25.03.2013 Views

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 ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!