Council Unlawfully Assesses Disabled Child’s Housing Needs

William Ford

Local Authority fails to lawfully assess the housing needs of a single mother and her disabled child

This case involved a claim in the High Court for judicial review against the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham (“the Council”) for failure to comply with its duties under the Housing Act 1996, the Children Act 2004, and the Equality Act 2010. William Ford, head of the Housing and Social Care Department was instructed in this matter.

Background

Our client (“AN”) and her daughter (“EB”) have had their names anonymised for legal reasons. AN is a single mother and her 7-year-old daughter, EB, has autism spectrum disorder (“ASD”). EB is recognised as having special educational needs (“SEN”) and has an Educational Health and Care Plan (“EHCP”). She has impaired speech, communication, concentration, and sensory processing. She often becomes dysregulated by loud noises, crowded places, and sudden changes in environment. EB also struggles to use public transport. She needs to be accommodated within a short travelling distance from her school.

AN’s accommodation in the private rented sector was terminated by her landlord and she had to move out. She first approached the Council in Augst 2024 to express her concerns about needing re-housing. She explained the importance of avoiding disruption to EB’s education to the Council and provided full details of EB’s disabilities. EB attends a local school in the Council’s borough where she has been making good progress with good support in place to manage her SEN.

She had to leave her private sector accommodation in December 2024, but was not provided with alternative accommodation by the Council. Various out of borough and out of London properties were proposed prior to AN being evicted, but these were either unavailable or wholly unsuitable. It would not have been possible for EB to continue to attend her school had any of these properties been accepted and no alternative educational placements were identified. Following pre-action correspondence from Osbornes, and AN and EB having to stay temporarily with a friend, the Council eventually accommodated AN and her daughter in a bed and breakfast hotel accommodation situated in borough. AN and EB were subsequently moved to a hostel accommodation (also within the Council’s borough), which was the subject of a separate suitability challenge (culminating in the Council accepting that the accommodation was not suitable for AN and her daughter in July 2025).

The Council produced 4 separate housing needs assessments, in December 2024, February 2025, March 2025, and May 2025 (the latter two being undertaken after the issue of Court proceedings).

Court challenge

Osbornes sought to challenge each of the housing needs assessment on the basis that they did not comply with the Council’s legal obligations under s189A of the Housing Act 1996, read in conjunction  with s11 of the Children Act 2004, and s149 of the Equality Act 2010.

The housing needs assessments all failed to identify what AN and EB’s needs actually were, including what accommodation would be suitable for her, whether there was a need for her to be accommodated in borough, and the relevance of EB’s ASD and her schooling. There was no proper assessment of needs, and the housing needs assessments simply set out what AN had said she desired, rather than assessing whether these were, in fact, needs.

A claim for judicial review was issued in the High Court on behalf of AN on 11 March 2025. An order was made to expedite consideration of the claim and it was heard by the High Court on 19 June 2025, with judgment being handed down on 3 September 2025.

The High Court found that all 4 housing needs assessment were unlawful and ordered that a revised housing needs assessment be prepared by the Council by 1 October 2025. The Court held that the housing needs assessments failed to comply with the requirements of s189A of the Housing Act 1996 and s11 of the Children Act 2004. There was also a breach of the public sector equality duty under s149 of the Equality Act 2010, due to the failure to adequately consider EB’s disability.

This decision highlights the importance of local authorities lawfully assessing the housing needs of homeless applicants – especially for vulnerable families. Thanks to the expertise and persistence of Will Ford, justice was secured for AN and her daughter, ensuring their rights were recognised and upheld. You can read the judgment in full here

How can we help?

If you or someone you know is facing housing challenges or needs support navigating complex legal issues, Osbornes’ award-winning team is here to help. With a proven track record in housing and social care law, we’re committed to fighting for fair outcomes. Please contact us by:

• Filling in our online enquiry form; or
• Calling us on 020 7485 8811