Craig visits this blog - it’s my blog. I can’t give advice on your specific situation and certainly not without seeing the letters involved. This isn’t an advice blog.

S.193(7)is the section that allows the Council to discharge housing duty if you refuse a suitable offer of accommodation. Any s.193(6A) is not, I think, yet in force.

‘Suitable’ is a difficult test. My general and usual advice to people in this situation is to sign up for the offered property but request a review of suitability at the same time. Otherwise the danger is that they end with nothing. I recommend that you get advice on the submissions to the suitability review.

Councils are only under the legal obligation to offer (to homeless with s.184 duty accepted) one suitable property. So that is what they do. You may well feel coerced, but I’m afraid this is pretty widespread, as is asking for the acceptance form to be signed on viewing, or shortly afterwards.

This post is full of legalese because it is a technical discussion of a court of appeal judgment, sorry. I appreciate this won’t make it the easiest thing for people looking for advice.

I am struggling with this ‘Legalese’, but wondered if you are able to clarify a legaslative query for us, we have today been offered a confirmation of permanent housing, which does NOT state that it is a final offer, but continues to mention Homelessness Act 2002 s 193(7), new s 193(6A). The latter (6A), has not come up in any blogs I have read. My wife and I are concerned that the approach used by the Council is not dissimilar to a pressure salesman (in that we had to sign an acceptance form on viewing). It is also of great concern that we unfortunately find ourselves in a situation whereby we do not believe that the accomodation is suitable, yet declining it would render us, (including our 4 children) homeless, in a situation which I can only describe as coersion.

We have not been afforded reasonable time to seek advice, as the acceptance/decline form requires to be signed by tomorrow (Wednesday), which I am at present refusing to sign until I have sought advice. I would very much welcome your comments on the above legislative acts.

Many thanks

LJ

Good to hear that there may be progress on an Omar appeal. I would have thought that a clear public interest argument can be made and that, assuming there is any rationality left at the LSC, the argument would achieve funding. This is crucial for every person in temporary accommodation under a s.184 duty. More worrying is that Birmingham (and possibly other councils) are seeking to use Omar in regard to suitability. The very best with the other CoA cases.

I’ll do a fresh note on the blog today on this issue. It is important

Anon,

Firstly, there is no certainty at present that your Council will seek to rely on Omar. Secondly, if they do and it goes to appeal, it is very likely that the appeal can be stayed pending the outcome of either Omar in the House of Lords or a clarificatory case in the Court of Appeal. Thirdly, although I would need much more detail to be sure and offer proper advice, it sounds like you would have a potential argument under suitability, even if reasonableness wasn’t considered.

Lastly and most importantly, find a housing solicitor, right away. You will need advice and assistance with the submissions to the review. Use the Community Legal Service search at the top right of this site.

I am very interested in all the info that I have read above because I am about to find myself in a similar position. I am a single mother of two who has been in temporary accomodation for four years. The previos two offers made to me I refused and requested reviews these were found in my favour and I was placed back on the list to be rehoused. I have now been offered a property by a Housing association which the council nominated us for. The road on which the property is based is rife with drug dealers and addicts. The property has been vacant for a long time because no one will accept it for that reason. When I went for the viewing I saw men peeing on the front gate, a drug dealer offered me drugs and this was all before 12 noon. I then went back in the evening and saw many dealers being surrounded by people buying drugs and people openly taking drugs on the road. There are cameras there but because they have been doing it for years they know they will not be stopped. I even took footage of what I saw. They want me to move my two small cildren into this place. I refused it yesterday and have requested a review. I stated that I did not feel that the place was suitable for a family with small children and that it was not reasonable for me to accept it.

What I have read above though has frightened me a bit because now youre saying that the reasonable test is not being used anymore because of the decsion in the Omar case?? Where does that put me and my kids? do you think they will chuck us out? Can anyone give me some advice???