Shapps Taking Shortcuts

Housing Minister, Grant Shapps, is once again disregarding the Supreme Court by proposing a mandatory power of repossession which would take into consideration previous offences if a social tenant has consistently behaved in an anti-social manner. Any changes would be introduced in a Home Office bill over the next year
The intention is to include trigger offences such as:

• A conviction for a serious offence related to housing, including violence against neighbours, drug dealing and criminal damage.
• Breach of an injunction for anti-social behaviour obtained by a landlord.
• Closing of a premises under a closure order – such as a home used for drug dealing.

Announcing the proposals Grant Shapps said:
 ‘All too often, efforts to tackle neighbours from hell take far too long, and it seems the needs and right of the victims play second fiddle to those of the perpetrators. That’s why I’m looking to speed up the process, so where a social housing tenant already has a conviction for anti-social behaviour and the situation has not improved this can be taken into account and landlords can act swiftly to bring to an end to the day-to-day misery that is inflicted for too long on those simply seeking to quietly enjoy their homes. Of course eviction is a drastic step and should be the last resort that landlords take to tackle this menace – but when all other options have failed to stop this yobbish behaviour, victims should not have to wait months or even years to see justice done.’

One of the problems with the proposals is that there is already recourse for social landlords to deal with perpetrators of serious anti-social behaviour quite swiftly including by obtaining an order for possession on discretionary grounds and Judges whilst having to exercise proportionality, frequently do not take anti-social behaviour lightly. There are problems with mandatory possession orders which have been proven to be a breach of human rights and not proportionate in some cases particularly where a tenant has not been given the opportunity to redress their behaviour. Additionally, injunctions and closure orders can temporarily displace someone from their home or from a specified area in any event.

The total disregard for the ruling in Pinnock v Manchester CC in which the Supreme Court ruled that courts must test the proportionality of a landlord’s decision to carry out mandatory possession proceedings, meant that a court must take into account a tenant’s personal circumstances is once more a slight on the rule of law. Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling, this did not affect the outcome of the Pinnock case as after they took into account the personal circumstances, they ordered possession. However, the case has had an impact on other hearings.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has released guidance for Social Landlords ‘Human Rights at Home’.

If landlords follow the correct procedure to obtain possession and act in a proportionate manner in the first manner then they should not fall foul of the law in the first place.  See Inside Housing - Flood Defences