City acted illegally in putting people in unsuitable homes

Council loses High Court challenge

THE Court of Appeal has upheld a ruling that Birmingham City Council acted illegally in leaving tenants in unsuitable housing while it looked for alternative accommodation.

In a landmark judgment, Lord Justice Lewis dismissed the council’s challenge to an original judgment, and reasserted the conclusion that the council was in breach of the 1996 Housing Act.

Last April, the High Court ruled the council “had been operating an unlawful system for the performance of its main housing duty” by leaving tenants in unsuitable housing.

The judgment was brought forward by four claimants living in temporary accommodation the council itself acknowledged was unsuitable. Nonetheless they had remained there for more than a year.

Each of the claimants had at some point been placed on the council’s ‘planned move list’, without a realistic time frame of how long they would be expected to wait for suitable accommodation.

One claimant, Mr Elkundi, suffered from osteoarthritis. He and his family had been living in temporary accommodation since 2015, which was spread over two floors.

The family had to climb four flights of external stairs to reach the entrance.

In January 2020, a review officer employed at the council confirmed

to Mr Elkundi his accommodation was unsuitable on mobility grounds. He was told he had been placed on Birmingham’s “planned move list” and told to wait.

Another claimant, Mr Ahmed, was a single parent who lived with his seven children. Two were identified as severely disabled. The family was placed in three-bedroom temporary accommodation in March 2019, but was so overcrowded that four of the children shared one bedroom.

Mr Ahmed was forced to postpone surgery for his disabled daughter because she would be unable to safely recover in the temporary accommodation.

Similar to Mr Elkundi, a review officer wrote to Mr Ahmed stating his accommodation was unsuitable on the basis of overcrowding, and was told that he would be placed on the “planned move list” but was not given further details.

Mrs Ross, the third claimant, had multiple complex disabilities and required accommodation that would allow her to use her powered wheelchair.

The council placed her in a temporary two-bedroom bungalow. While it offered a secure tenancy to Mrs Ross in light of adaptations to the property, in October 2020, the review officer notified Mrs Ross that the accommodation was “unsuitable”.

Lord Justice Lewis concluded: “The conclusion that Birmingham was in breach of its section 193(2) duty in three of the cases in this appeal was the result of the fact that Birmingham had already accepted that the respondents’ current accommodation was unsuitable.

“The system operated by Birmingham of placing persons to whom the section 193(2) duty was owed on a waiting list until suitable accommodation became available was unlawful.”