The exercise of judicial discretion in rent arrears cases - Sheffield ...
The exercise of judicial discretion in rent arrears cases - Sheffield ...
The exercise of judicial discretion in rent arrears cases - Sheffield ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
conditions under which it is adm<strong>in</strong>istered. All <strong>of</strong> them have a certa<strong>in</strong> amount <strong>of</strong> sympathy<br />
and patience with defendants, but are also aware that claimants are los<strong>in</strong>g <strong>rent</strong>al <strong>in</strong>come<br />
while hous<strong>in</strong>g benefit problems are sorted out, and while possession <strong>cases</strong> are adjourned.<br />
Most district judges have become cynical about the capability <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g benefit<br />
adm<strong>in</strong>istration to deal with claims, through their experience <strong>of</strong> hear<strong>in</strong>g <strong>cases</strong> <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g lost<br />
application forms and other <strong>in</strong>formation, <strong>in</strong>correct assessment <strong>of</strong> benefit, and adm<strong>in</strong>istrative<br />
delay.<br />
Ground 8 provides a mandatory possession ground for hous<strong>in</strong>g associations, where there<br />
are at least eight weeks <strong>rent</strong> <strong>arrears</strong> at the time <strong>of</strong> notice and hear<strong>in</strong>g. Possession <strong>cases</strong><br />
brought us<strong>in</strong>g Ground 8 caused district judges considerable difficulties. However, the recent<br />
case <strong>of</strong> North British Hous<strong>in</strong>g Association v. Mathews [2004] EWCA Civ 1736 may mean<br />
that the outcomes <strong>of</strong> the Ground 8 <strong>cases</strong> recorded <strong>in</strong> this study, and <strong>in</strong>deed the district<br />
judges’ responses <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>terview would now be diffe<strong>rent</strong>. <strong>The</strong> f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong> relation to Ground 8<br />
were:<br />
It is more commonly used <strong>in</strong> London.<br />
A lower number <strong>of</strong> suspended possession orders and a higher proportion <strong>of</strong> outright<br />
possession orders were made <strong>in</strong> <strong>cases</strong> <strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g Ground 8.<br />
Ground 8 is operat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a far from mandatory way, with district judges us<strong>in</strong>g a<br />
number <strong>of</strong> tactics to avoid hav<strong>in</strong>g to make an outright possession order.<br />
<strong>The</strong> f<strong>in</strong>al part <strong>of</strong> the possession process, applications to suspend warrants for possession<br />
were perhaps the most difficult for judges, as they were acutely aware that their decision<br />
would have an immediate impact on the tenant’s life, and that <strong>of</strong> any family members.<br />
Although a number <strong>of</strong> factors were likely to be consistently taken <strong>in</strong>to account by all judges<br />
<strong>in</strong>terviewed, their responses to the scenarios varied considerably.<br />
Applications to suspend warrants were also the type <strong>of</strong> case which prompted judges to<br />
directly address the tenant <strong>in</strong> a possibly paternalistic manner, frequently referr<strong>in</strong>g them to<br />
sources <strong>of</strong> advice and warn<strong>in</strong>g them that this was their ‘last chance’ to rema<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong> their home.<br />
Issues <strong>of</strong> consistency and fairness caused some concern particularly where district judges<br />
did not have the full case file.<br />
iv