Suitability and size

In November 2000, Camden council accepted that Ms Sahardid and her two-year-old son were homeless and that it had a duty to house them.

It provided temporary accommodation and registered the application under its housing allocation scheme. Under that scheme, homeless applicants living in temporary housing with a single child will be offered one-bedroom council homes if the child is under five and two-bed homes if the child is five or over.

Sahardid said she needed two bedrooms for medical reasons. The council did not accept that and in April 2003, when her son was four, offered her a one-bed flat. Sahardid accepted the offer but also exercised her right to seek a review on the grounds that the flat was unsuitable for medical reasons.

The reviewing officer rejected these arguments and, on 5 November 2003, made a decision that the accommodation was suitable. Three days earlier, Sahardid’s son had turned five.

Sahardid appealed unsuccessfully to the county court judge and made a further appeal. The Court of Appeal allowed her appeal. It said that on the date of the review decision, the flat was potentially “unsuitable” for an applicant with a child of five because the council scheme said such a household should get two bedrooms.

The reviewing officer had overlooked the son’s fifth birthday and that was an error of law because a review had to be conducted on the basis of the facts at the date of the review.

The council’s argument that Sahardid should simply pursue an application for a transfer to two-bed accommodation was rejected. Camden would have to carry out a fresh review.