under construction
Particulars of Claim
Background
1. The Claimant and his wife are tenants of the Clearing House, which is run by the Defendant on behalf of the Mayor of London. The Clearing House provides supported housing in London for people with a history of rough sleeping. The Claimant and his wife are living in a Clearing House property owned by Peabody Housing Association. The Greater London Authority (GLA) funds and commissions the Clearing House and related Tenancy Sustainment Teams (TSTs) to the tune of £2.6 million per year. On 17 May 2014, the Claimant and his wife were housed by the Mayor of London's Housing First, an internationally acclaimed programme for rough sleepers, the core principle of which is the provision of permanent accommodation and non-compulsory support (Johnsen and Teixeira, 2010). GLA Housing First was a pilot project commissioned in March 2012 for a period of three years. When this Housing First pilot ended in March 2015, the Claimant and his wife "reverted to being standard Clearing House tenants", according to the GLA in court papers. The Defendant's website states that support from TSTs was introduced in 2000 to "all new tenants and those already in tenancies who required support".
2. It has been recognised by the GLA in court papers that the Claimant and his wife can live independently. Both are degree-holding professionals with a background in teaching and psychology respectively. They do not have addictions or mental illness or behavioural issues. Their support needs are solely related to the belief-related harassment, discrimination, intimidation and victimisation they have encountered since moving to England in 2003 from Ireland with the then-aim of forming a network organisation for those abused by church. They have been twice forced to sleep rough on the streets of London, and for almost four years in total. Since February 2014, through funding from America, both the Claimant and his wife have been part-time employed by Network for Church Monitoring, a non-profit the Claimant founded in 2011. The organisation's 239 Honorary Associates include leading figures from around the world, including 15 Nobel Laureates and eight knighted professors. The Claimant most recently challenged the violation of his rights under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by means of an updated complaint to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights dated 12 July 2019[*].
Failure to provide satisfactory support
3. On 10 July 2019, the Claimant complained to the Defendant's TST in north London (TST North) about his TST caseworker's supporting email to Active Newham of Newham London Borough Council, which bounced back as undeliverable because it was sent with a full stop at the end of the address. The Claimant's stage two complaint relating to the entire week commencing 8 July 2019 was not only not upheld by the Defendant's Quality team, but it was superseded during the complaints process by his complaint against TST North for creating an immediate threat to his tenancy (see paragraph 8 below). On 17 September 2019, the Claimant was informed by TST North that he will not be provided with a reference for learning disability (LD) volunteering, and that he believes should be issued to put things right. The explanation reads: "This is not something that St Mungo's would usually provide to any client. You are not being treated differently or unfairly in this respect. TST North will not be providing this to you." As matters stand, there is a failure by the Defendant to provide the Claimant with satisfactory support in regard to a personal referee for LD volunteering (either in writing or over the phone), which poses an ongoing threat to life and/or property (see paragraph 6 below). The Claimant contends that this constitutes a failure to provide satisfactory support - and this notwithstanding his almost four months of dialogue with the Defendant on this issue. It also comes on foot of a string of other violations of the 1998 Human Rights Act (HRA) that have had a destabilising effect upon his tenancy month in, month out for well over a year.
4. Since the beginning of May 2018, the Claimant has been battling the Defendant to stabilise his tenancy. First it was problems with the renewal of their tenancy agreement, which took over two months and the threat of court action to resolve. Then, for over two months, it was problems with inaccurate case notes, which got even more serious when the Claimant discovered that notes the Defendant assured the court the year previous had been rectified were in fact being held under the Claimant's wife's name. Then, for almost three months, the Claimant battled the Defendant for a TST caseworker such as his wife would eventually be assigned, during which time he also had to stave off enforced joint visits. In January of this year, the Claimant discovered that outrageous communication notes were being held against him since May 2018. After these case notes were removed, TST North provided written assurance that any and all future notes would be agreed upon by both parties. The Claimant was then forced to engage in a four-month battle over false and misleading notes that were inputted without his authority or consent. This was followed the next month by the Claimants complaint to the Quality team, referred to in paragraph 3 above, and his preceding and ongoing battle for satisfactory support.
5. Also relevant to this case is a complaint the Claimant made on 8 April 2019 to Mayor of London Sadiq Khan about a blockade across London on his volunteer applications. The Claimant is a former physical education teacher who has taught in Glenstal Abbey, one of Ireland's top schools. He is cleared by the police to work with children and adults (DBS checked), and has a high-quality written recommendation from his professional referee. Last year the Claimant became an accredited UK Athletics assistant coach to further enhance his volunteering applications. Nonetheless, supporting emails that TST North has written to Active Newham, Bromley by Bow Centre, Sense and KEEN London have either been ignored or overlooked by the recipients. The case notes most recently rectified by the Defendant relate to his TST caseworker's supporting emails to learning disability organisations for voluntary roles that require no specialist skills or experience. For example, in the case of KEEN London, this TST caseworker's supporting email of 15 March 2019 and follow-up phone calls on 22 March and 2 April 2019 were in effect all ignored. The Claimant has had no contact with KEEN London. It cannot, therefore, be suggested that he compromised this support.
Continual threat to life and/or property
6. The failure of the Defendant to provide the Claimant with satisfactory support in regard to a personal referee for LD volunteering (either in writing or over the phone), poses an ongoing threat to life and/or property. In an email to Active Newham regarding the Claimant's case of unfair treatment against the leisure trust for Newham London, it has been acknowledged by the Defendant that "this matter [of volunteering in the community] will impact on the sustainment of Mr. Heavey's tenancy in the long term". The Claimant's tenancy agreement with Peabody states: "We have granted this tenancy to help provide support services to you. If you refuse to co-operate in providing the support services or refuse to accept the services provided, we may treat this as you breaking your tenancy." There is also a threat to life in this case considering the following range of factors as applicable:
a. The Claimant has a history of respiratory diseases such as pneumonia, bronchitis and other lung infections. Both he and his wife doubt he has the respiratory health to survive even another year or two on the streets. The Claimant is in his late fifties (59), and during their first period of homelessness, he was hospitalised with pneumonia in December 2006 and with a viral infection in October 2007. Near the end of their second period of homelessness, in April 2014, he was diagnosed with asthma as well as a chest infection.
b. Back on the streets the Claimant and his wife will be restricted to sleeping on night buses in all sorts of weather (money permitting), notwithstanding the Claimant's asthma and now increased susceptibility to respiratory disease. They were forced into this predicament prior to coming off the streets the second time because of an excessive use of force by police officers to move them out of where they were sleeping. This included the Claimant's wife being threatened with arrest on the trumped-up charge of assaulting a police officer. The Claimant's subsequent complaint to the Police Professional Standards Directorate was not upheld.
c. The Claimant and his wife have serious concerns about the health care the Claimant has or has not received over the years from the National Health Service. Prior to his hospitalisation with pneumonia in 2006, he lost consciousness while vomiting. He was discharged from Chelsea and Westminster Hospital 42 hours after admission whilst still unwell. Most recently, in 2018, NHS England did not uphold his complaint about emergency dental treatment. He was only prescribed antibiotics after his tooth erupted within days of the treatment.
Ineffective, unfair and biased complaints procedure
7. In a Witness Statement dated 14 December 2016, the Defendant wrote: "St Mungo's has an effective complaints procedure, which our clients can use to address problems they are having. Mr. Heavey has bypassed this process and instigated litigation". The Defendant's Quality team did not uphold the Claimant's complaint about his TST caseworker's supporting email to Active Newham, referred to in paragraph 3 above, but sent it back to stage one of its complaints process for further investigation on two peripheral points (only one of which was partially upheld). Moreover, the Claimant's original complaint was superseded during the complaints process by the subject his claim letter dated 12 August 2019, which was his complaint against TST North for creating an immediate threat to his tenancy by insisting that no reference would be issued, or an explanation for its non-issue provided, before a meeting has taken place between the Claimant and his TST caseworker "to discuss your support moving forward". The Claimant has repeatedly informed the Defendant that he will not engage again in the future with its complaints procedure, which he has found to be ineffective, unfair and biased. In the current situation, and after several months of dialogue with TST North on the issue of its failure to provide satisfactory support, the Claimant believes that he must seek relief in court.
Relief sought
8. The Defendant has a duty to provide the Claimant with the support he needs to stabilise his tenancy. Nonetheless, it took the Defendant over a month and a half to even mention the Claimant's claim letter dated 12 August 2019, in a clarification email from TST North dated 3 October 2019. As matters stand, there is a failure by the Defendant to provide the Claimant with satisfactory support in regard to a personal referee for LD volunteering (either in writing or over the phone), which poses an ongoing threat to life and/or property. The Claimant contends that this constitutes a failure to provide satisfactory support - and this notwithstanding several months of dialogue with the Defendant on this issue. It also comes on foot of a string of other violations of HRA Articles 8 (protection of family life and home) and 14 (prohibition of discrimination) that have had a destabilising effect upon his tenancy since the beginning of May 2018. The Claimant is, therefore, making an application to the Court for a declaration that the Defendant has acted unreasonably and in breach of duty towards him. Alternatively, the Claimant asks that leave to appeal be granted.
_________________________________
* 12 July: Threat to life: Updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Mayor of London-commissioned St Mungo's highlighted
Background
1. The Claimant and his wife are tenants of the Clearing House, which is run by the Defendant on behalf of the Mayor of London. The Clearing House provides supported housing in London for people with a history of rough sleeping. The Claimant and his wife are living in a Clearing House property owned by Peabody Housing Association. The Greater London Authority (GLA) funds and commissions the Clearing House and related Tenancy Sustainment Teams (TSTs) to the tune of £2.6 million per year. On 17 May 2014, the Claimant and his wife were housed by the Mayor of London's Housing First, an internationally acclaimed programme for rough sleepers, the core principle of which is the provision of permanent accommodation and non-compulsory support (Johnsen and Teixeira, 2010). GLA Housing First was a pilot project commissioned in March 2012 for a period of three years. When this Housing First pilot ended in March 2015, the Claimant and his wife "reverted to being standard Clearing House tenants", according to the GLA in court papers. The Defendant's website states that support from TSTs was introduced in 2000 to "all new tenants and those already in tenancies who required support".
2. It has been recognised by the GLA in court papers that the Claimant and his wife can live independently. Both are degree-holding professionals with a background in teaching and psychology respectively. They do not have addictions or mental illness or behavioural issues. Their support needs are solely related to the belief-related harassment, discrimination, intimidation and victimisation they have encountered since moving to England in 2003 from Ireland with the then-aim of forming a network organisation for those abused by church. They have been twice forced to sleep rough on the streets of London, and for almost four years in total. Since February 2014, through funding from America, both the Claimant and his wife have been part-time employed by Network for Church Monitoring, a non-profit the Claimant founded in 2011. The organisation's 239 Honorary Associates include leading figures from around the world, including 15 Nobel Laureates and eight knighted professors. The Claimant most recently challenged the violation of his rights under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by means of an updated complaint to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights dated 12 July 2019[*].
Failure to provide satisfactory support
3. On 10 July 2019, the Claimant complained to the Defendant's TST in north London (TST North) about his TST caseworker's supporting email to Active Newham of Newham London Borough Council, which bounced back as undeliverable because it was sent with a full stop at the end of the address. The Claimant's stage two complaint relating to the entire week commencing 8 July 2019 was not only not upheld by the Defendant's Quality team, but it was superseded during the complaints process by his complaint against TST North for creating an immediate threat to his tenancy (see paragraph 8 below). On 17 September 2019, the Claimant was informed by TST North that he will not be provided with a reference for learning disability (LD) volunteering, and that he believes should be issued to put things right. The explanation reads: "This is not something that St Mungo's would usually provide to any client. You are not being treated differently or unfairly in this respect. TST North will not be providing this to you." As matters stand, there is a failure by the Defendant to provide the Claimant with satisfactory support in regard to a personal referee for LD volunteering (either in writing or over the phone), which poses an ongoing threat to life and/or property (see paragraph 6 below). The Claimant contends that this constitutes a failure to provide satisfactory support - and this notwithstanding his almost four months of dialogue with the Defendant on this issue. It also comes on foot of a string of other violations of the 1998 Human Rights Act (HRA) that have had a destabilising effect upon his tenancy month in, month out for well over a year.
4. Since the beginning of May 2018, the Claimant has been battling the Defendant to stabilise his tenancy. First it was problems with the renewal of their tenancy agreement, which took over two months and the threat of court action to resolve. Then, for over two months, it was problems with inaccurate case notes, which got even more serious when the Claimant discovered that notes the Defendant assured the court the year previous had been rectified were in fact being held under the Claimant's wife's name. Then, for almost three months, the Claimant battled the Defendant for a TST caseworker such as his wife would eventually be assigned, during which time he also had to stave off enforced joint visits. In January of this year, the Claimant discovered that outrageous communication notes were being held against him since May 2018. After these case notes were removed, TST North provided written assurance that any and all future notes would be agreed upon by both parties. The Claimant was then forced to engage in a four-month battle over false and misleading notes that were inputted without his authority or consent. This was followed the next month by the Claimants complaint to the Quality team, referred to in paragraph 3 above, and his preceding and ongoing battle for satisfactory support.
5. Also relevant to this case is a complaint the Claimant made on 8 April 2019 to Mayor of London Sadiq Khan about a blockade across London on his volunteer applications. The Claimant is a former physical education teacher who has taught in Glenstal Abbey, one of Ireland's top schools. He is cleared by the police to work with children and adults (DBS checked), and has a high-quality written recommendation from his professional referee. Last year the Claimant became an accredited UK Athletics assistant coach to further enhance his volunteering applications. Nonetheless, supporting emails that TST North has written to Active Newham, Bromley by Bow Centre, Sense and KEEN London have either been ignored or overlooked by the recipients. The case notes most recently rectified by the Defendant relate to his TST caseworker's supporting emails to learning disability organisations for voluntary roles that require no specialist skills or experience. For example, in the case of KEEN London, this TST caseworker's supporting email of 15 March 2019 and follow-up phone calls on 22 March and 2 April 2019 were in effect all ignored. The Claimant has had no contact with KEEN London. It cannot, therefore, be suggested that he compromised this support.
Continual threat to life and/or property
6. The failure of the Defendant to provide the Claimant with satisfactory support in regard to a personal referee for LD volunteering (either in writing or over the phone), poses an ongoing threat to life and/or property. In an email to Active Newham regarding the Claimant's case of unfair treatment against the leisure trust for Newham London, it has been acknowledged by the Defendant that "this matter [of volunteering in the community] will impact on the sustainment of Mr. Heavey's tenancy in the long term". The Claimant's tenancy agreement with Peabody states: "We have granted this tenancy to help provide support services to you. If you refuse to co-operate in providing the support services or refuse to accept the services provided, we may treat this as you breaking your tenancy." There is also a threat to life in this case considering the following range of factors as applicable:
a. The Claimant has a history of respiratory diseases such as pneumonia, bronchitis and other lung infections. Both he and his wife doubt he has the respiratory health to survive even another year or two on the streets. The Claimant is in his late fifties (59), and during their first period of homelessness, he was hospitalised with pneumonia in December 2006 and with a viral infection in October 2007. Near the end of their second period of homelessness, in April 2014, he was diagnosed with asthma as well as a chest infection.
b. Back on the streets the Claimant and his wife will be restricted to sleeping on night buses in all sorts of weather (money permitting), notwithstanding the Claimant's asthma and now increased susceptibility to respiratory disease. They were forced into this predicament prior to coming off the streets the second time because of an excessive use of force by police officers to move them out of where they were sleeping. This included the Claimant's wife being threatened with arrest on the trumped-up charge of assaulting a police officer. The Claimant's subsequent complaint to the Police Professional Standards Directorate was not upheld.
c. The Claimant and his wife have serious concerns about the health care the Claimant has or has not received over the years from the National Health Service. Prior to his hospitalisation with pneumonia in 2006, he lost consciousness while vomiting. He was discharged from Chelsea and Westminster Hospital 42 hours after admission whilst still unwell. Most recently, in 2018, NHS England did not uphold his complaint about emergency dental treatment. He was only prescribed antibiotics after his tooth erupted within days of the treatment.
Ineffective, unfair and biased complaints procedure
7. In a Witness Statement dated 14 December 2016, the Defendant wrote: "St Mungo's has an effective complaints procedure, which our clients can use to address problems they are having. Mr. Heavey has bypassed this process and instigated litigation". The Defendant's Quality team did not uphold the Claimant's complaint about his TST caseworker's supporting email to Active Newham, referred to in paragraph 3 above, but sent it back to stage one of its complaints process for further investigation on two peripheral points (only one of which was partially upheld). Moreover, the Claimant's original complaint was superseded during the complaints process by the subject his claim letter dated 12 August 2019, which was his complaint against TST North for creating an immediate threat to his tenancy by insisting that no reference would be issued, or an explanation for its non-issue provided, before a meeting has taken place between the Claimant and his TST caseworker "to discuss your support moving forward". The Claimant has repeatedly informed the Defendant that he will not engage again in the future with its complaints procedure, which he has found to be ineffective, unfair and biased. In the current situation, and after several months of dialogue with TST North on the issue of its failure to provide satisfactory support, the Claimant believes that he must seek relief in court.
Relief sought
8. The Defendant has a duty to provide the Claimant with the support he needs to stabilise his tenancy. Nonetheless, it took the Defendant over a month and a half to even mention the Claimant's claim letter dated 12 August 2019, in a clarification email from TST North dated 3 October 2019. As matters stand, there is a failure by the Defendant to provide the Claimant with satisfactory support in regard to a personal referee for LD volunteering (either in writing or over the phone), which poses an ongoing threat to life and/or property. The Claimant contends that this constitutes a failure to provide satisfactory support - and this notwithstanding several months of dialogue with the Defendant on this issue. It also comes on foot of a string of other violations of HRA Articles 8 (protection of family life and home) and 14 (prohibition of discrimination) that have had a destabilising effect upon his tenancy since the beginning of May 2018. The Claimant is, therefore, making an application to the Court for a declaration that the Defendant has acted unreasonably and in breach of duty towards him. Alternatively, the Claimant asks that leave to appeal be granted.
_________________________________
* 12 July: Threat to life: Updated complaint to the United Nations under Article 19 (freedom of expression) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Mayor of London-commissioned St Mungo's highlighted
