Intentional Homelessness: Giving Up Settled Accommodation For A New Job

• Published date: 19 January 2022
• Subject Matter: Employment and HR, Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Employee Benefits & Compensation, Employee Rights/ Labour Relations, Trials & Appeals & Compensation
• Law Firm: Russell-Cooke Solicitors
• Author: Tom Hopkins

On 26 November 2021, Lord Justice Lewison handed down Court of Appeal judgment in the case of Ciftci v London Borough of Haringey [2021] EWA Civ 1772 (26 November 2021) (bailii.org).

To be owed a full housing duty you must be:

• homeless
• eligible for assistance
• in priority need and
• not intentionally homeless.

The latter is one of the most heavily litigated and has been subject to judicial scrutiny on many occasions, including in the Supreme Court multiple times. This is because it involves so many elements which rely on the specific facts of each case, so it is easy for parties to the litigation to disagree on one or more elements of whether the test is made out. It is therefore likely to remain a key area of litigation in homelessness law.

The latest judgment summarised factors to be considered when determining whether someone is intentionally homelessness, particularly in relation to awareness of relevant facts under section 191(2) Housing Act 1996 and the relevance of employment prospects. The Court of Appeal considered whether Haringey was entitled to conclude Ms Ciftci was intentionally homeless or if her deliberate decision to give up secure accommodation could be disregarded on the ground that she was unaware of a relevant fact; and acted in good faith. The appeal was dismissed on the facts.

Legislative framework

Section 191 Housing Act 1996: Becoming homeless intentionally

• A person becomes homeless intentionally if he deliberately does or fails to do anything in consequence of which he ceases to occupy accommodation which is available for his occupation and which it would have been reasonable for him to continue to occupy;
• For the purposes of subsection (1) an act or omission in good faith on the part of a person who was unaware of any relevant fact shall not be treated as deliberate.

In Ciftci, the Court of Appeal considered intentional homelessness in the context of an applicant surrendering settled accommodation to move somewhere temporary. In this case, the applicant moved hoping to obtain settled accommodation in the future as the result of improved economic conditions, through a new job. However, this did not materialise and the applicant was made homeless. To be owed the main housing duty under s193(2) the applicant must not be intentionally homeless. The typical function of s191(1) would be to suggest the applicant was intentionally homeless as they surrendered accommodation that they had and which would be available to them if they...