One day, he returned to the site to find that his caravan (and all his possessions, which had been inside it) had gone. It was not known who had moved it and the caravan was never traced. Higgs applied to the council for rehousing as a single homeless person. The council decided that he was homeless but that he had no "priority need" for rehousing.
Higgs argued that he had priority because he had been made "homeless … as a result of an emergency such as a flood, fire or other disaster", which is one of the legal categories, and appealed.
The Court of Appeal decided that the sudden unexplained disappearance of his mobile home was indeed just as much an emergency as if the caravan had been destroyed by fire or flood.
However, it dismissed his appeal because the emergency had not been the cause of Higgs' homelessness; he had already been homeless before the caravan disappeared because he had no place on which he was permitted by law to park it.
Source
Housing Today
Reference
This case provides useful guidance for homelessness officers on the circumstances in which emergency loss of a home gives a displaced resident "priority need". It is also a reminder of the correct approach to deciding whether a mobile home owner is "homeless".
