Social housing case round-up

Sarah Pearson analyses some of the key cases affecting social housing, including two rulings on under-occupation.

Reading BC v Holt

It is always a contentious decision to seek to move a resident who is under-occupying but has lived in a property for a long time. It is essential for you to use your stock in the best way you can. This case concerned a three bedroomed property. Ms Holt had lived there her whole life.

She had succeeded to the secure tenancy after acting as sole carer for her mother prior to her death in 2010. In 2011, the landlord decided Ms Holt was under-occupying and asked her to apply for smaller accommodation but she refused. The landlord sought possession under ground 16 of Schedule 2 to the HA 1985. A possession order was made but Ms Holt appealed.

The Court of Appeal dismissed her appeal deciding that:

• there was no evidence that Ms Holt's mental health would be affected if she was required to move;
• three bed homes were in high demand in the area and the court was required to balance the needs of both landlord and tenant;
• the court had been entitled to grant a conditional order, stating that the possession order would become final within 28 days of a formal binding offer of suitable alternative accommodation being made (which was within 1.5 miles of the existing property and had bike storage). The court had been satisfied that suitable accommodation would be available when the order took effect.

Comment: This situation is one that many landlords will encounter. The Court of Appeal showed sympathy for Ms Holt but the county court had been correct to order possession. However, the Court did warn that courts should carefully consider whether a conditional order is necessarily the best option.

Birmingham CC v Beech

Norman Warren and his wife, Rita, had a joint tenancy of a three bed property. When Mr Warren died, Rita succeeded to the tenancy. Janet Beech was one of Mr and Mrs Warren's daughters. She lived at the property until she married in 1970. Her marriage ended and she moved back for a few months in 2005 before moving out again. Janet Beech married again but she returned to live with her mother in 2007 when she and her husband were looking for their own accommodation. In October 2009 Mrs Warren went into hospital and then moved into a care home. In February 2010 she signed a notice to quit (NTQ). She died in June 2010. The Council sought possession.

A possession order was made despite Beech's suggestion that Mrs Warren had been unduly influenced to sign a NTQ. A human rights challenge by Mrs Beech was also rejected. The court felt it would be disproportionate to allow Beech to remain in a three bed house which was too big for her needs and which would go against the Council's allocation policy.

Comment: This is a welcome decision for landlords but one which highlights the issues when asking residents, who have moved to care homes, to end their tenancies. It is essential to keep good records of your decision making and also of your communications with residents when inviting them to end long held tenancies. You should keep attendance notes of conversations and ask someone from the care home to be present when you discuss these matters with your tenant.

Viridian Housing v Zamanian

The landlord served a section 21 notice on the assured shorthold tenant on 28 March 2012. The notice gave the date for giving up possession as 9 June 2012 but it also included a "saving clause". The date provided by the saving clause was 2 June 2012. Both dates were valid. Which should prevail? The landlord did not issue proceedings until after 9 June 2012.

The District Judge found that the landlord should not be prejudiced for providing two dates when they were both valid. He noted that the landlord had waited until the expiry of the later of the two dates before issuing proceedings. A possession order was made.

Comment: An unusual case perhaps, but the right result. If in doubt with your own dates for section 21 notices, always seek a second opinion. A few minutes to double check will save you valuable time and money.

John Boyd v Incommunities Ltd

Following an appeal by the tenant against the making of a possession order, the Court of Appeal has now confirmed that a possession order can be made even when much of the evidence submitted was given anonymously by neighbours. The judge had satisfactorily considered the reliability of the evidence.

Comment: This is great news for those endeavouring to build cases where there is ASB but neighbours are reluctant to come forward.

Sarah Pearson is an associate at Blake Lapthorn. She can be contacted on 023 8085 7002 or by This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..