Comments on: On the Naughty Step

By: RLC office now a wine bar | Free Movement

RLC office now a wine bar | Free Movement — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 14:50:52 +0000

[...] some of them have far from liberal reputations. I’m not aware of anyone who has tried to run this type of argument in immigration law yet, against membership of either a ‘pro’ [...]

By: J

Sat, 20 Dec 2008 19:58:03 +0000

Press House is a property which seems to attract a disproportionate amount of litigation…

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/1447.html

By: RLC office now a wine bar « Free Movement

RLC office now a wine bar « Free Movement — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 08:30:58 +0000

[...] some of them have far from liberal reputations. I’m not aware of anyone who has tried to run this type of argument in immigration law yet, against membership of either a ‘pro’ [...]

By: house

house — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 11:44:17 +0000

On 16th September 2 and a bit weeks after the decision the job of Tenancy Services Manager at Stadium Housing was posted. Other vacancies, according to their website, include that of Director of Housing Services and rather amusingly a Supported Housing Contracts manager who should have ‘extensive experience of contract management and its legal framework and be able to lead on lease negotiations and policy formulation’.

Can only wonder where the old staff are. Probably got a promotion.

Looking at the salaries one would have hoped that they would have attracted staff that had the intellect to think that keeping receipts might be a good idea…

Big cheer for the applicant and the pro bono people involved.

The most depressing thing is the fact that the service charges would have actively discouraged unemployed tenants from getting a job. Good on the applicant for not giving up!

By: NL

NL — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 19:03:58 +0000

Options? Few.

If it was an existing tenancy, the LVT route as above (but no legal aid available!). It would be a rare LA (and few RSLs) that could withstand a detailed look at the levying of service charges on temp accom Assured shortholds.

S.202 review? Could well be. ‘Suitability’ includes financial affordability (can’t remember the precedent case off hand – my homeless cases recall is getting a bit rusty – but it exists). So any attempt to give an un-affordable temp accomm is clearly open to review and s.204 appeal on suitability grounds, and potentially, depending on the circumstances, judicial review (for instance on a policy to only offer temp accomm via high rent/service charge Assured shorthold, if that was the reason no alternative was available/offered).

I’ll have a think and a bit of a look, but is that anything to go on?

By: D Shanmuganathan

D Shanmuganathan — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 08:19:24 +0000

Housing Corporations Funding Guide has given a free hand for RSLs and Local Authorities to charge their assured shorthold tenants regarding rent and service charges Temporary Social Housing-TSH). Capital Funding Guide 2008 issued by the Housing Corporation:
4.2.1 Housing Corporation rent re-structuring and Rent Influencing regime does not apply to TSH. The rent at letting must be equal to or less than that Bid for.
4.2.2 The RSL must ensure that:
· The rent + HBSC charged is within the housing benefit threshold, in their local authority; and
· The provision of this scheme is cheaper than the cost of bed and breakfast accommodation.
4.2.3 The RSL must retain documentary evidence that this requirement is met. This can be a letter from the local authority.

Tenants, who in receipt of state benefits do not have any issues with the above charges, as these will be paid/covered by HB and CTB, except some element of service charges.

Recent trend in the TSH is, self-contained 1/2/3 bedroom properties are let as B&B (no need for the L/L to issue possession proceedings to evict the tenants). Local authorities are aware of this.

If the tenant is working and not entitled for full HB/CTB will suffer financially by paying rent including service charges and council tax. Housing Corporation’s Funding Guide did not address this situation. Haringey Council operates Workers Rebate scheme (TSH tenants are required to pay £70 per week as their rent – rest will be covered by HB).

I recently contacted a local authority in London about my client’s financial inability (FT nurse) lives in TSH. They advised my client to seek review u/s 202. Any suggestions…

By: Francis Davey

Francis Davey — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 15:00:19 +0000

@simply – yes, s.19 LTA 1985 imposes a reasonableness condition on payability.

By: simply wondered

simply wondered — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:10:17 +0000

thank you francis (and J – yes i am very much an LVT fan!); i take it that payability includes a reasonableness condition

By: J

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:27:40 +0000

@Francis
Although the Lands Tribunal may have come to a sightly different conclusion in this case http://www.landstribunal.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=550

Oakfern wasn’t cited and the facts of the LT case are so odd that I doubt we should be too concerned about it.

Hope your recovery continues to go well

By: Francis Davey

Francis Davey — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:24:27 +0000

@J Thank you, that is exactly the authority (sub. nom. Oakfern v Ruddy) I had in mind, although informed opinion (well certainly our opinion) was always that that had to be right.

S.27A is very properly drafted to allow anyone to make an application for the determination of the payability of a service charge. Usually that will only concern landlord and tenant but there are other possibilities, and this is one.