John Gallagher, principal solicitor, Shelter
Whose duty is it anyway?
A Lords decision should end confusion about who is responsible for housing 16- and 17-year-olds
Who is responsible for housing a homeless 16- or 17-year-old? Since 2002, housing departments have had to treat 16- and 17-year-olds as in ‘priority need’, unless the social services department owes a duty to provide them with accommodation. But which of these duties is the primary one, and how should the two departments interact with each other in assisting a homeless young person?
The answer to this conundrum has been provided by the House of Lords in the recent case of G v Southwark Council.
The background
G is a young man who was thrown out of his home when he was 17 years old. Southwark Council’s housing office arranged mediation with his mother in the hope of repairing their relationship, but this proved unsuccessful. He resorted to ‘sofa surfing’ and sleeping in cars.
G’s solicitors asked Southwark’s social services department to carry out an urgent assessment of his needs. The intention was that Southwark should provide him with accommodation under its ‘section 20’ duty. Section 20 of the Children Act requires a social services authority to provide accommodation to any `child in need’ who lacks suitable accommodation or care.
However, children’s services considered that G’s needs could be met through arranging accommodation for him and referring him to other support agencies. On this view, he simply required ‘help with accommodation’, which could be given by referring him to the homeless persons’ section of the housing department.
The decision
The Lords considered that the children’s services duty is the primary duty. Most homeless young people would be ‘children in need’, and this assessment would be expected to trigger the Children Act duty. Unless the problem was relatively short-term, social services accommodation would bring with it a general duty to help and support the young person in the transition to independent adult living.
The impact
Does it really matter which department provides the accommodation so long as the young person’s need for accommodation is answered? Yes, for various reasons. The young person who is looked after by children’s services will also be entitled to ‘leaving care’ duties on reaching the age of 18. But equally, everyone needs to know where the responsibility lies, so that the young person is not shuttled back and forth between the two authorities.
A social services authority may ask a housing authority for assistance in exercise of any of their functions. The House of Lords commented trenchantly that this did not mean that a children’s services authority could avoid their responsibilities by ‘passing the buck’ to another authority; but they could ask the housing department to assist them, by making a certain amount of accommodation available to them to use in carrying out their duties.
The G decision will have a major impact on the treatment of homeless 16- to 17-year-olds. There is an urgent need for radical reconsideration of practices and protocols between authorities, and between the departments of unitary authorities, to ensure that referrals are made and acted upon, and that no young person is left without suitable accommodation.
johng@shelter.org.uk
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (4)
Kirsty Diggins | 07/09/2009 2:15 pm
Whilst this decision is welcomed by those people in the housing world, it does leave open the question of when can a Childrens Servcies department end their duty under S20 and thereby re-refer the person to Housing departments under the Housing Act 96 Pt VII. This is happening more frequently in my expereince.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Joe Halewood | 07/09/2009 4:28 pm
The Children Act does define that as being no longer than the age of 21 and/or that a child in need assessment can involve a child up to the age of 21.
So that is a definitive latest time that is not left open.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Carolyn Drew | 25/09/2009 12:06 pm
In Somrset we have taken all of our unaccompanied Asylum seeking young people inot 'care' and provided foster care or residential children's units placements as appropriate. My question is what happens to young people who do not wish to be placed 'in care'? We cannot place them in flats etc as we have very clear duties - as per Southwark to provide the support a Child in Need requires. This 'gap' is causing us difficulties as we can either 'care' for them or have an assessment in the community and provide support, however we cannot provide housing/accomodation that does not meet our 'care' duties criteria of assessment, planning and reviews - and the provision of carers who are assessedas appropriate for our young people.
if 16/17 year olds will not be 'in care' and refuse our assessments our hands are tied.
I would really like to know how other authorities are managing this?
thanks
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Joe Halewood | 25/09/2009 2:15 pm
Are your hands tied by law or by your practises and thinking? My reading of the Southwark case is that it prioritises the duty of social services over housing duties. As such that duty remains whether either of your specified two routes works or not - a third way would have to be found.
The child in need assessment also gives marked priority to the housing needs of that child in need and must take these into consideration. So why cant that child in need be placed in temporary accommodation with support and care whilst that assessment is carried out?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment