Hearings for the homeless

Ms Connors, an assured shorthold tenant, was evicted as a result of her antisocial behaviour. The council decided she was intentionally homeless. She asked for a review of that decision.

Council papers given to her to help her prepare her case included an officer's note of a conversation with the letting agent, who gave an outline of the antisocial behaviour allegations. Connor’s solicitors said that if the council was to rely on the allegations, they should be put fully to her at an oral hearing so she could respond to them. The review officer did not convene a hearing but confirmed the finding of intentional homelessness.

The county court judge dismissed an appeal.

Connors asked for permission to bring a second appeal, claiming her case raised the important general issue of the extent to which an opportunity to meet allegations must be provided on review. The appeal court refused the application.

It decided that she had had the opportunity to comment on the allegations or seek more details. There was no basis in law to the demand for an oral hearing; the substance of the allegations had been clear enough from the note and Connors had had her opportunity to respond to them.