Anti-Social behaviour claim for possession. Win for council tenant.

Council fail to evict disabled client who had done no wrong.

In this case possession proceedings were issued by the London Borough of Haringey against the client. They said  that her children were encouraging groups of boys to congregate on the estate. Further that these boys were involved in anti-social behaviour such as playing loud music, smoking cannabis  supplying drugs and being rude to local residents.

The defence

The client lived on the estate with her four children. She  was a wheelchair user and rarely left the property except to attend medical appointments. A defence was filed on the basis that:

  • The client did not know or have any knowledge of the offending.
  • Further that it would be disproportionate for a Possession Order to be given and that it would be in breach of Article 8(2) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights 1998.
  • That the council had failed to take into account the fact that the client was disabled within the meaning of Section 6 of the Equality Act 2010 when deciding to issue possession proceedings.

Moss & Co  obtained witness statements from local neighbours who supported the client. Just before a two-day trial the council offered to settle the case on the basis of a suspended Possession Order. We advised the client not to agree to this as there was no evidence to show that she  had engaged in antisocial behaviour. Nor had she  allowed her visitors to do so.

The trial

There was a two-day trial with the client and her witnesses giving evidence after which the judge confirmed that the council did not have any grounds to obtain possession based on antisocial behaviour. He dismissed the possession proceedings and ordered the council to pay the client’s costs. The client and her family remained in the premises.

Narinder Moss did this case

Go Back