ASB Possession & the Equality Act 2010.
Janine Green
Providing ASB and Community Safety Services to Registered Providers, Councils and Police
A guest article kindly provided by MSB Solicitors
Possession proceedings and evictions are the ultimate legal tool when dealing with anti-social behaviour.? It is usually the last resort and the option that we turn to when all other alternatives have failed, and/or when the antisocial behaviour is so serious, a landlord feels it has no alternative option to protect communities and their colleagues.
An eviction is a serious matter – it potentially makes a person homeless, and this goes against one of the underlining aims of most social housing providers, which is to provide affordable, quality, secure and safe homes, and communities.??
If a social landlord is faced with no option but to consider possession proceedings, it must have carefully considered its duties under the Equality Act 2010.? This applies to all possession claims but is most prevalent when dealing with proceedings based on anti-social behaviour (grounds 12, 14 and or 7a Schedule 2 to the Housing Act 1988 (as amended).???
The Equality Act 2010 legally protects people from discrimination in wider society. It sets out the different ways in which it is unlawful to treat someone. The Equality Act protects everyone against discrimination as we all have protected characteristics. Under the Equality Act, the nine protected characteristics are:
There are four main types of discrimination. These are:
The Equality Act also requires social landlords to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations between different people when carrying out their activities. This is the public sector equality duty (PSED).
Further, section 35 of the Equality Act specifically makes it unlawful for a landlord to discriminate against or victimise someone, on the basis of a protected characteristic, when managing a property.?
If a social landlord issues a claim for possession, a tenant may well raise an Equality Act Defence by claiming discrimination.? We often see this in claims where the tenant suffers from a long standing mental impairment and is therefore disabled pursuant to the EA Act 2010 and their conduct, which is being complained of, is argued by the tenant to be a consequence of that disability.????
Consider this possible scenario…….
领英推荐
The tenant suffers from paranoid schizophrenia. As a direct consequence of their mental impairment, which is long standing and substantial, they play loud music at night. This helps them sleep. This loud music however is causing a nuisance and or annoyance to the neighbours. If the landlord, in this case, was to start possession proceedings, the tenant may raise a defence under the Equality Act 2010, as the landlord is arguably discriminating against the tenant, as the conduct being complained of is a direct consequence of the tenant’s disability, and therefore they are being treated less favourably or worse because of their protected characteristic.?
Now we appreciate noise ASB cases are rarely as clear cut as the above example, and a set of headphones is likely to solve the above problem, but you get the point. Sometimes there is a clear and/or indirect link between the disability and breach of tenancy and/or ASB.?
If a tenant is successful in raising an Equality Act Defence, your possession claim will likely fail, which means not only will you not secure an eviction, your organisation may have to pay legal costs and explain to the victims and community why the tenant/perpetrator is still in occupation.
So, what do we do when faced with this scenario…
Social landlords may have a defence to a claim of discrimination if they can show the alleged discriminatory act, i.e., possession claim, was a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It will only be proportionate if it is in pursuit of a legitimate aim, it is rationally connected to the legitimate aim and it is a measure which is no more than is necessary to achieve the legitimate objective.
This means it is vital that social landlords consider their duties under the Equality Act 2010 when dealing with all ASB cases and consider if their actions are proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim and whether it’s actions are in line with the PSED.? A social landlord must identify its legitimate aim and it must consider if there are any alternatives to possession. The impact of the decision to seek possession must/should be weighed against the impact the ASB is having on others who may also have a disability or vulnerability, and also upon the social landlord’s exercise of housing management functions and its housing stock. This can demonstrate that a social landlord has done a reasonable and proportionate balancing exercise.
Here are MSB’s top 10 points to remember when dealing with ASB possession and the Equality Act 2020
Finally, if you work in the field ASB & litigation, we would suggest you read the case of Rosebery Housing Association Ltd v Williams & Anor https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/Misc/2021/22.html and Akerman-Livingstone (Appellant) v Aster Communities Limited (formerly Flourish Homes Limited) (Respondent) https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2015/15.html?
If you have any questions about this blog and/or Possession and the Equality Act 2010, please do not hesitate to contact Louise Murphy, Head of Social Housing and Regeneration at MSB [email protected]? 0151 281 9040
Further information on MSB’s Social Housing and Regeneration Team can be found at https://www.msbsolicitors.co.uk/our-expertise/social-housing-regeneration/?
Associate Director & Solicitor at Greenhalgh Kerr - Head of Housing
2 年Olivia McAllister
★ Head of Housing Services ★ Non Executive Director and Board Member ★ Audit and Risk Committee Member
2 年Emily Cail