Out-of-area placement
s.208(1) Housing Act 1996: council must, so far as reasonably practicable, provide accommodation in its own district. Out-of-area = exception requiring justification. Nzolameso v Westminster [2015] UKSC 22: published policy + iterative procedure + individuated reasoning. Alibkhiet [2018] narrowed it: challenges harder, but process failures still work.
What the law says
s.208(1): «So far as reasonably practicable a local housing authority shall in discharging their housing functions under this Part secure that accommodation is available for the occupation of the applicant in their district.»
s.208(2)–(4): If accommodation is secured outside the district, the placing authority must notify the receiving LA in writing within 14 days (applicant name, household, address, date, function).
«So far as reasonably practicable» is a lower threshold than «impossible», higher than «inconvenient». It's a question of fact reviewable.
When s.208 applies
Doesn't apply where another LA accepts referral under s.198 — there the receiving LA owes the duty in its own district.
Suitability of location (Order 2012 art 2)
Council must consider:
- (a) Distance from the placing authority district
- (b) Disruption to employment of the applicant or household member
- (c) Disruption to education — especially children + young people
- (d) Proximity to medical facilities + support currently used + essential for well-being
- (e) Proximity to local services, amenities, transport
2022/2023/2024 amendments added caring responsibilities + temporary modifications for recent arrivals (relevant for Ukrainians + Afghan resettlement).
Nzolameso v Westminster [2015] UKSC 22
Facts: Westminster offered Ms Nzolameso (single mother of 5 children) a property in Bletchley near Milton Keynes — about 50 miles. Review + County Court appeal failed. UKSC quashed.
Key principles (Lady Hale):
- Council must have a published policy on procurement + allocation of TA, including ranking in-borough → near → out-of-area
- Decision-making must be iterative: home district first, then near, only then further
- Decision letter must show individuated reasoning — what specifically was done for this family. Standard «we have a Westminster shortage» paragraphs are NOT enough
- Best practice: keep records of which properties considered + why rejected
- Children\'s welfare under s.11 Children Act 2004 — primary consideration
Alibkhiet & Adam [2018] EWCA Civ 2742 — narrowing
Court of Appeal upheld out-of-area offers from Brent (Birmingham) and Westminster (Worcester Park). Lessons:
- Published policy + reasoned decision letter can satisfy Nzolameso even with far placement
- Affordability + severe local supply pressures are legitimate «reasonable practicability» factors
- Court won't micro-manage councils
- Decision must show genuine engagement with the family's specific circumstances — schools, work, medical, support network
What this means for challenging: challenges now usually win on process failure (no policy, generic letter, no engagement with the evidence the family submitted) — NOT on distance alone.
What to do if offered out-of-area
- Don't refuse on the spot. Refusal can end the duty (s.193(5) / s.193(7F)). Accept under protest + request s.202(1)(f) review
- Request the council's out-of-area placement policy + written reasons for this specific offer (which in-area / near-area properties were considered?)
- Gather an evidence pack for review (see below)
- 21 day deadline for review request (s.202(3))
- Request accommodation pending review under s.188(3)
- If review fails — s.204 County Court appeal on a point of law within 21 days. Legal aid available (means + merits-tested)
- In parallel — LGSCO complaint for maladministration. 83% of complaints upheld in 2024-25
Evidence pack for review
Common failures
Out-of-area can protect a survivor — Code + DAA 2021 (auto priority need) recognise this. But it must be:
- Discussed with the survivor, not imposed
- Risk-checked against the perpetrator's networks + locations
- Supported by an onward safety plan (DA service in receiving area, safeguarding referral, school transfer protocol)
Refugee survivors face an extra layer — moving away from interpreters, faith community, immigration solicitor mid-claim can itself be a safety risk.
Frequently asked questions
Can the council refuse to house me in their borough?
Only if «not reasonably practicable» (s.208(1)). Council must have a published policy + iterative process: in-borough → near-borough → out-of-area. And a reasoned decision letter with individuated assessment.
Westminster offered Birmingham — what to do?
Don't refuse verbally. Accept under protest + request s.202(1)(f) review. Gather evidence pack: school letter, GP letter, employer letter, support service letters. Demand the out-of-area policy + Nzolameso enquiries.
What's in Nzolameso v Westminster?
UKSC 2015 — quashed Westminster's placement of a family with 5 children in Milton Keynes (50 miles). Set principles: published policy, iterative procedure (in → near → far), individuated reasoning, children's welfare per s.11 Children Act 2004 — primary consideration.
Alibkhiet narrowed Nzolameso — what does that mean?
EWCA Civ 2018 — affordability + supply pressures can justify out-of-area. Court won't micro-manage. Challenges usually win on process failure (no policy, generic letter, no engagement with evidence) — NOT on distance alone.