The High Court upheld Waterford City and County Council’s decision to stop Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) for a rented home after finding the Council was entitled to act on the property’s failure to meet rental standards. The court also found the Council had no power to require the tenants to move, but refused a declaration about that letter because it had no practical effect.
Natanya Feeney and Kealan Duggan, a couple with two young children, sought judicial review of the Council’s actions concerning their home at 5 Fenian Place, Abbeyside, Dungarvan. The judgment records that the couple were receiving disability benefits and remained a household qualified for HAP.
Council inspections in 2017 and 2018 identified defects at the property. The later inspection report listed, among other issues, a leaking ceiling, heating and plumbing problems, blocked gutters, inadequate ventilation and electrical systems described in the Council’s letter as being in a dangerous condition. The landlord did not carry out the requested repairs. The parties agreed the property had the identified defects.
In December 2018, the Council told the tenants they had to move by 31 January 2019. Council counsel accepted that the Council had no power to require them to leave and that the letter was misconceived. In February 2019, the Council told them their HAP had stopped from 31 January and that they were responsible for paying rent directly to the landlord. The couple remained in the home at the time of the hearing.
The tenants argued that HAP could not be stopped because the Council had not served a statutory prohibition notice. The judge found that neither of the Council’s letters to the landlord was an improvement notice or a prohibition notice. However, she held that the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2014 did not make either notice a necessary precondition to stopping HAP for a dwelling that failed to meet rental standards. She found the Council could cease payment under section 41(1), and could also rely on the terms of the HAP application form signed by the landlord, which allowed payment to be suspended or stopped if defects were not remedied within the stated period.
The tenants also sought an order requiring the Council to take statutory action against the landlord. The judge found the Council had discretion over whether to issue improvement or prohibition notices and was not legally obliged to issue them. She refused that order and the requested declaration challenging cessation of HAP.
The court refused a declaration about the move-out letter because the tenants had not acted on it and it had not changed their factual or legal position. It therefore refused all three remedies sought. The judgment noted the tenants remained eligible for HAP, while expressing hope they would find suitable accommodation.