Challenge to 'bedroom tax' over impact on sanctuary schemes gets go-ahead

A High Court judge has given permission for a judicial review challenge to the under-occupation provisions on housing benefit – or ‘bedroom tax’ – and their impact upon women living in ‘Sanctuary Schemes’.

His Honour Judge Anthony Thornton QC rejected arguments from the Department for Work and Pensions that the claim should be dismissed. The hearing is expected to take place between 1 October and 19 December this year.

According to her lawyers, law firm Hopkin Murray Beskine and Doughty Street Chambers, the claimant (‘A’) is a victim of rape, assault, harassment and stalking at the hands of an ex-partner.

She argues that the changes introduced in April 2013 to the housing benefit regulations are discriminatory and will have "devastating consequences" for her and her young son.

A and her son live in a three-bedroom home adapted for them by the police, because her life and physical safety are at risk. The adaptations include a ‘panic space’ and a specialist ‘sanctuary system’ with reinforced doors and electric alarms.

Under the revised regulations they are only able to receive housing benefit for a two-bedroom property. A has been told that her benefit will be reduced by 14% in accordance with those regulations.

A’s lawyers will argue that the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has failed to take into account the disproportionate impact of the ‘bedroom tax’ upon victims of domestic violence, who are overwhelmingly women, and in particular those in Sanctuary Scheme homes.

They said that – following FOI responses from 79 councils – almost 1 in 20 households using the Sanctuary Scheme for people at risk of severe domestic violence had been affected by the under-occupancy penalty or bedroom tax.  This amounts to 281 households in total across the country. 

Rebekah Carrier, the solicitor at Hopkin Murray Beskine acting for ‘A,’ said: “These changes to housing benefit are having a catastrophic impact upon vulnerable people across the country. Our client’s life is at risk and she is terrified. She lives in a property which has been specially adapted by the police, at great expense, to protect her and her child.

“It is ridiculous that she is now being told she must move to another property (where she will not have any of these protections) or else take in a lodger. She is a vulnerable single parent who has been a victim of rape and assault. The Secretary of State cannot seriously suggest that it is appropriate for her to take a stranger into her home.”