Job Ads

Brixton Advice Centre

Who We Are:

Brixton Advice Centre provides free, independent legal advice in debt and housing matters to the residents of Lambeth and the surrounding boroughs. Particularly we deal with people facing unmanageable debt, eviction, homelessness, possession proceedings or serious disrepair. We also provide generalist, one-off advice and support in welfare benefits, debt and family issues.

We are partly-funded by the Local Authority and various other charitable projects and we have a Legal Aid contract and Specialist Quality Mark for housing matters. We also have outreach projects at Brixton Prison and at Brixton and Vauxhall Foodbanks.

We are open to the public Monday-Thursday 10am – 4pm and offer … Read the full post

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged |

The point of having policies….

A post on a County Court case, one well worth looking at for the application of public law principles, the Equality Act and reasonableness. I’m working from a note of judgment, so any quotes should be taken as being from a note, rather than a transcript.

Peabody Trust v Steven Evison (By his litigation friend) Wandsworth County Court 17 July 2014.

Mr E was the assured tenant of Peabody. He had been since after 2000 (date not clear from the note), but had lived in the property since 1981, when his father took the tenancy from Peabody, so had lived there for 33 years.

In 2012, Mr E’s rent account … Read the full post

Posted in assured-tenancy, FLW case note, Housing law - All, Possession | Tagged , , |

Missing tenants and missing sentences: Council tax and periodic tenancies

Further to my post here on council tax liability for statutory periodic tenancies, I have heard about another Valuation Tribunal case, this time involving a contractual periodic tenancy, and also oddly involving this blog.

The issue was council tax liability for a period where a tenant had left a property before the tenancy was ended and the tenancy was a contractual periodic. The tenancy agreement specified a 12 month fixed term followed by a monthly periodic.

The Council, Shropshire Council (to whom we will return below) considered that this meant that the landlord was liable for the Council tax for the relevant period, as per CT v Horsham District Read the full post

Posted in Assured Shorthold tenancy, Housing law - All | Tagged |

Spencer v Taylor – section 21 news

The Appellant tenant in Spencer v Taylor [2013] EWCA Civ 1600 (our note here) has had permission to appeal to the Supreme Court refused, on the grounds that it did not raise an arguable point of law.

This means that the Court of Appeal decision stands. Where an assured shorthold tenancy has had a fixed term and a statutory periodic tenancy has arisen, there is no requirement to use a s.21(4)(a) notice, or have a date of expiry at the end of a period of the tenancy. A section 21(1)(b) notice with two clear months notice is adequate.

Where a tenancy was periodic from the start, or where … Read the full post

Posted in Assured Shorthold tenancy, Housing law - All, Possession | Tagged |

Pyrrhic victory corner: Costs on appeal from a small claim

Akhtar v Boland [2014] EWCA Civ 943

Just a quick note on this one, after a conversation with a colleague reminded me I hadn’t written it up.

The details of the case need not detain us, it was a PI case which had been allocated to the small claims following admissions by the Defendant. The Claimant appealed on the basis that it should have been allocated to the fast track, and then appealed to the Court of Appeal. The appeal was unsuccessful in the Court of Appeal. The Defendant sought its costs of that appeal.

The Court of Appeal notes the CPR provisions:

CPR 27(14) provides, so far as relevant:

Read the full post
Posted in Housing law - All | Tagged , , , |

Trouble out west

In O’Brien v Bristol CC [2014] EWHC 2423 (Admin) [heard at the RCJ instead of in the Bristol admin court?  Not on Bailii yet but we have seen a transcript], a range of issues arose out of the council’s decision to seek and obtain a possession order of an unauthorised encampment below the M5 at Avonmouth.  The real aim of this judicial review, though, was not the possession order, but the council’s decision not to allow the O’Brien’s and their four caravans to return to the temporary transit site, which had available pitches.  The O’Briens had stayed at that temporary site for the allowable period (13 weeks) and had been … Read the full post

Posted in FLW article, FLW case note, Homeless, Housing law - All | Tagged , , |
css.php