A Traveller family has been awarded compensation after they were deemed to have been subjected to discrimination when they submitted an application to the social housing waiting list with their local County Council.
The family of 5 had been living within the relevant county since 2014, in a small caravan on the roadside which lacked basic facilities. An application was made in June 2016 for inclusion on the local authority housing list but this was rejected on the basis that the family was not normally resident within the county. The family appealed, asserting that they had been normally resident in that county for two years and had family ties to the area.
The appeal was rejected and the original decision was upheld, with the Council stating that the family did not meet the criteria set out under the Social Housing Assessment Regulations 2011. Under these regulations, a household may apply for social housing from the housing authority for the area in which they normally reside or for an area wherein they have a local connection.
The County Council claimed that the family could not be considered to normally reside in the county as they were ‘illegally residing in a caravan on private property.’ It also stated that a local connection was not demonstrated pursuant to the regulations, as the children did not attend school in the area, the unemployed parents did not work in the area and sufficient family ties could not be established.
The family referred the matter to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), complaining of discrimination on the Traveller ground and were represented by the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IHREC) at the hearing of the case. The Commission argued that these regulations only refer to ‘normal residence’ and that this requirement of legal residency is not included within these regulations.
The WRC found that this interpretation by the County Council of the regulations was discriminatory under the Equal Status Acts. The adjudication officer assigned to the case stated that ‘‘the introduction of this additional criterion disproportionality affects members of the Traveller community and is therefore discriminatory.’’ In applying this requirement, the Council did not take into account the unique circumstances that Traveller families live in. It was also found that the Council does not usually apply this criterion to people living in houses and therefore the family were treated less favourably by the Council in comparison to settled families.
The Court however could not make a determination on the regulations themselves as under section 14(1)(a)(i) of the Equal Status Act 2000, it was precluded in expressing any opinion on whether any legislative provision is discriminatory or not.
The family were awarded with €20,000 in compensation from the Council who were also instructed to review its policy with regards to assignment of social housing in order to remove the legality requirement when interpreting the normal residence provision in the regulations.
Click here for the IHREC’s press release.
Click here, here, here, here and here for the WRC’s decision in the five cases.