ZRR, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Bexley
[2024] EWHC 2073 (Admin)
Rebecca Pickford, R (on the application of) v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council
12 April 2024
[2024] EWHC 756 (Admin)
High Court
A mother and son were stuck in a bad hotel room for too long after losing their home. The law says families shouldn't stay in such places for more than 6 weeks. The council broke that rule, but because they promised a better place soon, the judge didn't force them to move right away.
Key Facts
- •Rebecca Pickford and her 9-year-old son, C, were placed in B&B accommodation (Saffron Hotel) after being evicted from their flat on October 9, 2023.
- •They remained in the B&B for 26 weeks, despite the council's 6-week limit for B&B accommodation for families.
- •C has allergies and eczema, impacting the suitability of the B&B.
- •The council did not make a decision on Pickford's homelessness application until April 4, 2024, after a draft judgment was circulated.
- •The council found Pickford intentionally homeless due to the condition of her flat and rent arrears; this is under review.
Legal Principles
Suitability of accommodation for homeless families under the Housing Act 1996 and the Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003.
Housing Act 1996, Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003
Mandatory orders for providing non-B&B accommodation after B&B accommodation becomes unsuitable.
R(Imam) v Croydon BC [2024] HLR 6
Public Sector Equality Duty under the Equality Act 2010 in relation to providing suitable accommodation.
Equality Act 2010, s.149
Duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children under the Children Act 2004.
Children Act 2004, s.11
Definition of 'homeless' under the Housing Act 1996.
Housing Act 1996, s.175
The concept of 'intentional homelessness' under the Housing Act 1996.
Housing Act 1996, s.191
Duties of local housing authorities under the Housing Act 1996 in investigating and deciding homelessness applications.
Housing Act 1996, s.184
The meaning of 'suitability' of accommodation under the Housing Act 1996.
Housing Act 1996, s.206, s.210
Judicial review as a remedy of last resort.
R(Glencore) v HMRC [2017] 4 WLR 213 (CA)
Outcomes
The claim succeeded on Ground 1 (breach of duty to provide suitable interim accommodation).
The court found that the 2003 Order applied, deeming B&B accommodation unsuitable after six weeks for families. The council had not taken all reasonable steps to secure alternative accommodation despite the 26-week stay.
Grounds 2 and 3 (breach of Equality Act 2010 and Children Act 2004) failed.
Insufficient evidence to prove the child was disabled under the Equality Act; the council considered the child's health needs when making the accommodation decision and was actively working to address the broader housing shortage.
No mandatory order was made.
Although the council was in breach of its duty, the court considered the council’s efforts to increase housing availability and the agreement to move Pickford and C into suitable accommodation by April 22, 2024.
Similar Cases
SA, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
[2023] EWHC 1787 (Admin)
SK, R (on the application of) v Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead
[2024] EWHC 158 (Admin)
Sabhya Bano, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Waltham Forest
[2024] EWHC 654 (Admin)
Amina Ahamed, R (on the application of) v London Borough of Haringey
[2023] EWCA Civ 975