Council Decision Challenge Solicitors — Challenging Local Authority Decisions on Housing, Social Care & Planning

A refusal to accept a homelessness application (a decision that the household is not homeless, not eligible, not in priority need, or intentionally homeless) can be challenged through a s.202 review, which must be requested within 21 days of the written decision. The review is conducted by a different officer in the council's housing department. If the review upholds the original decision, there is a further right of appeal to the County Court (s.204 HA 1996) within 21 days of the review decision. The County Court appeal is on a point of law — whether the review officer's decision was made on a point of law that is wrong, or whether the officer failed to take account of a relevant fact. A solicitor prepares the s.202 review submission and manages the s.204 County Court appeal where needed. An injunction can be sought where the council refuses interim accommodation while the review is pending.

Yes — the Care Act 2014 eligibility criteria (Care and Support (Eligibility Criteria) Regulations 2015) require that the council find needs eligible where: (1) the needs arise from physical or mental impairment or illness; (2) as a result, the adult is unable to achieve 2 or more of the 10 specified outcomes (maintaining personal hygiene, getting dressed, preparing food, managing medication, etc.); and (3) as a consequence, there is or is likely to be a significant impact on the adult's wellbeing. A council that applies the threshold incorrectly — for example, by considering only what the person can do with the support they currently receive, rather than their needs without support — makes a legal error. A solicitor challenges the eligibility assessment decision through the council's complaint process and — where the council refuses to reconsider — through judicial review.

Yes — a third party (for example, a neighbour or community group) can challenge a planning permission granted to a developer through judicial review in the High Court (CPR Part 54). The challenge must be brought within 6 weeks of the planning permission notice (Town and Country Planning Act 1990 s.288 for development plan decisions; CPR 54 PD8 for other planning permissions). The grounds of challenge include: the council failed to follow required statutory procedures; the decision was not in accordance with the development plan without proper justification; the council failed to take into account relevant environmental impact; or the decision was irrational. Planning JR is a specialist and technically complex area — a solicitor advises on the prospects and manages the proceedings.

Before complaining to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, the council's internal complaints process must generally be exhausted. The LGO accepts complaints within 12 months of the complainant becoming aware of the problem. The LGO investigates complaints about: housing (allocation, homelessness, repairs); planning; adult social care (needs assessment, care provision, charging); education (SEN support, school admissions); and other council services. The LGO can award financial remedies (distress and inconvenience, direct payments, cost reimbursement), require apologies, and recommend service improvements. A solicitor prepares the LGO complaint, identifies the specific maladministration or service failure, and challenges any finding that fails to fully recognise the impact of the council's failure.

The Administrative Court's Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review requires a claimant to send a pre-action protocol (PAP) letter to the defendant public body before issuing JR proceedings. The PAP letter: explains the legal basis for the challenge; identifies the decision being challenged; states what remedy is sought; and gives the council 14 days (or 7 days in urgent cases) to respond and reconsider its decision. In practice, the PAP letter is often effective — it forces the council to review its decision in the knowledge that JR proceedings will follow if it fails to reconsider. Many cases are resolved at PAP stage without the need for full judicial review proceedings. A solicitor prepares a well-drafted PAP letter that identifies the legal error clearly and sets out the consequences of failing to respond — giving the council every reason to reconsider.