ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00011156
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | A Tenant | A Property Management Company |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000 | CA-00014875-001 | 03/10/2017 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 17/01/2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marian Duffy
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 25 of the Equal Status Act, 2000, and following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
The complainant is claiming that she was discriminated against on the housing assistance ground (Section 3(3B) in terms of Section 6(1)(c) of the Equal Status Act 2000 as amended. She is alleging that the respondent failed to process her housing assistant payment application a for a period of eight months and this had a detrimental effect on her financial situation. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant applied for social housing and she was informed by the local Council on the 10th of February 2017 that she qualified for social housing, but the Council was not in a position to allocate a house to her. In the meantime, she qualified for social housing support and was provided with information on the HAP scheme and an application form to apply for same. She said that she was a tenant of a rented house since 2015 and in March 2017 she asked the landlord to sign the application form for the HAP scheme. The landlord did not respond. On the 11th of May 2017, she received a letter from the respondent stating that they had been appointed as property managers by the Receivers and was given bank details about paying her rent to the respondent and instructing her not to pay the rent to the landlord. She said that she sent the HAP form to the respondent following this letter in May 2017, but it was not signed. She then received letters in August and September from the respondent alleging that she was in arrears with her rent. The complainant said that while she struggled financially she was not in arrears but she needed the HAP scheme to help pay her rent. On the 3rd of August 2017, the complainant said that the Citizen Information service wrote to the respondent on her behalf requesting the return of the completed HAP form and pointing out that discriminatory treatment on the housing assistance ground is prohibited under the Equal Status Act 2000 – 2015. A further letter issued to the respondent on the 6th of September 2017 requesting completion of the form but she received no response. On the 3rd of October 2017, the complainant referred her complaint to the WRC. In early November 2017, she received a handwritten note from the respondent requesting that she forward another copy of the HAP form (Part B) to them for completion. The complainant sent the form and on the 8th of January 2018, she met with the local Council and she was signed up to the HAP scheme. Her participation on the scheme commenced on the 8th of December 2017 and she was granted €40 per week rent support. The complainant said that the respondent repeatedly ignored her requests to complete Part B of the form since May 2017 and consequently, she was placed under significant financial pressure trying to keep up to date with her rent as well as meeting all the other household costs. It was submitted that while the respondent completed the HAP form in December 2017, this had been reluctantly done on foot of the complaint to the WRC. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The respondent stated that the complainant’s original landlord was put into receivership on the 11th of May 2017. The respondent was appointed by the Receiver to manage the property and collect the rents. On the 11th of May, they wrote to the complainant and informed her of their appointment. The respondent’s witnesses accepted that they received the HAP form from the complainant in May 2017. Ms A. said that a tax number was required to complete the form and it was requested from the Receiver. They got the tax number on 1st of September 2017. The relevant part B of the HAP form was missing and they requested a copy from the complainant. Ms A said that she then contacted the Council and got another copy of the form which she filled out and returned to the Council on the 13th December 2017. The respondent submitted that the delay occurred in completing the because of the missing tax number and a further delay occurred because they did not have the relevant Part B of the HAP form. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The issue for determination in this complaint is whether the Respondent discriminated against the Complainant under the ‘housing assistance ground’ contrary to Sections 3 and 6 of the Equal Status Act 2000 (as amended), in relation to completing its section of her HAP Application Form. Section 3(1) provides: “For the purposes of this Act discrimination shall be taken to occur— (a) where a person is treated less favourably than another person is, has been or would be treated in a comparable situation on any of the grounds specified in subsection (2) or, if appropriate, subsection (3B), (in this Act referred to as the ‘discriminatory grounds’) which— (i) exists, (ii) existed but no longer exists, (iii) may exist in the future, or (iv) is imputed to the person concerned,” Section 3(3B) provides: “For the purposes of section 6(1)(c), the discriminatory grounds shall (in addition to the grounds specified in subsection (2)) include the ground that as between any two persons, that one is in receipt of rent supplement (within the meaning of section 6(8)), housing assistance (construed in accordance with Part 4 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2014) or any payment under the Social Welfare Acts and the other is not (the “housing assistance ground”).” Section 6(1) of the Equal Status Act 2000 as amended provides: “A person shall not discriminate in- (a) disposing of any estate or interest in premises, (b) terminating any tenancy or other interest in premises, or (c) subject to subsection (1A), providing accommodation or any services or amenities related to accommodation or ceasing to provide accommodation or any such services or amenities. Section 6(1A) provides: “Subsection (1)(c) is without prejudice to- (a) any enactment or rule of law regulating the provision of accommodation, or (b) the right of a person providing accommodation to make it a condition of the provision of that accommodation that rent supplement is paid directly to that person.” Section 38A of the Acts applies to all complaints of discrimination under the Equal Status Acts and requires the complainant to establish, in the first instance, facts from which the discrimination alleged may be inferred. It is only where such a prima facie case has been established that the onus shifts to the respondent to rebut the inference of discrimination. The complainant was an applicant for housing assistance, therefore she is covered by the prohibited ground per Section 3(3B) cited above. The complainants case is that the respondent refused to sign the HAP form despite a number of requests resulting in her being unable to get housing assistance from the local Council for a long period of time. The complainant submitted that the refusal/delay of the respondent to sign the form for such a long time placed her under significant financial pressure in paying her rent. I am satisfied that the respondent’s ongoing refusal/delay to complete the HAP application form in question amounts to less favourable treatment. The respondent’s refusal/delay to participate in the HAP Scheme had the direct effect of placing the complainant in a very difficult financial situation and placing the tenancy in jeopardy, when compared with a tenant not requiring HAP. I find the complainant has established a prima facie case of discriminatory treatment on the housing assistance ground. I must now consider if the respondent has rebutted the prima facie case raised by the complainant. The respondent accepts that they received the HAP form from the complainant in May 2017. It was submitted that they could not complete the form until they received a tax number from the Receiver and a further delay occurred because the complainant did not send them the Part B of the HAP form. I note that Citizen Information wrote to the respondent on the 6th of August and again on the 6th of September asking for the return of the completed HAP form, but no response was received. Likewise, I note that the respondent got the tax revenue number from the Receiver on the 1st of September 2017, that they requested the HAP form from the Local Authority on the 13th of September 2017 and it was sent to them the following day, but it was not completed until the 13th of December 2017. It is significant that during the period that the complainant was seeking the return of the completed form, the respondent wrote to the complainant on the 11th August and 5th September 2017 telling her that her rent was in arrears and advising that they were entitled to terminate her tenancy if she failed to pay the arrears. I do not accept the respondent’s reasons for not completing the HAP form when it was first presented. I accept the complainant’s evidence as credible and that she sent a copy of full HAP form including Part B to the respondent for completion in May 2017. It seems to me that the respondent had the form because they could only have known from reading Part B of the form that the tax number was required. Surely if the respondent had not got a copy of the relevant part B, as suggested by them, they could have requested it much earlier, particularly given the letters from the complainant requesting its completion. The delay in getting the tax number from the receiver was excessive and not acceptable and the further delay in completing the form after receiving a copy from the Local Authority is difficult to understand, particularly given the respondent was writing to the complainant about rent arrears. In relation to the tax number, I note from the HAP form, that a valid tax clearance certificate and number was required, but the form provides that if it was unavailable it could be forwarded to the Local Authority within a period of 5 months. I am satisfied therefore, that the missing tax number was not a valid reason for not completing the form. It is evident that the respondent was not pro-active in having the form completed for whatever reason and due to this the complainant was at the loss of the housing assistance payment until the respondent eventually signed the form on the 13th of December. This delay amounts to less favourable treatment of the complainant contrary to the Equal Status Act 2000 as amended. For the foregoing reasons, I am satisfied that the respondent has failed to rebut the prima facie case of discriminatory treatment on the housing assistance ground raised by the complainant. |
Decision:
Section 25 of the Equal Status Acts, 2000 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under section 27 of that Act.
Under section 27(1) of that Act redress may be ordered where a finding is in favour of the complainant. Section 27(1) provides that: "the types of redress for which a decision of the Director of the Workplace Relations Commission under section 25 may provide are either or both of the following as may be appropriate in the circumstances: (a) an order for compensation for the effects of the prohibited conduct concerned; or(b) an order that a person or persons specified in the order take a course of action which is so specified." Under the above Section the maximum amount of compensation I can award is €15,000. In considering the amount of compensation that I should award, I have considered the effects of the discriminatory treatment has had on the complainant including, the loss of the HAP financial support from May to December 2017, and the detriment she suffered because of the financial pressures she experienced. I order the respondent to pay to the complainant the sum of €3,500 (three thousand five hundred euro) compensation for the discriminatory treatment within 42 days of the date of this decision. |
Dated: 1st May 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Marian Duffy
Key Words:
Equal Status Acts, Section, Section 6 - provision of accommodation, Section 3(3B) - housing assistance ground. |