More results...

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Allocation
ASB
Assured Shorthold tenancy
assured-tenancy
Benefits and care
Deposits
Disrepair
Homeless
Housing Conditions
Housing law - All
Introductory and Demoted tenancies
Leasehold and shared ownership
Licences and occupiers
Mortgage possession
Nuisance
Possession
Regulation and planning
right-to-buy
secure-tenancy
Succession
Trusts and Estoppel
Unlawful eviction and harassment

Accommodation pending review – getting it wrong at s.189B stage

20/10/2019

R (on the application of Laryea) v London Borough of Ealing (2019) QBD (Admin) 29/08/2019 (Not on Bailli, note of extempore judgment on Lawtel)

Mr L was homeless and suffered from epilepsy and PTSD. He had applied to Ealing as homeless.

He was placed in temporary accommodation and Ealing accepted he was in priority need, but then found that he was intentionally homeless. Ealing wrote discharging its duty under s.189B Housing Act 1996, such that it no longer had a duty to help to secure accommodation.

Mr L sought a s.202 review of this decision and asked for the exercise of the council’s discretion to accommodate him pending review. Ealing refused this on the basis that Mr L had not taken the reasonable steps agreed in his personalised housing plan.

Mr L sought judicial review of this decision. He argued that Ealing had failed to take into account his personal circumstances and the consequences to him of not exercising the discretion. In particular, Ealing had ignored the medical evidence that his epilepsy became worse when homeless.

Held:

While Mr L and not taken full advantage of the opportunities set out in his personalised housing plan, that had to be considered against his medical situation, including physical and mental disabilities.

Ealing’s letter had errors and did not identify the likely consequences of a decision, or consider whether those consequences should bear on the decision. R v Camden LBC (1997) 5 WLUK 486.

The medical evidence was that Mr L’s epilepsy was worse when he was homeless, and Ealing’s letter did not engage with that, or with Mr L’s personal circumstances and the consequences to him of being homeless.

Relief granted.

Giles Peaker is a solicitor and partner in the Housing and Public Law team at Anthony Gold Solicitors in South London. You can find him on Linkedin and on Twitter. Known as NL round these parts.

0 Comments

Leave a Reply (We can't offer advice on individual issues)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.