Homelessness reviews

Mr Feld was a homeless person entitled to accommodation from Barnet. He was offered a home but said it was unsuitable. The council’s review officer said it was suitable but directed that a further offer be made. Mr Feld also rejected the second property and asked for another review. The review officer upheld the council’s decision. Mr Feld appealed because the same officer who had conducted the first review had conducted the second, and that was unfair.

Miss Pour was a homeless person entitled to housing from Westminster. She said the property offered to her was unsuitable, but one of the council’s three review officers upheld a decision that it was suitable. Miss Pour brought an appeal but that was compromised by the council agreeing to review the matter again. The same review officer conducted the fresh review and reached the same decision. Miss Pour appealed again on the ground that a new review officer should have conducted the fresh review.

The local judge dismissed Mr Feld’s complaint, but Miss Pour’s appeal was allowed. Both cases were further appealed.

The Court of Appeal decided, in the absence of any exceptional circumstances, there was nothing objectionable in the same officer conducting a review and then a second review. This was because the reviewing officer is not reviewing his or her own decision but, in what would have to be unusual circumstances (because there is no right to a second review), is starting afresh to review a second decision. There was nothing unfair about that.