Transport for London eOur Ref: ACYour Ref:

15 July 2015

Mr Declan Heavey71 Queens Road WestLondonE13 OPE

Transport for LondonLegal

Windsor House42-50 Victoria StreetLondon SW IH OTL

Fax 020 3054 3556www.tfl.gov.uk

Dear Mr Heavey

Please find enclosed by way of service the GLA's Acknowledgment of Service andGrounds of Defence in this claim.

Yours sincerely

If Anna CondliffeLegalDirect Line: 020 3054 7937Email: annacondliffe@tfl.gov.ukPlease note we do not accept service by email

Enc.

MAYOR OF LONDON

RECEIVED IN---AOUINISTRATIw.:COURT OFFICE

In the High Court of Justice1 ~ JUL 2015 Administrative Court

E••1... J.- 14laimNo. C0/2872f2015

d - -~ ~---• Claimant(s) Declsn Heavey

(including ref)herfoord)

Defendant(s) Greater London Authority

OPEBQY Interested Single Homeless Project

Parties

._..

Judicial ReviewAcknowledgment of Servic

Name and address of person to be s'_e.... --_.__ .._---Name(1) Declan Heavey(2) Single Homeless Project (ref: Liz Rut

AddreS$(1) 71 Queens Road West, London E13

(2) 245 Gray's Inn Road, London WC1X

SECTION ATick the appropriate box

1. I intend to contest all of the claim

complete sections Band F

complete sections B, C, D and F2_ I intend to contest part of the claim

3. I do not intend to contest the claim complete section F

4. The defendant (interested party) is a court ortribunal and intends to make a submission. complete sections B, C and F

5. The defendant (interested party) is a court ortribunal and does no1 intend to make asubmission.

6. The applicant has indicated that this is a claim to Dwhich the Aarhus Convention applies.

complete sections E and F

Note: If the application seeks to judicially review the decision of a court or tribunal, the court or tribunal need only providethe Administrative Court with as much evidence as it can about the decision to help the Administrative Courtperform its judicial function.

SECTION Bfnsert the name and address of any person you consider should be added as an interested party.

address address

ITelePhone no. -I [Fax no... _ .._-_.

ITelePhone no. J IFax no.

I""'" odd ress I·~a;,add""

1 of 4N462 Judidal review Acknowledgment of service (04.13) © Crown copyright 2013This form is reproduced from http://hmclsformffnderJustice.qov.uIrIHMCTSlFormFinder.do and is subject to Crown copyright protection. Contains publicsector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v2.0

SECTION CSummary of grounds for contesting the claim. If you are contesting only part of the claim, set out which part before youive our rounds for contestin it. If au are a court or tribunal filin a submission, lease indicate that this is the case.

Please see attached Grounds.

20f4N462 Judicial review Acknowledgment of service (04.13) © Crown copyright 2013This form is reproduced from http://hmctsformfinder.iustice.gov.uklUMCTSIFormnnder.do and is subject to Crown copyright protection. Contains publicsector infonnation licensed under the Open Government Licence v2.0

'. -

SECTION DGive details of any directions you will be asking the court to make, or tick the box to indicate that a separate applicationnotice is attached.

~/A

If you are seeking a dlrection that this matter be heard at an Administrative Court venue other than that at which thisclaim was issued, you should complete, lodge and serve on all other parties Form N464 with this acknowledgment ofservice.

SECTION EResponse to the claimant's contention that the claim is an Aarhus claim

Do you deny that the claim is an Aarhus Convention claim?

If Yes, please set out your grounds for denial in the box below.

DYes D No

SECTION F

"delete 9Sappropriate

Position Qr office held

SO!J c..\ TtJ R~AN5(OKC fo~

LQ;.j"90tV

*(+b9Iieve)(The defendant believes) that the facts statedin this form are true.*1am duly authorised by the defendant to sign thisstatement.

(If signing onbehalf of firmor company,court ortribune!)

b~Oy~~~;~1ISI.OO.4-c-~~your solicitor or . ~f!____..:__litigation friend)

Give an address to which notices about this case can besent to you

If you have instructed counsel, please give their nameaddress and contact details below.

namaAnna Condliffe, Transport for London Legal

addressWindsor House, 42-50 Victoria StreetLondon SW1 H OTL

address

----j.._IT_el_e_Ph_O_"_e_no_" _,1 Lax~o.IFaxno.

IE-mail addressE·mail addressannacondliffe@tfl.gov.uk

Completed forms, together with a copy, should be lodged with the Administrative Court Office(court address, over the page), at which this claim was issued within 21 days of service of the claimupon you, and further copies should be served on the Claimant(s), any other Oefendant(s) and anyinterested parties within 7 days of lodgement with the Court.

30'4N462 Judicial review Acknowledgment of service (04.13) © Crown copyright 2013This form is reproduced from hftp://hmctsformfinder,juslice.gov.uklHMCTSIFormFinder,do and is subject to Crown copyright protection. Contains public.sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v?O

• Administrative Court in LondonAdministrative Court Office, Room C315, Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, london, WC2A 2LL.

Administrative Court addresses

• Administrative Court in BirminghamAdministrative Court Office, Birmingham Civil Justice Centre, Priory Courts, 33 Bull Street,Birmingham B4 60S.

• Administrative Court in WalesAdministrative Court Office, Cardiff Civil Justice Centre, 2 Park Street, Cardiff, CF10 1ET .:

• Administrative Court in LeedsAdministrative Court Office, Leeds Combined Court Centre, 1 Oxford Row, Leeds, LS1 3BG.

• Administrative Court in ManchesterAdministrative Court Office, Manchester Civil Justice Centre, 1 Bridge Street West,Manchester, M3 3FX.

40(4N462 Judicial review Acknowledgment of service (0413) © Crown copyright 2013This form is reproduced from hflp:Jlhmctsfcrmfinder.jusfice.gov. tlklHMCTSlFormFinderdo and is subject to Crown copyright protection. Contains publicsector infonnation licensed under the Open Govemment licence v2.0

Claimant

CO/2872/2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

BETWEEN

THE QUEEN

on the application of

Declan Heavey

-and-

The Greater London Authority

Defendant

-and -

Single Homeless Project

Interested Party

DEFENDANT'S GROUNDS OF OPPOSITION TO THE CLAIM

1. The Claimant seeks permission to bring a judicial review of a decision which hedescribes in his claim form as "the Defendant's decision to uphold the Claimant andhis wife's referral from GLA Housing First to Clearing HouselT~T in contravention ofthe 2014/15 Pilot Funding Agreement between GLA and SHP at Schedule 2." Thedate of the decision is said to be 23 March 2015.

2. For the reasons set out in these Grounds, the Defendant considers that the claim ismisconceived. The Defendant respectfully asks the Court to refuse permission andto declare the claim to be totally without merit.

Background

The Clearing House

3, In 2011 the Department for Communities & Local Government devolvedresponsibility to the Defendant for the provision of pan-London rough sleepingservices. This included the services provided by the Clearing House. Working inpartnership with housing providers and organisations which refer rough sleepers forhousing. the role of the Clearing House is to co-ordinate the letting, management andsupport of designated Rough Sleeper Initiative (RSI) properties so that verified roughsleepers with support needs can access suitable accommodation and best use ismade of RSI housing stock. The GLA currently commissions St Mungo's Broadwayto provide Clearing House services.

4. Traditionally, tenancies granted for Clearing House properties are for two years: withan option to renew. There is an expectation that all Clearing House tenants have toengage with a tenancy support team (TST) and will have an allocated support workerto ensure that they receive appropriate support to prevent them from returning tosleeping rough, to assist them to maintain their tenancy and to help them move on.

The Housing First Project

5, GLA Housing First was a pilot project commissioned in March 2012 for a period of 3years, finishing in March 2015. Its aim was to provide small numbers of homelesspeople and rough sleepers in London with stable (at least two year) tenancies inprivate, social or council housing in circumstances where their support needs mayotherwise have excluded them from access to such housing. The housing used forthis project came from the RSI housing stock managed by the Clearing House.

6. Under the project, clients were first provided with accommodation and then receivedsupport with practical tenancy-related issues from Housing First support workersThey also had the option of further support such as training and coaching, with theaim of helping clients to sustain their tenancies. However, receipt of such supportwas not a condition of the tenancy.

7. To provide the support services, GLA commissioned 3 charitable organisations,Including the Interested Party, Single Homeless Project (SHP). The GLA enteredinto a funding agreement (the Agreement) with SHP dated 13th March 2014, a copyof which has been attached to the Claim Form.

8. The Claimant and his wife became Housing First clients on 17 May 2014 and wereprovided with accommodation by Family Mosaic Housing Association. Supportservices were made available by SHP.

The decision under challenge

9. On 4 September 2014, following a decision by the GLA not to extend the HousingFirst pilot due to lack of funding, SHP wrote to the Claimant to inform him that the 3year GLA Housing First pilot would be coming to an end in March 2015.

::

. ,

10. The Agreement provides at clause 3.1 that it shall continue in force until 31 March2015. Schedule 2 of the Agreement sets out milestones for the project, noting thatby 31 March 2015 "secure exit plans" should be in place for all clients still intenancies a1 that point. There is no explanation or definition in the Agreement ofwhat constitutes a "secure exit pian".

11. SHP informed the Claimant that it had been asked to put in place exit strategies forHousing First tenants, Since SHP's involvement in the project was to end on 31March 2015, alternative arrangements were necessary. It was decided as part of theexit strategy in September 2014 that all Housing First tenants would be referred backto the Clearing House for assessment, to ensure that they felt able to manage theirtenancies with TST support. In other words, at the end of the Housing First pilot, thetenants would revert to being standard Clearing House tenants and as such wouldfall to be referred for support to the TST like all other Clearing House tenants, TheDefendant considered it important to ensure that arrangements were in place forformer Housing First tenants so that they continued to have support at the end of theproject.

12, It is evident from the statement of facts and grounds in the Claim Form that theClaimant objects to the decision to refer him to St Mungo's Broadway/Clearing House{the "referral decision"). However, because the referral decision was taken in 2014(by 4 September 2014 at the very latest) he is now far too late to challenge thatdecision in judicial review proceedings. A claimant in judicial review proceedingsmust bring his claim "promptly" and in any event within 3 montt:s of the decisionbeing challenged,

13, It may be for this reason that the Claimant has identified the decision underchallenge as being the Defendant's "decision" on 23 March 2015 to uphold thereferral decision. In fact, the Defendant's letter of 23 March 2015 (which wasattached to the Claim Form) was a response to the Claimant's pre-action protocolletter. It did not amount to a new decision and the GLA has not reviewed the earlierdecision or taken any new decision regarding the Claimant's tenancy.

Alleged illegality

14, As set out above, the Defendant denies that the Claimant has identified any decisionwhich is susceptible to challenge by judicial review. Even assuming that there is inprinciple a decision which could be challenged, the Claimant has not advanced anyarguable legal grounds which would justify the grant of permission.

15. The basis of the Claimant's claim is that the "decision" to uphold the referral decisionis in breach of the Agreement, because it does not constitute a "secure exit plan" asreferred to in the milestones in Schedule 2. The Claimant considers that referral toClearing House with support from TST is not a "secure exit plan" because the natureof the tenancies provided by Clearing House differs from those that were offeredunder Housing First.

(i) The Agreement does not define what is meant by a "secure exit plan" and it is nota term of art. The GLA, acting reasonably and within its statutory powers, wasentitled to choose Clearing House as a replacement for the Housing First pilot. Thereis no basis on which that decision can be said to be unlawful.

17. Although the nature of the tenancies offered by Housing First and Clearing Housemay be different, this does not give the Claimant any arguable legal basis for seekingto challenge the "decision". In particular:

(ii) The Claimant can have had no expectation that the Housing First pilot wouldcontinue beyond March 2015 - it was always intended to be and was consistentlyreferred to as a pilot, as illustrated by the date of termination of the Agreement. TheClaimant has been aware of this fact since 4 September 2014 at the latest.

(iii) The change from Housing First to Clearing House does not give rise to anybreach of the Claimant's human rights, as alleged or at all.

(iv) There is no legal basis for the Claimant's attempt to seek damages in theseproceedings; the Claimant has not identified any cause of action in respect of whichdamages could be recoverable.

Relief sought

18. The Claimant seeks a quashing order in respect of the alleged "decision" but it is notclear what he hopes to achieve: the Housing First project is at an end so continuationof the tenancy on that basis is not an option.

Conclusion

19. For the reasons set out in these Grounds, the Defendant submits that permission forthis claim should be refused. In the Defendant's submission the claim should also bedeclared totally without merit.

20. The Defendant seeks its costs of preparing the Acknowledgment of Service.

Transport for London Legal

14 July 2015