One of our caseworkers recently helped a client who presented as homeless to the Housing Executive after losing his tenancy.
Asking for a review of a negative homeless decision requires expert advice. Housing Rights caseworkers have specialist experience in appealing these decisions.
Speak to our advisers if you’re supporting someone who gets a negative homeless decision.
Eviction from supported accommodation
Mark was a tenant in supported accommodation. He has a complex mental health condition and has been under the care of a psychiatrist for some time.
Mark’s tenancy broke down when he experienced a decline in his mental health. After a serious incident with a member of staff, he was asked to leave his accommodation.
Negative homeless decision
Mark’s care team felt that he would cope best in a home in the community with a care package. They asked the Housing Executive to assess him under homeless legislation.
They asked the Housing Executive to take his poor mental health into account when considering the incident that led to the end of the tenancy. However, the Housing Executive decided that Mark’s behaviour was deliberate.
They found him intentionally homeless and decided he was not a full duty applicant. This means the Housing Executive did not have a duty to provide him with accommodation.
Getting the right help
Mark’s social worker contacted Housing Rights for advice on how to appeal the Housing Executive’s decision. Our helpline explained the:
- homeless review process
- the right to request a county court appeal if a review is unsuccessful
Our advisers explained that requesting a review of a negative homeless decision can be complicated. The Housing Executive rarely changes its decision without more information and new evidence. Reviews need to include legal arguments based on:
- case law precedent and
- relevant homeless legislation
If a review is unsuccessful, the person can appeal to the County Court. However, there are strict circumstances when an appeal is allowed. A County Court appeal is also very expensive and legal aid is not always available to help with the costs.
Our helpline explained to Mark’s social worker that our casework team had the right experience and expertise to support Mark in challenging this decision. Working together on Mark’s case would give him the best chance at successfully appealing the Housing Executive’s decision.
Mark gave Housing Rights permission to act on his behalf. He also agreed that his care team could share relevant information about his mental health.
Intentionality test for homelessness
The Housing Executive does not have a duty to provide accommodation to someone who is intentionally homeless.
The Housing Executive will decide a person is intentionally homeless if they have:
- deliberately done or failed to do something, and
- because of this, they no longer occupy accommodation that was available to them
The Housing Executive must consider if an act that led to becoming homeless was deliberate.
The Housing Executive decided that Mark had deliberately taken part in anti social behaviour and this was the reason he was evicted.
Were Mark’s actions deliberate?
Housing Rights gathered evidence from Mark’s care team. After looking at the evidence, we felt that Mark’s actions had not been deliberate and were a direct result of his mental health diagnosis.
Mark’s psychiatrist and social worker provided evidence of his mental health difficulties. The evidence showed that Mark’s behaviour was outside of his control.
We requested a review of the Housing Executive’s decision that Mark was intentionally homeless.
Was Mark discriminated against because of a disability?
As part of the review, Housing Rights argued that NIHE had not acted in line with The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA).
DDA defines a disability as:
“a physical or mental impairment which has substantial and long-term adverse effect on a person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities”.
Mark’s diagnosis means that he is a person with a disability. DDA protects Mark from being discriminated against because of this disability. The Housing Executive must make reasonable adjustments to make it easier for disabled people to access housing.
There was no evidence that the Housing Executive made reasonable adjustments for Mark.
Overturning the negative homeless decision
The review request was successful, and the Housing Executive overturned its original decision. He is now accepted as a full duty applicant. This means that the Housing Executive has a duty to provide him with accommodation.
Mark is now on the waiting list with full duty applicant status. He is living in temporary housing arranged by NIHE, where he will stay until he finds a new permanent home.
Get specialist help with negative homeless decisions
It is important that someone with a negative homeless decision gets expert help as soon as possible.
If you, or someone you are supporting, needs help with a negative homeless decision, contact our helpline for advice.
Kate McCauley — Chief Executive