"I'm Disabled and I'm Being Evicted"

Protection from Eviction for Tenants with a disability under the DDA

A recent case involving residents of Burrington, Devon has resulted in further protection being given to those with a disability under the Disability Discrimination Act. A tenant with a mental impairment that resulting in persistent antisocial behaviour, disturbing her neighbours and the public, was protected from eviction from her home on the basis that such an eviction would be discriminatory.

The tenant suffered from schizophrenia and paranoid psychosis that resulted in her hearing voices, believing that she was being persecuted, under surveillance and that her environment was being contaminated. This caused significant anxiety and resulted in persistent anti-social, hostile, threatening and abusive behaviour. Matters complained of specifically by her neighbours were: shouting, keeping them awake at night, using foul language and making rude gestures. Both the police and social services were called to the property on a regular basis.

The landlord applied to the Court for a possession order to evict the tenant as she had breached a covenant in the lease not to cause ‘nuisance, annoyance, inconvenience or harassment to third parties’. At first instance, the Judge held that the possession order should be granted, as the landlord’s rights had to take precedent. On appeal, the Court decided that the DDA should take precedent and said that the main question to be considered was whether the breach of the tenancy was caused by her disability?

As the tenant was unable to prevent her anti-social behaviour the Court held that the breach was solely as a result of her disability. Under the DDA, she therefore could not be treated less favourably than someone who was not disabled, unless there was an objective justification. If she were treated less favourably, i.e. by being evicted, she would have been discriminated against. The tenant was therefore not evicted, despite the problems that were in existence.

Could eviction have been objectively justified? The Court recognised that in certain circumstances eviction would be justified if necessary in order not to endanger the health and safety of any person (including the disabled person). There would need to be shown a real risk either to the individual or the neighbours. In this particular case the fact that the neighbours were getting ‘worn down’ was not sufficient to warrant the discrimination.

This case is in accordance with a recent government announcement of it’s intention to further extend rights for disabled persons, by widening the definition of who is ‘disabled’ and by introducing changes in relation to transport, premises and the public sector.

Verity Slater