The Supreme Court has ruled that local authorities have a statutory duty to provide accommodation in "so far as reasonably practicable" under section 208(1) of the Housing Act 1996.
The case was taken by Titina Nzolameso, a single mother of five children. Ms. Nzolameso has long standing health problems including HIV. The introduction of a cap on Local Housing Allowance in 2012 resulted in her family's eviction from a privately rented four bedroom house in November 2012.
Following the family's eviction, Ms. Nzolameso applied to Westminster City Council under the homelessness provision of the 1996 Act. The family were temporarily housed in a hotel in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea on a bed and breakfast basis.
On January 24th, 2013, the Council offered Ms. Nzolameso temporary accommodation in Bletchley, near Milton Keynes, due to "a severe shortage of accommodation in Westminster".
When Ms. Nzolameso rejected the offer, the Council issued a letter headed "Notice that our housing duty has come to an end" under section 193(5) of the 1996 Act. Ms. Nzolameso appealed, however the appeal to the reviewing decisions officer was rejected. This was followed by unsuccessful appeals to the London Central County Court in October 2013, and the Court of Appeal in October 2014. After being refused judicial review of the County Court ruling, the Council stopped providing temporary accommodation. Subsequently, Ms. Nzolameso, after the Children's Services Department refused to accommodate the whole family, asked the Department to provide the children with accommodation.
In a unanimous Supreme Court judgment, Lady Hale found that:
There is little to suggest that serious consideration was given to the authorities obligations before the decision was taken to offer the property in Bletchley. At that stage, the temporary lettings team knew little more than what was on the homelessness application form. This did not ask any questions aimed at assessing how practicable it would be for the family to move out of the area. Nor were any inquires made to see whether school places would be available in Bletchley and what [Ms. Nzolameso's] particular medical conditions required.
Therefore, Lady Hale concluded, the Council still owed Ms. Nzolameso a duty to secure accommodation.
Lady Hale also set out guidelines. The first guideline provides that every local authority have "a policy for proving sufficient units of temporary accommodation" to meet the anticipated annual demand. The second guideline provides that every local authority have a policy for the allocation of those units to individual homeless households. Moreover, where a shortage is anticipated in Borough Units, the policy should outline the factors taken into account in offering units close to home, and the factors that would make it suitable to accommodate a household further away. Both policies should be kept up to date and made publicly available.
Finally, Lady Hale rejected the standard paragraph used in the letter purportedly explaining the reviewing officer's decision. However, Lady Hale did not set out any guidelines for local authorities to ensure that their decisions are evidenced and explained properly.
