Housing help needed

[debbieg1984]

I dont know if i am in the right place or if any1 can help me but im looking for some advice in regards to my local housing association..... I am currently in emergency accomodation and have been accepted by the council as homeless, they have contacted me today and told em that they have found what they deem to be suitable accomodation for myself and my children, i have 4 children under the age of 7 and am currently 21wks pregnant and am classed as high risk as i also have problems with my lungs(i am waiting for a major operation at papworth hospital) the property that they have identified as suitable for me is in an area where i dont know and have no immediate family or friends, i have spoken to my health visitor, midwife and gp who have stated that with my pregnancy and medical condition i need to be placed in an area where i have immediate family so that i have a support network around me, i have contacted my housing association and explained this and have told them i can get the health professionals to put it in writing..to which i was told would make no difference, also 2 of my children attend school in the area where i have immediate family and once my baby is born i wil no longer be able to get them to school as it is not within walking distance and im not in a financial position to be able to buy a 7seater car in the near future...1 of my children that attends school is suspected ADHD and we r currently under a paediatrician who wants to start him on medication for behaviour problems, i have told the housing association of my inability to get my children to their school if i move to the property they hav allocated me and their responce was that i will need to remove my children from their current school and place them at a school nearer to the new property..i feel that this would be too much disruption to my son and believe that it will affect his behaviour... as he is having the disruption of moveing from pillar to post at home and school is the only stability he has at present..the council have refused to take this into consideration aswell stating that he will get over it!! they have told me that they are only "offering" this property to me...i cant see how as they have said if i refuse it they will discharge their duty to me and i will have to leave the emergency accomodation and they will not help me...so in other words if i refuse they r going to kick me out..how is that offering me, i see that as forcing me, does any1 know if i have any rights on this, as the council have said that i have to meet with them on this coming monday morning and sign the paperwork to accept the property, i understand that there is limited properties available( they r offering me private rented accomodation at a very high rent price) but they are not meeting my medical and social needs which are backed by health professionals yet they r saying that it is suitable accomodation on the basis that it has 3 bedrooms.....any ideas or advice would be very much appreciated, thanku

[Guest Old_andrew2018]

because of the urgency of your thread can I suggest you click on the red triangle , there is one uner every post

This opens a dialogue box in which you could leave a message for the site team asking if they could direct people with expertise to your thread.

[debbieg1984]

thanku, will do that now

[IdaInFife]

with your metting being on Monday there isnlt much advice i can give. I would normally have advised you to get you mp involved due to the circumstances but as you regarded as homeless then they have to offer suitable accomadation (no of bedrooms) in the area you chose and if none are availabel then a wider area is accpetable.

 

you can give shelter a call 0808 800 4444 who should be able to give you the best advice for Monday

[ErikaPNP]

Under the Housing Act 1996 (as amended by the Homelessness Act 2002) the council has to ensure, that when allocating housing, reasonable preference is given to certain groups of people, one of which is people who need to move to a particular locality in the district of the authority, where failure to meet that need would cause hardship (to themselves or to others).

 

I place emphasis on the word "reasonable preference". The council are not under strict obligation to offer you a property in your preferred location. They should give reasonable preference to you if not doing so would cause hardship.

 

Firstly, the council needs to establish whether you fall into the above category. You and your health professionals may think so, but ultimately, it is the council's who determine this.

 

If they have accepted that you fall within that category, they need to establish if there are any properties in your preferred location which would meet your family's needs. For example, there could be several properties but if they all have only one or two bedrooms they would not be considered suitable properties for your situation.

 

Thirdly, the council has a long drawn out list. There may be other people on that list who fall into the same category as you and need the same area as you. Those whose needs are the greatest (in order of the points system) will be the people who are offered the accomodation first and foremost.

 

They can only meet your medical and social needs if there are properties available to you, and you come before anyone else in the points system for that particular area. If they are unable to offer a property in the area, they will offer you another property which meets your needs in accordance of the type of property and number of bedrooms and have therefore fulfilled their obligations to you.

 

They are within their rights to give you a penalty if you refuse a property, such as moving you down the list - the policy on this varies from council to council.

 

They are also correct in regards to your child's schooling. Local authority education is based on the catchment area, so your child's current school can refuse to educate him if he no longer resides within the catchment area, and the school that is within the catchment area would have to educate him. Although his current school may allow him to stay. Most do, but can later refuse if his place is required by someone within the area.

 

You can write to the council and ask if they consider you to fall into the category, and if they don't consider that you do, to provide their reasons for this in writing. You can then take this to the housing charity Shelter who can see if there is any way of challenging it, to get you into another property in your preferred area if one becomes available.

 

However if you do not have time to do this and are going to be discharged from them, I think your best option would be to accept the property and then register on the council exchange list for your preferred location.

[debbieg1984]

thanku for ur advice, i have tried contacting shelter, its constantly saying all their advisors are busy but i think what u quoted at the top of ur msg will be a lot of help, as when i applied to the housing association they did say that i fell into that category..i am also band 2(1 of the highest banding here)and i do know that there are a lot of properties in the area i requested that are available, the housing association operate a choice based letting scheme here.

As i stated at the beginning of my thread they have told me that i have to attend a meeting with them at 10am monday morning to agree and sign the paperwork for this property...they were meant to contact me yesterday afternoon or this morning so that i could vie the property today, i did not recieve any phone call so i have not been able to view the property. Can they legally push me into signing and agreeing to a property without me viewing it first?? this is a private rented property in a very dirty area and is known for its violence, break ins and drugs,

[ErikaPNP]

Nobody can push you into signing for anything. If they try to, you just tell them that you are not happy to enter into a contract to rent a tenancy when you have no idea whether or not the house is habitable.

 

Tell you a little story about one of my council house experiences. I moved from one district to another when I was a youngster. When I was offered the property, the council said with me living and working so far away it would be difficult to arrange a viewing. I said that time off work for viewing would not be a problem, provided it was not on Friday. The council said the only available day was Friday for viewing. I asked them to look into the following week. They said they could not hold the property for that length of time. So I asked for time off work on the Friday and was granted it. I rang the council back. They then said the woman had got it wrong, Tuesday was the only available day. Cut a long story short they messed me about with the days something rotten. I eventually got a day to view the property and if I was happy I would then sign the agreement.

 

I travelled the three hour journey and arrived at the council offices at the agreed time, where they attempted to get me to sign the agreement. I explained that I had come here for to see the property with a view to signing the agreement if I was happy with it. I was told that someone had messed up somewhere, the lady who did the viewings was booked up. I smelled a rat. For some reason, they didn't want me to see this property prior to signing the agreement and I wanted to know why. So I told them that I was suspicious and that I had travelled all this way, I wanted my fares reimbursed and I would leave. I was then advised I would be moved to the bottom of the housing list as I was refusing the tenancy. I was given a form to sign saying I had refused the tenancy, the woman signed it first - big mistake.

 

I then wrote on it the reasons I was refusing it, and that they were being unreasonable in moving me to the bottom of the list and as such I would be challenging their decision with my MP. However, I worded it in the "third person", so instead of saying "I" refused it, I said "the prospective tenant" and instead of saying "my MP" I said "The tenant is aware that she can challenge this decision via her MP" Now at this time, the council had a photocopier where you could put 5p in a slot for a photocopy, so I stood up saying I would take a photocopy. The woman said she would do it so I wasn't charged, I said "oh no I'd rather do it myself thankyou", left the room and went to the main area and photocopied it. I returned, placed the original on the desk and wished I had a camera when I saw the shade of red the woman turned when she saw what I had written and that she had effectively signed in agreement to it. Naughty and nasty but yes it worked.

 

I got my viewing that same day, and discovered the reason why they tried to get out of my viewing it first. There were no internal doors in the property, and there were no windows - they had all been smashed, and were covered up by nailed on boards. The kitchen cupboard doors were missing. The place was a mess, and no-one in their right mind would have let it in that state. So I went back and signed the agreement, but on the condition that the council signed an agreement that the issues would be rectified by the time I moved in (which was three months away). I think they had learned that I wasn't going to let them take the mick out of me, and surprisingly, they agreed to draw up an agreement that the repairs would be done.

 

It wasn't rectified, so I wrote a letter of complaint to the council telling them that anyone could pull the boards off my windows and get into my home and help themselves, and I would hold them responsible as they had not secured the property which is their responsibility and I had a signed agreement (enclosed a copy) which stated the work should have been completed by now. I also with held the rent until the repairs were done and told them I wanted reimbursed for the rent I had paid in the three months before I had moved in, otherwise I'd have the local press round to take photos and do a story on it.

 

A girl soon moved in to the flat above me. Her flat required numerous repairs and it was filthy. She had taken on the tenancy without seeing the property first. But had nothing in writing to say so and after the repairs were done when she complained, she was billed for them, the council stated that an inspection was carried out when the tenancy had been vacated by the previous tenant and was fine, effectively saying she must have damaged the property. Poor girl had no comeback.

 

I don't know if they would still carry out those dirty tricks in this day and age - it was far more common back then, but has become less common over the years as people are fighting more for their rights. It's more the sort of thing you would see in the private sector these days as public authorities are more easy to hold to account these days.

 

The moral of the story is: Never let a tenancy until you have seen it first, ever!

[debbieg1984]

Thanku very much, that advice could be of great use to me... i was looking through the homeless act 2002 last night and saw the following statements....

28. Section 7(4) inserts new subsections before section 193(8) of the 1996 Act. These provide that where accommodation is made available to an applicant by a private landlord as a result of an arrangement between the housing authority and the landlord, the authority's homelessness duty under section 193 can be brought to an end if the applicant accepts an offer of an assured shorthold tenancy. The provisions make clear that an applicant is free to reject such an offer without this affecting the duty owed to him by the authority under section 193. They also provide that the acceptance of such a shorthold tenancy is not effective unless the tenancy is for a fixed term and the applicant confirms in writing that he understands the effect of accepting the offer (ie that it will bring to an end the section 193 homelessness duty owed to him by the authority).

 

29. In both the case of a final offer of accommodation under Part 6 and the offer of an assured shorthold tenancy secured by the housing authority, the offer is not effective unless the authority are satisfied that the accommodation is suitable for the applicant and it would be reasonable for him to accept it.

 

30. Section 8 makes provision in respect of reviews as to suitability of accommodation and came into force on Royal Assent on 26th February 2002. Subsection (1) amends section 193(5) and (7)(a) of the 1996 Act to provide that the main homelessness duty cannot be brought to an end unless the applicant has been informed of his right to request a review of the suitability of the accommodation offered.

 

31. Subsection (2) amends section 202 of the 1996 Act (right to request a review of decisions) and provides that an applicant offered accommodation under section 193(5) (temporary accommodation to carry out the main homelessness duty) or 193 (7) (an offer of an allocation under Part 6 that would bring the main homelessness duty to an end) may request a review of the suitability of that accommodation whether or not he has accepted the offer.

 

 

The provisions make clear that an applicant is free to reject such an offer without this affecting the duty owed to him by the authority under section 193.

and also states that ...of the 1996 Act to provide that the main homelessness duty cannot be brought to an end unless the applicant has been informed of his right to request a review of the suitability of the accommodation offered.

i Have not been informed of my right to request a review of the suitablilty..i did however asked them if they could review it and they point blank refused.

i have still recieved no phone call from them in regards to viewing the property but i did recieve a letter in the post yesterday telling me that if i dnt attend the meeting on monday 23rd november at 10am then they will discharge their duty to me

[debbieg1984]

bump