Section: Homelessness & Asylum Seekers

Council Acted on Applicant's Information

Ms Lomotey jointly owned the flat she lived in with her brother. She made an application to Enfield Council for housing, but was refused because of this owner's interest. A year later, Ms Lomotey gave up her interest in the flat, and her brother issued her with a Notice to Quit.

Ms Lomotey made an application to Enfield Council for housing assistance for her and her children (she was separated from their father). She advised the Council that she had agreed with her brother serving the Notice to Quit, as it would help her to get rehoused as homeless. Later she told the Council the flat had been overcrowded.

Consequently, the Council decided Ms Lomotey had become homeless intentionally. Ms Lomotey requested a review. She said she had not asked her brother to serve the Notice to Quit and claimed the flat had not been suitable because the father was unable to live with her there. The original decision was upheld at review.

The Court of Appeal upheld the finding of intentional homelessness, deciding that the Council had been correct to rely on the information it had been given by the applicant.

Lomotey v Enfield Council

B&B Targets Reinforced

The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 came into force on 1 April 2004.

Under the Order, local authorities are no longer able to place families with children in B&B for longer than six weeks. Authorities that fail to comply with the Order may be subject to review and then challenge in the civil courts.

The Order does not apply where authorities are housing a family under a discretionary power, e.g. during a review or appeal against a decision.

Emergency Accommodation Not Provided

A housing advice group complained to the Ombudsman on behalf of a young man, who had been evicted from his home, about the way Teignbridge DC dealt with his homelessness application. The Advice Agency complained that the Council:

failed to provide emergency accommodation while making enquiries;
ignored information provided; and
did not answer queries.

The Ombudsman decided:

The Council had failed to make reasonable enquiries into whether there was a need for emergency accommodation and the reasons for homelessness. As a result, the complainant was roofless for three nights.
Although it could not be concluded that the decision on the homelessness application would have been different, the complainant suffered injustice in that he had no way of knowing whether the decision would have been different. He had a justifiable sense of grievance that things had not been done properly.

The Ombudsman recommended that the Council review its procedures, meet with the complainant to consider what practical assistance it could offer him in his search for settled accommodation, and pay him compensation of £300.

Report No. 02/B/15772

Shelter at Night a Human Right

The Government announced that asylum seekers, who have been refused accommodation and support under section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration & Asylum Act and are applying to have their cases reviewed, must be provided with emergency accommodation.

Section 55, which denies support to any asylum seeker who fails to make a claim as soon as is reasonably practicable - and within three days after arriving in the country - is now being reviewed. This follows a Court of Appeal ruling that shelter of some form from the elements at night is a basic amenity.

The case was brought by the Home Secretary, in an attempt to reverse a previous High Court ruling that the Government had a duty to provide shelter to destitute asylum seekers. The original case was brought by three asylum seekers - Wayoka Limbuela, Binyam Tefera Tesema, and Yusif Adam - all of whom were ineligible for state aid, including housing, having failed to claim asylum status within the section 55 time limit.

The Home Office was reported to be considering an appeal to the House of Lords.

New Regulations

The Allocation of Housing and Homelessness (Amendment)(England) Regulations 2004 SI 1235

This took effect on 1 May 2004, being the date of accession of ten additional States to the European Union: Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia.

The Regulations support a policy of opening up the UK labour market immediately to workers from all ten of the new Accession States, while trying to ensure that this does not lead to additional inappropriate demands on the social welfare system.

The Regulations provide that:
- Nationals of EEA countries whose only right to reside here is conditional on them being self-sufficient and not becoming an unreasonable burden on the host State will be ineligible for local authority housing and homelessness assistance. This will include nationals from the new accession states who are subject to the Home Office Worker Registration Scheme, while they are looking for work.
- Other EEA nationals, who previously have had to be habitually resident here in order to be eligible for housing and homelessness assistance, can in future only be treated as habitually resident if they have a right to reside here.
  
  As before, those EEA nationals genuinely working here will continue to be eligible for local authority council housing and homelessness assistance. This will include nationals from the new accession states if they are registered with the Worker Registration Scheme and are genuinely working.
- The Homelessness etc. (Scotland) Act 2003 (Commencement No. 2) Order 2004 SI 288 (C.18)
© Copyright 1996 - 2012 UK Housing Ltd.

Section: Homelessness & Asylum Seekers

Council Acted on Applicant's Information

B&B Targets Reinforced

Emergency Accommodation Not Provided

Shelter at Night a Human Right

New Regulations

Legal Update

Reporting on April-June 2004

Quick Links

Welcome to the Legal Update

Archive Issues Reporting Periods