Tag Archive for 'transfer'

Asked, but not necessarily answered

By NL on 03/10/2010. 6 Comments

After the excitements of Kay v UK, the LSC Judicial Review and the coming into force of (bits) of the Equalities Act – on which we will have a post shortly – there is a bit of a lull before the floods of new housing case law start up again. So, time for another trawl through the logs of search terms that brought people to nearly legal in the last month. Some can be answered, some are unanswerable and some are frankly bewildering…

how to wear a cravat
boldly and flamboyantly, with no sense of shame, or taste. There is no such thing as an ironic or indeed an … Read the full post

Posted in Housing law - All and Various (non-housing). Tags: , , , , , .

Housing Benefit limits

By NL on 28/06/2010. 22 Comments

You’ve probably already seen this, but new upper limits on housing benefit rates are to be introduced from next April (2011).

For a three bed house, the upper limit will be £340 per week
For a four bed house, the upper limit will be £400 per week

LHA will be limited to between £250 and £400 a week depending on property size. LHA rates will be set using the bottom 30 per cent of rates instead of the median and they will be linked to the consumer prices index rather than the retail prices index, leading to smaller increases.

In London, this is likely to have a very significant impact … Read the full post

Posted in Allocation, Benefits, FLW article, Housing law - All and secure-tenancy. Tags: , , .

The end of the road

By J on 02/04/2009. 4 Comments

X v LB Hounslow [2009] EWCA Civ 286.

When news of X first reached the NL team, the near unanimous response was one of pleasure at the result. Once we obtained a transcript and saw the reasoning of the trial judge, it became clear not only that an appeal would be pursued but that it would be successful. Those feelings were only strengthened by the decision of the House of Lords in Glasgow CC v Mitchell. And we’re been proved right.

The facts of X are truly awful. X and Y are, on any view, vulnerable adults. They both have learning difficulties and have low IQs. In these proceedings, … Read the full post

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

Transferred Trespassers

By NL on 01/10/2008. 0 Comments

As it stands, Schedule 11 of the Housing and Regeneration Act will end the existence of tolerated trespassers who meet these conditions:

(i) the home condition is met (ie that the dwelling house remains the ex-tenant’s
only or principal home).
(ii) the ex-landlord is entitled to let the dwelling-house, and
(iii) the ex-landlord and the ex-tenant have not entered into another tenancy after
the date on which the original tenancy ended but before the commencement
date.

This will cover virtually all tolerated trespassers whose landlord has remained the same. They will get a ‘replacement’ tenancy. But what of those where there was a stock transfer, or one RSL was taken … Read the full post

Posted in Housing law - All, secure-tenancy and Tolerated trespasser. Tags: , , .

Duty to protect update 1

By NL on 28/05/2008. 0 Comments

Update on this case from Friday 24 May. No judgment available yet that I have seen, but there is a further new story on the Hounslow case at 24dash.com, which gives a few more details.

Specifically, the negligent failure found was that housing did not invoke emergency transfer processes, despite a) social services involvement with the family and b) complaints and warnings from neighbours about the youths’ presence and activities in the claimant’s home. It arose from a found lack of communication between social services and housing and lack of appreciation of the seriousness of the situation and failure to give priority in both departments, despite the evidence.

Damage … Read the full post

Posted in ASB, Community care, Housing law - All, Nuisance and secure-tenancy. Tags: , , , , , , , .

A duty to protect?

By NL on 24/05/2008. 3 Comments

A case is reported in the Guardian which apparently extends local authorities’ duty to protect tenants from third parties to include vulnerable adults, not only children.

A couple, both with learning difficulties, were terrorised in their flat by a group of youths over two days, during which they were assaulted and abused. Hounslow Council had failed to rehouse the couple, although the threat of attack ‘was foreseeable’.

At the High Court, Hounslow argued there was no duty of care, but Mr Justice Maddison held otherwise. The failure to rehouse was negligent. Damages of £100,000 were awarded. Hounslow were given permission to appeal.

I’m looking forward to seeing the judgment on … Read the full post

Posted in ASB, Community care, Housing law - All, Nuisance and secure-tenancy. Tags: , , , , , , , .
row of sheds footer image
1 pages