The Lifeline Project was a well-regarded charity. Failure to carry out the targets within the contracts led the charity into insolvency and resulted in a personal, 7-year disqualification order.
The Fraud Act added section 15A into the Housing Act 1988, which states that if an assured tenant “sub-lets” or “parts with possession of the dwelling-house”, the “tenancy ceases to be an assured tenancy and cannot subsequently become an assured tenancy.”
This is helpful for landlords as, if an assured tenant “sub-let” or “parted with possession” of a property, they cannot retain the assured status by returning to the property between service and expiry of the landlord’s Notice to Quit.
To fully utilise the Fraud Act’s new powers, a clear definition of “parting with possession” is required:
- Does this have to be for a specific length of time?
- Does the tenant have to remove all their belongings from the property?
- Does the new occupier have to have exclusive possession?
- What if the tenant has an intention to return at some distant point in the future?
- What happens if the new occupiers are friends or relatives of the tenant?
The interpretation of “parting with possession” was considered in our article ‘Overcoming the challenges of sub-letting by assured tenants’ in our Summer Newsletter.
Since then, the case of Poplar HARCA v (1) Begum (2) Rohim  EWHC 2040 (QB), was decided in July 2017 and provides some much-needed guidance on the matter, although additional clarification is still needed.
In the Begum/Rohim case, the Respondents were assured tenants of social housing and occupied a two-bedroom flat with their children. In August 2015, they moved out of the flat to live with the First Respondent’s mother and care for her ill brother. They sublet the flat for £400 per month to a couple but retained one bedroom containing their children’s belongings.
At the trial, the landlord stated that the Respondents had parted with possession of the whole of the flat and had therefore lost security of tenure due to Section 15A of the Housing Act 1988. In the alternative, it relied upon Grounds 10, 12 and/or 14 of the Housing Act 1988.
The Judge dismissed the landlord’s primary claim on the basis that the Respondents had neither sublet nor parted with possession of the whole flat and granted a suspended possession order based on the alternative claim.
This case, therefore, suggests that:
- Retaining a room within the property to store belongings might mean that a tenant has not parted with possession of the property;
- The reason for leaving the property might be relevant to whether or not the tenant had “parted with possession”; and
- The relationship between the tenant and the new occupier is potentially relevant.
The Judge’s decision was appealed and was held to be "fatally and demonstrably flawed” because they had overlooked the fact that the Respondents were pocketing Housing Benefit to cover the rent on the flat they were no longer occupying in addition to “fraudulently harvesting an additional £400 from the occupiers Mr Ahmed”. Whilst the appeal did not consider the Recorder’s “parting with possession” interpretation/decision, it nonetheless raises the question; if the rest of the Recorder’s decision was "fatally and demonstrably flawed”, was his interpretation of “parting with possession” similarly flawed?
We expect this will come up in another appeal soon.
For more information
For more information, please contact Katherine Raison.
On 23 July, trainees from Anthony Collins Solicitors will host an ‘experience day’, which will involve various activities and presentations, with lawyers and non-lawyers from across the firm.
The Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC) has launched a new scheme specifically for charities and not-for-profit organisations who want to advise EU citizens on UK settlement.
In the second part of our series on contract management pitfalls, we look at the risks and opportunities presented by payment mechanisms in construction contracts.
Under most construction contracts, the contractor takes on the ground conditions risk. However, a recent case has demonstrated that the risk can fall on the employer.
The UK Government has been consulting on how it should promote social value in its procurements. Here is our response that we submitted to the consultation...
The Tenant Fees Act 2019 came into force on 1 June 2019.
A recent case in the Court of Appeal will no doubt bring a sigh of relief for employers, but a corresponding sigh of disappointment may be uttered for equality and gender balance in the workplace.
This briefing assists response to the consultation paper by outlining the consultation questions, providing some background information and prompting some thoughts and potential answers.
A report published on 29 May by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has found that since 2009-10, local government spending on services has fallen on average by 21% in real terms.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.