Clarification that notice required for demotion order proceedings.
05/08/2005
Follow link to read John Hobson's report on a recent case where proceedings involving a demotion order were struck out.
Manchester City Council v Cleveland Pinnock
Manchester County Court, DJ Gosnell, 20.01.05
The Claimant local authority served a notice seeking a demotion order [s.83(1) Housing Act 1985] dated 30th September 2004 on the Defendant, a secure tenant since 1978. A claim was issued on the same day. The Defendant asserted that the notice was defective, there being no compliance with the required 28 day period and as stated in the notice itself.
The notice set out allegations of anti-social behaviour all of which concerned alleged actions of members of the Defendant?s family. ASBO proceedings had previously been taken against three children as well as injunctive relief against the Defendant?s partner. The Defendant had been pursuing an application to buy the property.
The matter was listed for a preliminary hearing and when the matter came to be heard the Claimant conceded that the notice was defective. The Claimant then made an application that sought to persuade the court to dispense with the requirement of notice pursuant to s.83(1)(b).
The Claimant asserted that the move towards a demotion order was motivated by a wish to preclude the application of the right to buy from proceeding. Only such action could enable the Claimant and the Greater Manchester Police to protect neighbours from further anti-social behaviour.
DJ Gosnell rejected the argument that it would be just and equitable for the notice to be dispensed with. If the local authority was seeking to use proceedings to preclude a tenant?s statutory right to buy then it was only fair that the procedure was followed correctly. The local authority could use powers under s.153A to tackle anti-social behaviour around a property - it was immaterial whether the property was owned or not. Furthermore, the last incident of alleged anti-social behaviour relied upon occurred in October 2003.
On consideration of all the circumstances (Kelsey HA Ltd v King [1996] 28 HLR 270) the application was dismissed and the proceedings struck out.
John Hobson appeared for the defendant instructed by Robert Lizar solicitors.
