We represented our client 'GO' in a judicial review challenge following a flawed housing association affordability assessment. This assessment wrongly led to the withdrawal of her social housing offer.

Initial refusal

GO was a single mother of four children, three of whom were primary school age. She had been a private tenant in Croydon since 2017 and received her main income from part-time work alongside Universal Income.

GO was nominated by Lambeth Council for a social housing property, having been on the housing register for eight years. After viewing, she was informed that she had been offered the property. However, following an affordability assessment conducted by the housing association, the offer was rescinded on the grounds that it was not affordable for her. This was despite the fact that she was not and had never been in arrears at her current private rented sector property, which had a higher rent.

Review of the affordability assessment

Housing Action Southwark and Lambeth (‘HASL’) provided initial assistance to our client. They found that the housing association had relied on a flawed affordability assessment. The assessment contained inaccuracies such as that GO had a weekly expenditure of £350 on clothing. HASL flagged these inaccuracies to the housing association. They explained that the assessment was conducted over the phone while our client was on a crowded and noisy bus, having picked up her children from school.

The housing association continued to uphold this incorrect assessment even after a correct affordability assessment was provided by GO. They stated that they would not withhold from filling the property with an alternative tenant despite Lambeth Council pausing its nominations.

We were instructed to challenge the decision and to seek an interim injunction preventing the housing association from letting the Property to another applicant until the outcome of the challenge.

Judicial review

We sent a pre-action letter challenging the refusal to offer our client the tenancy on the basis it was unaffordable for her. The housing association responded, stating the issue was a matter for Lambeth Council. They asked us to direct our correspondence to the Council instead.

The housing association failed to appreciate that as a social landlord providing a public function, their decision was amenable to judicial review.

We issued judicial review proceedings on the basis that:

• the decision was irrational,
• the housing association did not provide adequate reasons,
• they failed to have regard to relevant information.

Shortly after issue, the housing association agreed the property was affordable for our client. They accepted her nomination to the property, and arranged an appointment for her to sign the tenancy.

Our client was represented by Solicitor Thea Grattidge in the Housing team.