Contact us

Case 1:

AW had been evicted and had been through two homeless applications through to appeal with two different councils. In the end, he had been found intentionally homeless and asked to leave his temporary accommodation. We placed him in ROBES.

• We established with his erstwhile lawyer that the barrister’s opinion was that the case was not valid to go forward to judicial review if it were to be funded by public legal funds. We also talked to Social Services who re-iterated that he did not show high enough care needs to be managed within Social Services
• We made an application for the housing register in the most recent borough of residence – Lambeth where we were informed that this could take up to six months.
• We looked into private rented accommodation and the client was offered a property near Gatwick which he refused as he did not want to move out of London
• We also offered alternatives such as Anchor Trust and properties offered through organisations affiliated with the Elderly Accommodation Counsel. Again, these were discounted as they meant that he would have to move outside London to be placed quickly.
• Whilst in the ROBES project, he experienced some issues due to his diabetic condition. We made a referral to the Special Needs Assessment Panel in Lambeth and they moved his housing register application to sheltered accommodation, which meant he was registered more quickly. It also provided an opening to return to the borough to re-open his case.
• In the meanwhile the client had approached the local MP who wrote to the CEO of Lambeth. We waited for a reply and it was no surprise that the CEO supported the Housing Department’s decision
• As it was nearing the end of the ROBES project and there was a possibility of re-opening the case in Lambeth, we negotiated three month tenure at Graham House on the understanding that the solicitor would have to be able to place AW back in temporary accommodation or he accepted another reasonable offer of accommodation during that period.
• Since moving to Graham House, he has been assessed by the SNAP team who believe he is a valid candidate for sheltered housing and has been visited by a charitable organisation associated with Moorfields Eye Hospital that are prepared to support him with a rent deposit. Once that is established and the amount, we have access to some brand new flats in Charlton (Greenwich) which may suit him. We continue to work with the key worker in Graham House and liaise with his solicitor to keep pressure up.

Case 2:

JW had been evicted with her two daughters due rent arrears after the death of her husband. All three came for assistance to the centre.

• JW was over 60 and needed to sort out her benefits as did one of her daughters.
• We placed both daughters in hostels where they are currently doing courses to get them back into employment. Both had inconsistent employment records and one was not on benefits when they first came to the centre.
• We made an application to go on the Housing Register in Southwark, wrote to the MP and spoke to the solicitor about whether a homelessness case could be raised.
• We did do this but the borough lost the first set of papers, so another appointment had to be raised and she was assessed as priority by the Housing Options worker. She was given an appointment with a Housing Case-worker who advised her that a decision would take up to 33 days.
• We wrote a letter citing the Code of Practice on Homelessness and the relevant passages. We gave them seven days for a reply and threatened a judicial review on process if they failed to house her pending their investigations
• In the meanwhile, her housing register application for sheltered housing was processed. We also looked and registered for Anchor trust properties in Kent.
• ROBES staff took her to HPU with the letter on Code of Practice and she was placed in temporary accommodation whilst awaiting a successful bid on Homesearch.
• Within 2 weeks, we have now bid for and got a one-bedroom flat for her.
• She is now working with us on obtaining a Community Care Grant to fit out the flat.

Case 3:

GH is a South African who entered the UK on an ancestral visa where he is required to work for 5 years before he can make an application for leave to remain in the UK. He has no entitlement to benefits at this time.

• He needed to be persuaded to broaden his employment search and get back into employment after a period of no work
• He had been wrongly advised that he should be supported under the National Assistance Act 1948 despite being healthy and no more vulnerable than any other homeless person
• He started training with Streetshine, a Thamesreach project.
• We worked out the disposable income after tax and national insurance to enable us to establish how much he could reasonable pay in rent
• We found a private rented room in a shared house where the landlord was prepared to waive the initial deposit with a view to repaying it when GH’s cash flow was better.
• We negotiated with his employer to fund an advance as he was normally paid fortnightly to allow him to pay his rent.
• We also advised him to look into his immigration status in case a more advantageous status could be found