Apologies for what might be a daft question but let’s suppose that a client who has a dependent child goes to a LA and makes a homeless approach. Let’s just suppose that the LA don’t do any enquiries into whether it’s a dependent child and just decide it isn’t and so make a snap 184 decision which says the client has no priority need for accommodation. The decision to any right minded LA would one hope make no sense.
Now if the client requests a review and then finds let’s say an AST before the review is complete can the LA find the client not homeless on review or would the utter lack of enquiries be considered unlawful and so they can’t? Can the LA in effect take advantage of their complete lack of even basic enquiries?
Does anyone have any good links to cases that might assist House with his confusion!?
Deficient decision – Reg 8(2) should be triggered – but they will surely be minded to find not homeless on the new facts
http://nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/2008/06/deficiency-in-a-decision/
on reg 8(2) and dodgy 184s. But not sure it will get you very far.
Otherwise, I’ll have to think…
Ty Nearly
I was just thinking about the case with the 17 year old when the LA waited till she turned 18 before making a NP decision. Will have to read that case if I can find it
Hammersmith & Fulham v Robinson (I think) is the 17 going on 18 (with apologies to the Sound of Music) case…
Thanks J