Social services summoned to court in L&Q possession hearing

Mr Julier has lived independently in his care home in Ilford, east London, since 2013.

Discussions in court on 12 February revolved around whether Redbridge would deem Mr Julier “intentionally homeless” if the judge granted a possession order, absolving social services of the responsibility to rehouse him.

Judge Beard said: “My biggest concern is if I grant this, what happens to him next? Because he is vulnerable.”

He added: “We all know homeless people are more at risk. My fear is he could just disappear from view.”

Mr Julier, who did not attend court because of his disability and mental health problems, was represented by his niece, Jade Cummings. She claimed L&Q was told that “if he was evicted for anti-social behaviour he will be classed as intentionally homeless”.

“He’ll be on the street,” she added. Simon Strelitz of Five Paper chambers, representing L&Q, agreed to summon social services as a witness but noted that “it’s only when the court makes a possession order that social services spring into life”.

“The likelihood of Mr Julier being on the street is incredibly remote,” he said.

Mr Strelitz, who brought two L&Q employees and a member of Redbridge’s extra-care team to court as witnesses, argued that “the root problem is the accommodation is not right for Mr Julier” and that he needed to be moved to a “more one-to-one support setting”.

“That can sometimes happen as part of a small, shared house,” he said. “Such schemes exist but they’re not within L&Q’s ownership.”

According to Ms Cummings, the behaviour that led to Mr Julier’s eviction happened during COVID-19 lockdowns, when his mental health declined. This included compulsive cleaning of the building from 3am, swearing and threatening behaviour towards staff.

In February 2023, Mr Julier admitted to putting a cigarette in a bin, causing a fire, following which L&Q contacted the fire brigade.

Mr Strelitz accepted that there had been “a seeming improvement” in Mr Julier’s behaviour since the most serious incidents, “but that’s not to say his behaviour is not continuing to impact other residents”.

Asked whether Mr Julier’s home was the right place for him, Ms Cummings said initially she was “trying to achieve him being moved somewhere more suitable”, but her discussions with social workers “made clear there is no alternative accommodation”. 

“He has a level of independence that means he does not require a one-to-one carer,” she said, adding that she had not been made aware of any incidents since October. 

“He is stable at the moment,” she said. “He’s on medication.”

The judge told Ms Cummings that she had “done a cracking job both in this case and for Mr Julier throughout all these years”.

However, he said: “I have enormous sympathy for everyone in that block… I have to balance his vulnerabilities with the vulnerabilities of everyone else.”

The trial was adjourned to the earliest date after 12 March. L&Q said it was unable to comment on the proceedings.