could picture a future again.
Still waiting for accessible accommodation in 2026: disabled resident demands action, not apologies
As 2026 began, the situation remained unresolved. Sophie and her dad are still waiting for confirmation that adaptations will be funded and installed. The companies involved warned that the total cost of the flat and necessary adaptations would be higher than any property they had previously approved.
We approached the three companies involved in Sophie’s case for comments. RMG declined to provide a statement, indicating that the matter did not fall within its remit.
A Barratt Redrow spokesperson said: “We appreciate how difficult the temporary relocation will have been for all residents at Mistral and Sirocco, not least those with complex needs or requirements such as Ms Abel. We can only apologise for the severe disruption this has caused; the decision to move residents out of the building was not taken lightly. However, residents’ safety will always be our first priority.
“We have been working closely with Ms Abel and her father over the past few months to try and find alternative accommodation which suits her needs, and we believe we have now found a suitable apartment, which has been approved by Ms Abel’s father. We will continue to work with Ms Abel and her family to finalise this.”
ICAB said in a statement: “ICAB was appointed by Barratt Redrow to support residents affected at Admirals Quay, where we successfully secured alternative accommodation for 179 properties affected.
“From the outset, we advised that identifying like-for-like accommodation for this resident would be challenging due to the specialist accessibility features required, such as ceiling-mounted hoists. We have continued to work very closely with all parties to explore every viable option, kept the resident informed throughout, and remain committed to identifying a suitable solution.
“We understand the disruption and uncertainty these situations can cause, and our team consistently strives to make the transition as smooth as possible. ICAB remains dedicated to supporting all residents throughout this complex and sensitive process.”
Sophie’s response was simple: “Okay… and?… I’m not asking for anything more than what I had in my original flat.” She wasn’t asking for luxury. She was asking for what she had already had – basic access, safety, and dignity.
She added: “Accepting Cash in Leu would be the easiest thing to do and relinquishing the flat but why should we? Its not about the money, its about the principle and the effects it is having on my life, health and my work, why should I relinquish when society is wrong?”
Sophie refuses to celebrate prematurely. After months of broken promises and lost opportunities, she has learned not to trust words. For Sophie, the fight is not over until the keys are in her hand.
Have you had a similar experience to Sophie, where you were suddenly forced out of your home with no suitable accessible accommodation available to meet your needs? If so, we want to hear from you. Share your experience, thoughts, or advice in the comments box, on our social media, or contact us directly if you would like to tell your personal story.