Councils have been advised to ‘urgently’ review guidelines after a single mother of five won a legal battle against attempts to re-locate her 50 miles from her home.
Titina Nzolameso’s victory against Westminster City Council at the Supreme Court is expected to impact on the approach town halls take to re-locating homeless residents.
Ms Nzolameso lived in a privately rented property in Westminster in the four years to 2012 but was forced to leave after the Government’s benefits cap made her rent unaffordable. While the local authority offered Ms Nzolameso a residence in Bletchley, Milton Keynes, she turned down the house claiming it was too far from local family support and would require new schools for her children.
When the offer was refused, Westminster informed her its legal duty to accommodate her had ended. Ms Nzolameso appealed the decision after she was left homeless and her children taken into care.
The Supreme Court has now quashed the local authority’s decision, advising other town halls that they have a statutory duty to provide local residence ‘so far as reasonably practicable’.
The court’s deputy president Lady Hale said there was ‘little to suggest that serious consideration was given to the authority’s obligations before the decision was taken to offer the property in Bletchley’.
She added the temporary lettings team ‘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 inquiries made to see whether school places would be available in Bletchley and what the appellant’s particular medical conditions required… There was no indication of the accommodation available in Westminster and why that had not been offered to her’.
Following the ruling, Ms Nzolameso said: ‘I am very happy with today’s outcome and delighted to be reunited with my children after a long legal battle’.
‘Naturally, I am pleased that my case will now set an important precedent for homelessness applicants across the UK who are faced with important decisions (often on very short notice) to move far away from the authority or district they apply to for housing,’ she added.
Ms Nzolameso’s solicitor, Jayesh Kunwardia of Hodge Jones & Allen, said: ‘Westminster, like other councils, is under great financial pressure and I would urge politicians on the campaign trail to take note and think long and hard about council and social housing funding; budget cuts will not be tolerated by the courts as an excuse to move homeless families miles away from their friends and support networks. The court has issued very clear guidance today for local authorities.
‘Figures from the Department for Communities and Local Government show that there were over 15,000 homeless households in out of borough temporary accommodation, an increase of 123% in three years. So this decision will give hope to many of those offered accommodation out of their current district and will put the onus on local authorities to be transparent about their decisions in such cases.’
Daniel Astaire, Westminster council’s cabinet member for housing and regeneration, said: ‘We are disappointed with the ruling, as the court of appeal had previously upheld the council’s decision on this individual case from 2012. Nevertheless, we are already taking on board what the court has said and we will continue to review our procedures, and make any necessary changes to the way in which decisions are explained to applicants.
