The exercise of judicial discretion in rent arrears cases - Sheffield ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chart 2: Requests and outcomes Chart 3: Requests and outcomes in London court (n=363) in West Country court (n=47) 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% OPO SPO Adjourn Other Request outcome 23 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% OPO SPO Adjourn Other Chart 4: Requests and outcomes Chart 5: Requests and outcomes in Northern 1 court (n=61) in Northern 2 court (n=69) 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% OPO SPO Adjourn Other request outcome 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% OPO SPO Adjourn Other request outcome request outcome Although the numbers of recorded case outcomes are small, and care must therefore be taken in interpreting the data, there do appear to be differences between the courts in terms of response to requests made by the claimant landlords. Of the 162 initial hearings at which the landlord requested a suspended possession order (SPO), the proportion of requests resulting in an SPO across all four courts was 69%. However, there was some variation around this average, as the comparison of the above charts makes clear. For example, the proportion of SPOs granted to SPOs requested was lower in West Country and London courts (59% and 60% respectively), whereas in Northern 1 and Northern 2 it was higher than the average (70% and 88%). Where the landlord requested an outright order, the Northern 1 and Northern 2 courts always granted that order in our sample, whereas in West Country and London the proportions were lower (73% and 56% of requests granted, respectively). We now consider a number of factors, including those raised by the focus group participants, that might be leading to these differences, in both general outcomes and between requests and outcomes. The information from recorded cases is used here to examine whether these factors can begin to account for any differences between the four courts. After initial
consideration in this chapter, the factors which appear to be particularly influential are examined in greater depth in subsequent chapters. Level of arrears It might be expected that the most obvious factor to affect outcome would be the level of arrears, and judicial attitudes to arrears are explored further in Chapter 7. However, Table 3, p. 16 has shown that the variations between courts in the average levels of arrears at first hearings is not significant, being 14 weeks in both London and Northern 1 courts (although the average level of arrears was higher in London due to higher rents), 13 weeks in Northern 2 court and 12 weeks in West Country court. While the average level of arrears does not appear to account for the differences in outcomes between the courts, the relevance of the level of arrears should not be discounted in relation to individual cases and may be a factor in differences between individual judges (see Chapter 7). Housing benefit The importance of housing benefit in possession cases was raised in Chapter 2, above. When researchers observed and recorded cases for this study, they noted those cases where housing benefit was mentioned as a particular issue. There was a marked difference between the number of recorded cases in the different courts in which housing benefit was noted as a problem, specifically between Northern 2 court (3 cases, or 5%) and the other courts. London court had 93 cases where housing benefit was noted as a problem (26% of the total); West Country court had 10 cases in this category (21%); and Northern 1 court 15 cases (26%). The very low proportion of ‘housing benefit problem’ cases in Northern 2 court may be a factor in the low number of adjournments in that court as compared to the other three. The impact of housing benefit on outcomes is discussed in more depth in chapter 7. Attendance by tenant We have already seen (Chapter 3) that attendance and in particular participation by the defendant tenant may have an impact on outcomes. Levels of attendance did vary between the courts in our sample. In particular, participation was highest in London court, with only 52% of tenants not participating in any form, contrasting with the other courts where nonparticipation rates were all 60% or more, the highest being West Country court at 64%. Defendants were most likely to be represented in Northern 1 court where 29% of tenants had some form of representation, and in London where this applied to 26% of tenants. Representation and attendance was very low in Northern 2 court. 24
Page 1 and 2: The exercise of judicial discretion
Page 3 and 4: The Research Unit, Department for C
Page 6 and 7: Contents Executive summary i Chapte
Page 8 and 9: Executive summary The research ques
Page 10 and 11: the shift to housing officers appea
Page 12: Conclusions A wide and diverse rang
Page 15 and 16: on the role of judges under the exi
Page 17 and 18: Northern 1 court hears over 1500 ho
Page 19 and 20: significance to a particular respon
Page 21 and 22: The application may be adjourned; t
Page 23 and 24: such forms are completed in less th
Page 25 and 26: In November 2001, the Legal Service
Page 27 and 28: Levels of arrears Although the reas
Page 29 and 30: Table 2: Rent levels from ODPM stat
Page 31 and 32: Table 5: Changes in outcomes of ini
Page 33 and 34: Table 6: Impact of participation on
Page 35: The focus group participants consid
Page 39 and 40: Neither of the judges seemed to con
Page 41 and 42: chambers, where the possession list
Page 43 and 44: Most of the district judges felt th
Page 45 and 46: The views of the claimants’ group
Page 47 and 48: Qualitative and quantitative data f
Page 49 and 50: anything to say, and wants to stay
Page 51 and 52: Table 7: Sources of training and up
Page 53 and 54: sought with what they know the judg
Page 55 and 56: Chapter 5: Judges and landlords Int
Page 57 and 58: Chart 7: Orders granted by requests
Page 59 and 60: some unevenness in the impact of re
Page 61 and 62: Thus it can be seen that the type o
Page 63 and 64: District judges differed on how muc
Page 65 and 66: There were three other, more genera
Page 67 and 68: Conclusions In this chapter, we hav
Page 69 and 70: Chapter 6: Judges and tenants Intro
Page 71 and 72: approach he was more confident in t
Page 73 and 74: “I think in terms of exercising d
Page 75 and 76: Family make up The broad powers of
Page 77 and 78: are trying to deal with the particu
Page 79 and 80: “I wouldn’t dream of making an
Page 81 and 82: interpreter. Similarly, many of the
Page 83 and 84: Judges are human too - personal rea
Page 85 and 86: understand the proceedings, a great
Page 87 and 88:
What must be emphasised is that whi
Page 89 and 90:
also the most common explanation gi
Page 91 and 92:
anomalous case of West Country cour
Page 93 and 94:
District judges’ knowledge. Some
Page 95 and 96:
Two of the judges interviewed felt
Page 97 and 98:
DJ: I’d be inclining towards the
Page 99 and 100:
how he dealt with the housing benef
Page 101 and 102:
Chapter 8: Particular decisions: gr
Page 103 and 104:
Table 10: Outcomes in Ground 8 case
Page 105 and 106:
Others were, however, prepared to g
Page 107 and 108:
It is perhaps not surprising that,
Page 109 and 110:
the basis of the original possessio
Page 111 and 112:
Chart 13: Impact of family make up
Page 113 and 114:
The advice to the tenant was often
Page 115 and 116:
Chapter 9: Conclusions Where the la
Page 117 and 118:
shows that the vast majority of tho
Page 119 and 120:
important determining factors is th
Page 121 and 122:
Thus it is likely that that even th
Page 123 and 124:
110
Page 125 and 126:
Lawrence J (1995) “Sentencing pro
Page 127 and 128:
give a typology of the characterist
Page 129 and 130:
In analysing cases percentages have
Page 131 and 132:
Appendix 2 - Research instruments 1
Page 133 and 134:
What factors would you ascribe thos
Page 135 and 136:
20. Typically, how would you descri
Page 137 and 138:
with a duty desk representative who
Page 139:
DCA Research Series No. 6/05 The ex
show all

The exercise of judicial discretion in rent arrears cases - Sheffield ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?