‘In R(B) v Redbridge LBC [2019] EWHC 250 (Admin), Jeremy Johnson QC, sitting as a Deputy Judge, was required to adjudicate on what is, as far as I am concerned, a really important point of practice, given the nature and continuing obligations of suitability of accommodation in homelessness cases, and the increasing number of suitability reviews (especially following the 2017 Act). He also came to the wrong result imho – I wonder if there is an appeal, even if it becomes academic (which it might). Ms B was offered accommodation and sought a review. It was one of those ones where affordability is raised, but, given that one doesn’t know what the bills are going to be for the property at the outset, the reviewer and applicant make approximations. The review went against her, albeit on marginal grounds (and there are various consequential proceedings from that first review and appeal). For the purposes of this application for JR, however, what happened was that Ms B’s actual electricity bill arrived and it was more per week than had originally been estimated. She sought a further review, to which Redbridge did not respond, and which, ultimately, led to these proceedings as Redbridge did not conduct that further review.’
Nearly Legal, 15th February 2019
Source: nearlylegal.co.uk
