header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
23 March 2018
Issue: 7786 / Categories: Features , Civil way , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Civil way: 23 March 2018

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

  • Housing officers distraught.
  • Enforcement officers smiling.
  • No Corn from Cobb.

THAT WAS MY HOME THAT WAS: 1ST DOSE

A feast for housing lawyers. A nightmare for local authority housing officers. More appeals for the county court. And maybe a blessing for the actual and threatened homeless, particularly those who have no priority need or are intentionally homeless. That, folks, is the Homelessness Reduction Act 2017 (HRA 2017), which amends the Housing Act 1996 and is brought into force with application to England and Wales only on 3 April 2018 by SI 2018/167. It builds on the full housing duty owed to the those who score on priority and unintentional homelessness. A new statutory code of guidance for local authorities has recently been issued and can be found here.

A person will be deemed to be threatened with homelessness if it is likely they will become actually homeless within 56 days as against the current 28 days as will the recipient of a valid assured shorthold s 21 of the Housing

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll