Housing Law - Homelessness has increased over the past years and now there is a major need for a reform in this area of the law.

Housing Law

LW2006

J. Virdee

Homelessness has increased over the past years and now there is a major need for a reform in this area of the law. Under s175 (1) of the 1996 Housing Act, ‘A person is homeless if has no accommodation in the UK or elsewhere’ (world-wide). There are many causes of homelessness. These include, low income, unemployment, relationship breakdown and lack of affordability. Furthermore the factor of domestic violence may also lead to a person becoming homeless, especially women. Moreover the gradual increase in the rent also adds to the problems. This creates a divide between the rich and the poor, where the poor are ‘punished for being poor’ as they are not financially capable of keeping up with the rising rent, thus only those who can afford the houses would be able to obtain them.

The amount of official homeless people has increased over the years, this is evident in the statistics. In the 1970’s 50,000 households were accepted as homeless compared to 120,000 in 1995. These statistics are however not surprising, because this was reasonably expected due to the lack of cheap, affordable housing and the decline of building of new council housing in 1970’s.

One of the problems with this area of law is that there is some difficulty in obtaining ‘accurate’ statistics number of homeless people. This is due to the reason that generally those with children or those seen to be vulnerable are legally eligeble for housing, thus they are the only groups that can be accurately accounted for in the figures which exclude other groups such as, single homeless people, who become mere estimates.

However the survey by the University of Surrey for the Salvation Army in 1989, was a welcomed piece of research, as it unlike previous researches on the homeless concentrated on single homeless people in London. The group defined homelessness as, ‘anyone living in insecure or short term accommodation’. The result of the research showed that there was 75,000 homeless people in London. Therefore this gave a clear picture of the problem at hand, and the alarming amount of homeless in London alone. The survey also showed that the homeless were to be found in, hostels and hotels, bed and breakfasts and Squatting. The survey stressed that 30,000 people were squatting in London alone, this further shows how complicated and alarming the problem of homelessness is.

There needs to a authoritative body that governs research into homelessness for each city in England, so that a true refection of the problem may be accurately provided, so that the problem can be tackled. The lack of research into the single homeless people can be seen as factor that has made most people ignorant at the seriousness of the problem, which is highlighted in the Surrey survey. it seems that there is injustice in the housing system, which may be another factor in the increasing homeless people, as it can bee seen in the Surrey survey.

In the case of Cocks v Thanet District Council, Lord Bridge, dismissed the appeal and in relation to the Housing Act 1997, stated that an applicant must fulfil the following three questions in order to be eligible for housing:

Is he homeless or threatened by homelessness?
If yes, has he a priority need?
If yes did he become homeless intentionally?

The Local authorities have to comply by the fourfold rule, when assessing an applicant. However the Local Authorities can face certain problems when there is a case of a person intentionally becoming homeless. In some cases it is argued that young women get impregnated, do that they can jump the queue, this is nothing but just opinions and has no real evidence to support it. Although there may be cases where individuals become intentionally homeless, however this may be difficult for the local authorities to prove.

Password

Confirm Password

I agree to the terms of service and privacy policy

This is a preview of the whole essay

With the introduction of the Housing Act 1997, it is proposed that the building of Council housing has declined from 160,000 to 120,000. This may be seen as adding further problems to the already difficult and complicated issue of homelessness. This is highlighted in the right to buy scheme, which had sales of £40 million. Instead of spending this sales money on tackling the problem of homelessness, by building new council homes, however the money is used to pay of local authority debts, with only a mere 25% of the money used for building new houses. This would seem rather ignorant of the government for not spending the money for building new houses, and the right to buy scheme are creating greater problems, where houses sold under the right to buy are not being replaced by new houses. Thus for the poor and the homeless it becomes a viscous cycle in which they have been caught in by the injustice housing system.

The main proposals that have been made in respect of the reform of this area of the Housing Law dealt with in this Module.

The Housing Green Paper is seen as the most comprehensive review of housing for 23 years. It offers everyone a decent home. All types of housing owned or rented or public are intended to deliver improvements in the quality and also give the people a choice in the type of house.

The affordability is also an issue, the local authority and the registered social Landlord are to provide affordable housing. Moreover there is help for individuals and families to meet the costs of housing, in the form of housing benefits.

To bring the worst council housing up to an acceptable standard it would cost around 19 billion. This empahsises the enormity of the problem at hand.

Moreover John Prescott wants to see improvements in the quality of the housing, irrelevant of who provides the housing. The idea of giving people a real choice of home is also recognised by Mr Prescott.

The government has also promoted a stronger role for local authorities, when dealing with housing. The local authorities are encouraged to work along with local community group and registered landlords. The local authorities have been given a greater role in dealing with housing.

However these goals can only be reached if conditions and quality of housing improves in both public and private sector. Also to deal with problems of difficulties face when buying or selling a house.

If all these propositions are taken seriously and correctly followed then there is hope that the great problem of homelessness would be on the right track being tackled in a successful way to an extent.

Work plan 2

The following are the types of tenancy agreements that are excluded in the section 1 of the 1988 Act:

(i) Tenancies created before Act
(ii) tenancies of property of high rateable value (note the position with regard to Council Tax)
(iii) tenancies where no rent paid
(iv) business tenancies
(v) licensed premises
(vi) tenancies with 2 acres of agricultural land included
(vii) agricultural holdings
(viii) student lets
(ix) holiday lets
(x) resident landlords

Types of tenancy

Fixed-term tenancy

This type of tenancy is very common. A written lease usually creates this type of tenancy. However, the lease does not have to be in writing if the tenancy is for a period of less than a year.

Periodic tenancy

This is a tenancy that continues for successive periods of the same length for an indefinite amount of time. The most common is a month – to – month rental agreement. A periodic tenancy may be defined in terms of any period

Assured Shorthold Tenancy

This is the most common type of tenancy given by private landlords. Any new tenancy created where there is no written agreement is an assured short hold tenancy. An assured Shorthold tenancy is basically an assured tenancy but with some important differences. An assured Shorthold gives the landlord additional grounds to evict you because at the end of the fixed term period s/he can get permission to repossess the property with a court order without the tenant breaching any terms of the contract.

Changes that have been brought about by the 1996 Act in respect of Assured Shorthold Tenancies:

Section 96 inserts a new s19A into the Housing Act 1988 providing for a new type of assured Shorthold where it will no longer be a requirement to serve a notice of assured Shorthold tenancy before the commencement of such a tenancy. All assured tenancies entered into on or after 28th February 1997 will automatically be an assured Shorthold tenancy unless a notice is served or provision is made in the tenancy agreement stating that the tenancy is not to be an assured Shorthold tenancy.

There is no minimum time period for granting an assured Shorthold tenancy, although a landlord cannot recover possession within six months of the start of an assured Shorthold tenancy. A landlord cannot obtain a court order for possession even if the fixed term is for less than six months, unless the tenants are in breach of their tenancy agreement for some other reason (e.g. rent arrears).

What protections are there from eviction?

Part IV of the 1988 Act extends protection already available to most tenants and most licensees under the PROTECTION FROM EVICTION ACT 1977.

Phil Jew in an article in The Advisor (December 1993) gives a number of examples of behaviour that may amount to harassment:

* Refusing to allow access to parts of the accommodation
* Constant or late night visits from the landlord or landlord's agent
* Entering the tenant's home without permission or interfering with post
* Allowing the property to get into such a bad state of disrepair that it is dangerous or uncomfortable
* Starting building works and leaving them unfinished or sending in builders at unsociable hours
* Removing or restricting services such as hot water or heating or failing to pay bills so that services are cut off
* Moving in "stooge" tenants who deliberately cause nuisance
* Harassment due to the tenant's gender, race or sexuality
* Forcing tenants to sign agreements which reduce their rights
* Giving a tenant a groundless or unenforceable notice to quit
* Threats or use of physical or mental violence

An illegal eviction is any eviction not in accordance with the law and examples would include:

* Changing the locks whilst the tenant is out and putting the tenant's possessions on the street
* Physically removing the tenant from the premises

A tenant can take action against harassment and illegal eviction through civil and the criminal law. Criminal and civil actions may be pursued at the same time.

The 1977 Act protects all "residential occupiers" from harassment and illegal eviction until their rights of occupation have been properly ended (Section 1).

A "residential occupier" includes any tenant or licensee who occupies under a contract or with statutory protection and includes excluded tenants and licensees until the agreement ends. Thus tenants with resident landlords are included within the definition.

It is a criminal offence to unlawfully evict and deprive a tenant of his/her occupation of the whole or any part of his/her home, or attempts to do so.

Unless there is reasonable cause to believe that the tenant had ceased to live the, there is no other defence for unlawful eviction.

Harassment is also a criminal offence and is where the landlord does anything likely to interfere with the peace and comfort of an occupier or persistently withdraws or withholds services.

It is an offence if the landlord knows or has reasonable cause to believe the acts of harassment are likely to cause the tenant to leave or not to use his/her rights (Section 1).

It should be noted that it is not necessary to prove what the landlord's actual intentions are, only that he/she ought to have known the consequences of the harassment. This is illustrated in the case of Dowkes v Athelstone (1992) All ER 121.

However there has been changes brought about by the 1988 Act:

Section 27 applies after 9.6.89. and deals with the liability for damages for unlawful eviction. This is an important change.

It only applies in cases where the landlord has attempted to unlawfully deprive the residential occupier of the tenancy or behaves in a way likely to cause the residential occupier to leave etc.

The following are the defences available for landlords if an action is taken:

that the landlord had reasonable cause to believe that the occupier had left and;
(b) that the landlord had reasonable grounds for their actions

Section 28 provides that damages will be assessed on the difference between vacant possession and tenanted market value.

Section 29 and 30 amend Protection From Eviction Act 1977 by:

Creating a new criminal offence
extending protection to licences

However certain tenancies and licences are excluded from protection under Section 31:

where occupier shares any accommodation with owner or owner's family in the owner's only or principal home;
where the occupier shares any accommodation with a member of the owner's family, where that family member lived in the whole or some part of the premises at beginning and end of tenancy/licence;

AND

the owner also occupied as his/her only or principal home premises in the same building as the accommodation shared.

However this does not apply in the case of a purpose built block of flats.

(c) where the occupier gained access as a trespasser;
(d) where the let is for a holiday;
(e) where the occupier is a non- paying guest;
(f) where the accommodation is a hostel provided by a public sector landlord.

Recent cases in this area:

Grocia v Flint, Flint and Doyle (1992)

Landlords removed all tenant's belongings and re-let the room at a higher rent. Judge ordered damages totally £15,829

Uckuzular v Sandford-Hill (1994) CLW 37/94

. The court awarded general damages of £100, aggravated damages of £650 and special damages of £9.

Kuik & Baker v Cook (1994) CLW 37/94

The court awarded general damages of £500 and aggravated damages of £250 to each tenant.

Burke v Benoit (1995) CLW 2/95

After an illegal eviction the tenant was awarded damages of £100 a day for two months of homelessness, exemplary damages of £1,500, aggravated damages of £250 and damages for trespass to goods of £500.

Thus, there is protection for tenants and, any unreasonable behaviour by the landlord, mar result in him being liable to be sued.

Work plan 3

Under s11 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985, all landlords are obliged to repair,

‘The structure and exterior of the dwelling- house (including drains, gutters and external pipes)’

This covenant was reinforced in the case of Laskey v Webb (1993). Where the house was declared unfit by the council. The tenants were then awarded a total of £4,477 in damages.

However there is an alarming number of houses in England are unfit for human habitation in relation to the statutory criteria amended by the local Government and the Housing Act 1989. The area that is effected the worst is the private sector, where such properties are unfit, where in some cases the properties are of less value and old houses.

So it could be argued that under s10 of the 1985 Act these houses are below the standard required, thus unfit for human habitation. The standard of the fitness of the property is required to be that of ‘ the ordinary reasonable man ‘, per Hall v Manchester Corporation (1915).

The issue of repairs is not well structured out in this area of the law. Although the Housing Act 1996 states the duties and powers of local authorities, however it fails to cast an eye on the repairs of a property, of which the landlord is under an obligation to do. Although landlords are not expected to repair any intentional damage caused by the tenant, or repair the tenant’s own furniture, yet there needs to be strict guideline for the repairing of a property. Which may be in a bad state.

All properties must be fit for human habitation, and the Government, must stay inline with its promises on housing and deal with the housing and the issue of repairs.

Conclusion

Having completed this module, I have realised my complete ignorance on the area of housing law and in particular the great problem of homelessness.The viscous circle of homelessness is a complex issue, where the poor who are once trapped in it, may remain in it. The Government have failed to live up to their pre election promises, during elections housing is the hot subject for the political parties, as it is a vote buyer. However once elected the promises concerning development of the housing problems including homelessness are forgotten.

There are not enough houses being built, and yet the green built is ever increasing. The preservation of the green belt is in danger, but the need for housing is greater then ever. Thus prompting the house prices and rents going sky high. This would only increase the number of homeless as poor cannot afford housing at the present prices, thus for the poor it’s going back to square one. The proposed 19 billion is no where near the amount needed. Although development of inner city homes, can be seen as a positive. However it does not get rid of the huge problem of homelessness, where the poor are trapped in the vicious cycle of life.