Tag Archive for 's.202 review'

Page 2 of 2

Don’t answer the phone…

By NL on 10/01/2010. 19 Comments

[Update 03/04/2011 - the Court of Appeal decision on the further appeal in this case is here.]

Makisi v Birmingham City Council (Birmingham County Court Appeal Ref: BM9 0166A, 6 Jan 2010)

This was the County Court hearing of a s.204 Housing Act 1996 appeal following s.202 review of a decision that an offer of accommodation was suitable and reasonable to accept, and subsequent discharge of duty under s.193. It is only a County Court appeal decision, but there are some interesting points on the review process worth noting.

Ms Makisi had applied as homeless, with her three young children. Birmingham had accepted the full Housing Act 1996 duty. … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Homeless and Housing law - All. Tags: , , .

Contracting out homelessness reviews like the town hall catering contract

By Dave on 20/08/2009. 8 Comments

The Court of Appeal’s judgment in Heald and others v LB Brent [2009] EWCA Civ 930 is just out concerning the outsourcing of s 202 Housing Act 1996 reviews by Brent to Minos Perdios’ company Housing Reviews Ltd.  There have been a number of County Court judgments on this issue which have not necessarily been ad idem (see eg our post on Augustin v Barnet).  The argument against contracting out has been twofold: first, councils have no power to contract out their reviews function under Part VII (and, by extension although not relevant in this case, Part VI) because it is not a “function” of the local authority within … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Homeless and Housing law - All. Tags: , , .

Article 6, outsourced reviews and bias.

By NL on 31/05/2009. 13 Comments

The outsourcing of s.202 Housing Act 1996 reviews by local authorities to private, commercial bodies came under scrutiny in Charlotte Augustin v London Borough of Barnet, Central London County Court, 22 May 2009 (no report available online yet). There are a couple of Court of Appeal cases on the same issue coming up, so we will be revisiting it.

This was a s.204 appeal, heard by Mr Recorder Hollington QC, of a s.202 review decision, purportedly by Barnet, upholding their decision that an offer of temporary accommodation had been suitable. The s.202 decision was actually made by Mr Minos Perdios, the director of Housing Reviews Limited (HRL), a private … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Homeless and Housing law - All. Tags: , , , , , .

Homelessness – when unitary authorities aren't.

By NL on 15/01/2009. 0 Comments

R (Hassan) v Croydon LBC (Admin Court 13 January 2009. Only reported  so far in Arden Chambers eflash 336) was a judicial review on the discretion to secure accommodation pending s.202 review under s.188(3) HA 1996 and whether a potential duty under s.20 Children Act 1989 by the authority should be considered.

The applicant, together with her children aged 10 and 3, had fled Doncaster in 2005. In an initial application to Croydon, she stated she had fled through violence by a gang of youths. She was found not homeless. In a subsequent application,in 2006, she stated that the real reason was domestic violence, of which she had been ashamed. … Read the full post

Posted in Community care, FLW case note, Homeless and Housing law - All. Tags: , , , .

Homeless review, Reg 8(2) and changed facts

By NL on 17/12/2008. 11 Comments

Reg 8(2) of the Allocation of Housing and Homelessness (Review Procedures) Regulations 1999 provides that if a reviewing officer on s.202 review considers:

that there is deficiency or irregularity in the original [s.184] decision, or the manner in which it was made, but is minded nonetheless to make a decision which is against the interests of the applicant on one or more issues [the reviewing officer shall] notify the applicant (a) that the reviewer is so minded and the reasons why; and (b) that the applicant, or someone acting on his behalf, may make representations to the reviewer orally or in writing or both orally and in writing.

So what … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Homeless and Housing law - All. Tags: , , .

Deficiency in a decision

By NL on 19/06/2008. 4 Comments

London Borough of Lambeth v Johnston [2008] EWCA Civ 690 is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a County Court s.204 appeal.

The brief facts – the Claimant applied to Lambeth as homeless in September 2004. He told the officer he had an alcohol problem Lambeth put him into temporary accommodation. In September 2005, with no further interview or enquiries, Lambeth made a s.184 decision that he was not vulnerable.

At s.202, this was upheld, despite new evidence from the Claimant’s drug dependency agency that he was Class A dependant and alcoholic. He was now on a treatment programme but in a vulnerable condition. There was also … Read the full post

Posted in FLW case note, Homeless and Housing law - All. Tags: , , , .
row of sheds footer image
2 pages