R (on the application of C) v The London Borough of Islington
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Jeremy Baker |
| Judgment Date | 31 May 2017 |
| Neutral Citation | [2017] EWHC 1288 (Admin) |
| Date | 31 May 2017 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Docket Number | Case No: CO/4106/2016 |
[2017] EWHC 1288 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand, London, WC2A 2LL
Mr Justice Jeremy Baker
Case No: CO/4106/2016
Mr Ian Wise QC and Mr Michael Armitage (instructed by Hopkin Murray Beskine) for the Claimant
Mr Christopher Baker and Mr Richard Granby (instructed by The Legal Department, London Borough of Islington) for the Defendant
Hearing dates: 2 and 3 February 2017
Approved Judgment
Introduction
In many parts of England and Wales there is an imbalance between the supply and demand for social housing. This is particularly acute in many of the London boroughs, including the London Borough of Islington, (hereinafter "the defendant"), where the supply is far outstripped by the demand for this type of housing accommodation. Inevitably, in these circumstances, local housing authorities can face difficult decisions when seeking to allocate social housing in a fair and appropriate manner.
Part VI of the Housing Act 1996, as amended, (hereinafter "the 1996 Act"), makes provision for the allocation of social housing, and section 159(1) obliges local housing authorities to comply with those provisions. However, subject to those provisions, subsection (7) makes it clear, that a local housing authority may allocate this type of housing accommodation in such manner as it considers appropriate.
In addition, local housing authorities owe various statutory duties to homeless individuals within their area, under Part VII of the 1996 Act. If the local housing authority is satisfied that an individual is homeless, eligible for assistance, has a priority need, and is not satisfied that he became homeless intentionally, then, under section 193(2), it is under a duty to secure that accommodation is available for occupation by him.
However, just as there is no statutory duty to provide an applicant with social housing under Part VI of the 1996 Act, likewise, there is no statutory duty to provide social housing to a homeless individual; albeit, section 166A(3)(a) obliges a local housing authority to frame its allocation scheme so as to secure that reasonable preference is given to people who are homeless. Therefore, unless the local housing authority decides to accommodate a homeless person by providing her with social housing, its duty is limited to securing that accommodation is available for occupation by her.
As social housing is, in general terms, let either under the secure tenancy provisions of the Housing Act 1985, or the assured tenancy provisions of the Housing Act 1988, it is understandably perceived, by those seeking to be accommodated by a local housing authority, to be the gold standard, whilst accommodation provided under Part VII, is considered to be second best.
Inevitably, because of the imbalance between the supply and demand of social housing, those who are accommodated under Part VII of the Housing Act 1996 may spend prolonged periods in such accommodation, which can lead to disputes in relation to the allocation of social housing. This case concerns one such dispute.
Section 166A(1) of the 1996 Act provides that, in England, local housing authorities must have an "allocation scheme" for determining priorities, and as to the procedure to be followed, in allocating housing accommodation. Moreover, subsection (14) obliges local housing authorities to follow their schemes when allocating housing accommodation.
The other provisions of the 1996 Act which are of relevance to this case are as follows:
" Section 166A – Allocation in accordance with allocation scheme: England
(1) …..
(2) The scheme must include a statement of the authority's policy on offering people who are to be allocated housing accommodation –
(a) a choice of housing accommodation; or
(b) the opportunity to express preferences about the housing accommodation to be allocated to them.
(3) As regards priorities, the scheme shall, subject to subsection (4), be framed so as to secure that reasonable preference is given to –
(a) people who are homeless (within the meaning of Part 7);
(b) people who are owed a duty by any local authority under section 190(2), 193( 2) or 195(2) (or under section 65( 2) or 68(2) of the Housing Act 1985) or who are occupying accommodation secured by any authority under section 192(3);
(c) ……
(d) people who need to move on medical or welfare grounds (including any grounds relating to disability); and
(e) …….
(4) ……..
(5) The scheme may contain provision for determining priorities in allocating housing accommodation to people within subsection (3); and the factors which the scheme may allow to be taken into account include –
(a) the financial resources available to a person to meet his housing costs;
(b) any behaviour of a person (or a member of his household) which affects his suitability to be a tenant;
(c) any local connection (within the meaning of section 199) which exists between a person and the authority's district.
(6) Subject to subsection (3), the scheme may contain provision about the allocation of particular housing accommodation –
(a) to a person who makes a specific application for that accommodation;
(b) to persons of a particular description (whether or not they are within subsection (3)).
(7) ……..
(8) ……..
(9) The scheme must be framed so as to secure that an applicant for an allocation of housing accommodation –
(a) has the right to request such general information as will enable him to assess –
(i) how his application is likely to be treated under the scheme (including in particular whether he is likely to be regarded as a member of a group of people who are to be given preference by virtue of subsection (3)); and
(ii) whether housing accommodation appropriate to his needs is likely to be made available to him and, if so, how long it is likely to be before such accommodation become available for allocation to him;
(b) has the right to request the authority to inform him of any decision about the facts of his case which is likely to be, or had been, taken into account in considering whether to allocate housing accommodation to him; and
(c) has the right to request a review of a decision mentioned in paragraph (b), or in section 160ZA(9), and to be informed of the decision on the review and the grounds of it.
(10) …..
(11) …..
(12) …..
(13) …..
…….
Section 168 – Information about allocation scheme
(1) A local authority shall publish a summary of their allocation scheme and provide a copy of the summary free of charge to any member of the public who asks for one.
(2) The authority shall make the scheme available for inspection at their principle office and shall provide a copy of the scheme, on payment of a reasonable fee, to any member of the public who asks for one.
…….
Section 169 – Guidance to authorities by the Secretary of State
(1) In the exercise of their functions under this Part, local authorities shall have regard to such guidance as may from time to time be given by the Secretary of State.
(2) The Secretary of State may give guidance generally or to specified descriptions of authorities."
The defendant's allocation scheme
The defendant's current allocation scheme is its, "Housing allocation scheme 2015", (hereinafter "the 2015 scheme"). In the introduction, it explains the defendant's duty to give reasonable preference to certain categories of people, under section 166A(3) of the 1996 Act.
It also states under the sub-heading " Equalities" that,
"The council serves a diverse community, and is committed to meeting the needs of that community in the provision of housing allocation, by working in partnership with other housing providers.
The council will ensure that customers are treated fairly and equally, and that when allocating housing, ensure that the allocation policy does not discriminate against any particular group.
The implementation of a clear and consistent allocation scheme goes hand in hand with careful equalities monitoring. The data collected is used to ensure that the scheme is being operated in a fair and non-discriminatory manner, as well as for the purpose of regular equality impact assessments and subsequent improvements to service delivery.
…………"
Under the sub-heading " Discretionary powers" it states that,
"The allocation scheme cannot cover every eventuality. In special cases with exceptional needs, the Service Director for Housing Needs and Strategy has discretionary power to award additional priority and approve offers of housing, taking into consideration all factors relevant to housing and social needs."
Chapter 1 of the 2015 scheme, headed " Housing Register", states that whilst any person may apply to join the housing register, certain categories of people will be excluded, including those who have lived in Islington for less than three out of the previous five years from the date they apply for housing. However, it states that exceptions may be made, including applications from those who are homeless for whom the defendant has accepted that it has a long-term rehousing duty under Part VII of the 1996 Act.
The 2015 scheme goes onto explain that applicants are given points for housing need factors, which are cumulative in nature, and those with less than 100 points will not be included on the housing register. It then goes on to explain the factors for which points are awarded, together with the number of points awarded for each factor, which include:
i. 100 " Residence points" to everyone who has been resident in the borough for three out of the last five years.
ii. " Waiting time points" at the rate of 5% per year based upon the total number of points awarded to the applicant.
iii...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
EM and CM (a minor) by EM, her Mother and Next Friend, EM for Judicial Review v The Northern Ireland Housing Executive
...NIQB 105 at [84] – [94]; Re Turley [2013] NIQB 89 at [37] – [40]; R (HA) v Ealing LBC [2015] EWHC 2375 at [29]; R (C) v Islington LBC [2017] EWHC 1288 at [67]; and R (Osman) v LB Harlow [2017] EWHC 274 (Admin) at [42] and [65]. I shall consider these decisions infra. [37] The most recent de......