Intentionally homeless — 4-condition test
Intentionally homeless (s.191) = a common ground for refusal of main duty. The council must prove ALL 4 conditions: deliberate act + causal link + accommodation was available + reasonable to occupy. If even one fails, the finding is unlawful. For refugees the key point: fleeing a country of persecution is NOT intentional.
4 conditions — all must be satisfied
If even one is breached, the intentionally homeless finding is unlawful.
The act or omission must be conscious. s.191(2): an act «in good faith of unaware of relevant fact» is NOT deliberate. Mental illness / capacity issues are NOT deliberate (Hijazi v K&C [2003] EWCA Civ 692).
«But for» test — the act was the operative cause of homelessness. If the real cause was Home Office eviction / relationship breakdown / employment loss, intentionality fails.
«Available» = could be occupied with family members (s.176). Refugees whose children are in war zones did not have «available» accommodation.
Safety valve. s.177 — never reasonable if probable DA / violence (including psychological, economic — DAA 2021). Affordability — account for all benefits + essential expenses (Samuels v Birmingham [2019] UKSC 28). Overcrowding, poor condition — also factors.
Fleeing a country where you faced persecution by law does not make you intentionally homeless. Accommodation in a country of persecution is by definition NOT reasonable to continue to occupy (s.177). The causal element is persecution, not your «deliberate» act.
Councils that argue «you voluntarily left your country» breach R v Brent ex p Awua [1996] AC 55 (HL). This is the most common council error against refugees. Request s.202 review immediately + s.204 appeal on point of law.
Common scenarios and how to defend
Code Ch 9 requires distinguishing «won\'t pay» vs «can\'t pay». An affordability assessment is mandatory after Samuels.
Defence: 12 months bank statements + benefit award letters + Joseph Rowntree Foundation MIS as benchmark. If money was objectively short, NOT deliberate.
Defence: mental capacity (Hijazi), addiction recovery, whether it was actually you or others in the household. Don't blame «family» without basis.
If a sponsor asked you to leave / arrangement broke down, usually NOT intentional (Code Ch 12 specifically mentions Ukraine sponsor breakdown).
Never intentional (s.177). Including coercive control, economic abuse. In parallel, auto priority need.
Only intentional if the offer was lawfully suitable + refusal followed proper notice of consequences. If the offer is not suitable, accept under protest + s.202 review.
Key defences
What you get after an intentional finding
Council does not owe main duty. But it must:
- s.190(2)(a) — temporary accommodation for a «reasonable period» to find your own housing. Conville v Richmond [2006] EWCA Civ 718: assessed against your real ability to find, not the council's budget. Families with children — usually weeks.
- s.190(2)(b) — advice and assistance, including PHP
- Children Act s.17 referral — for families with children, Social Services may provide independent support
You have 21 days for a written s.202 review request. Don't wait — write immediately: «I request a review of the intentional homelessness decision dated [date]. Detailed grounds will follow within 15 working days».
Free help: Shelter 0808 800 4444 · Legal aid solicitor for housing — gov.uk/find-a-legal-adviser. This is a complex category — going alone for review is not recommended.
Frequently asked questions
Is fleeing your country from persecution intentional?
NO. Under s.191, the accommodation must have been «reasonable to continue to occupy». Accommodation in a country of persecution is by definition not reasonable. Awua v Brent [1996] AC 55. Strongest defence for refugees.
Are rent arrears automatically intentional?
NO. Code Ch 9 requires distinguishing «won't pay» vs «can't pay». After Samuels v Birmingham [2019] UKSC 28, an affordability test is mandatory: account for benefits + objective essential expenses (food, utilities, transport).
Is leaving a partner intentional?
NO. s.177 Housing Act 1996: accommodation is not reasonable to occupy if probable that occupation will lead to DA. DAA 2021 widened «abuse» to include economic, controlling, psychological. Never intentional.
If the council still found me intentional, what am I entitled to?
s.190 «reasonable period» temporary accommodation (Conville v Richmond [2006] EWCA Civ 718) + advice and assistance. Families with children get a parallel referral to Social Services under s.17 Children Act 1989.
What breaks the «chain» of intentionality?
A period of settled accommodation after the intentional finding (Awua, Knight v Vale Royal [2003] EWCA Civ 1258). A 6-month AST is not automatically settled — needs «real prospect of continuation» (Bullale v Westminster [2020]).