A woman struggling to pay her rent who was told by her council she had to move 150 miles away in order to be housed, has won her legal battle against the move.
In a last ditch attempt to stay in London, Nadia Zaman took Waltham Forest Council to court after they said the only suitable home for her was in the Potteries, Stoke on Trent.
The mum of three argued that it was legally 'incumbent' on the council to 'secure accommodation' as 'close as possible' to her home.
Now Lord Justice Newey, Lady Justice Asplin and Lady Justice Nicola Davies have concluded that the council’s 'accommodation acquisitions policy' is lawful.
But they said it was 'not apparent' that the policy was duly implemented – or that accommodation in Stoke-on-Trent was the 'closest property to the borough' the council could secure.
Appeal judges considered the case after Ms Zaman challenged a ruling by a county court judge.
Ms Zaman, who had asked the council for help after struggling to pay rent on her home in Walthamstow, argued that moving to Stoke-on-Trent would take her too far away from her mother, who needed her help.
She also said relatives would not be able to help with childcare – and she raised concerns about being a victim of 'racism or discrimination' in the Potteries.
Lawyers for the council said Waltham Forest’s accommodation acquisitions policy provided for properties to be procured 'as close to the borough as possible' – and they said the evidence did not establish that that policy 'was not duly implemented'.
Lord Justice Newey said, in a written ruling, that an 'acute' shortage of housing in London meant it had become common for London councils to offer people, to whom they owed a 'main housing duty' under housing legislation, accommodation outside their boroughs.
