ADJ-00017275

Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Adrienne Hynes

Deirdre O'Higgins

Representatives

Irene Dunne Threshold

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 21 Equal Status Act, 2000

CA-00022380-001

03/10/2018

The Complainant has been a tenant of the Respondent Landlord since 2005. The current monthly rental of the dwelling is €1,242.80.   A complaint was lodged with the WRC on 3rd October 2018.

The Complainant submits that she has been discriminated against on the housing assistance ground contrary to section 6(1) (c) (c) of the Equal Status Act 2000.

The Complainant submits that she has been a tenant of this Landlord/Respondent since 2005 without any significant issues arising. The monthly rent for the apartment is €1,242.80.   She was made redundant in early 2018 which had a material effect on her income and her ability to pay rent.   She is on the Dun Laoghaire Rathdown CC (DLRD). housing list and is therefore eligible for HAP.

The Complainant sent the required documentation to her Landlord which would allow her benefit from the scheme, but the Landlord has, up to the date of the WRC hearing, failed to return a completed application. The Landlord is required to complete a part of the application and if this is not done HAP cannot be paid. The Landlord has been notified of this and has been given instructions from DLRD CC on how to do this. A notice to quit notice was served on the Complainant in October 2018.

In oral evidence at the hearing the Complainant stated that the Respondent’s failure to fill in the HAP form has meant she has had to continue to pay the full rent herself; if the Landlord had completed the form, HAP would have kicked in and the Complainant would have been paying less rent. The Complainant stated that she had suffered great stress due to the difficulties she had encountered getting HAP and had been hospitalised for a time due to the stress.

The Complainant has sought the assistance of two housing agencies in this matter. A representative of one of these agencies attended the hearing and stated that the agency had attempted to assist the Respondent Landlord in filling in the HAP form without success and had only lodged the claim with the WRC as a last resort.

An ES 1 Form was sent to the Respondent by a housing agency, on behalf of the Complainant, by email and registered post on 30th August 2018. It was signed for by the Respondent the next day.

The Complainant is seeking compensation to make up for the difference between what she paid in rent and what she would have been paid in rent if she had been on HAP for the period between July and December 2018. As she would have been eligible for a Hap payment of €792 a month, this amounts to a total of €4,752 and something to make up for the stress she has suffered because of this episode.

The Respondent did not attend the hearing.

In correspondence to the WRC in advance of the hearing the Respondent submitted that she had completed a HAP form and sent it to DLRD CC on 12th October 2018 and as confused as to why the Complainant was pursuing her complaint. She also submitted that she had issued a Notice of Termination to the Complainant in 2017 but that the Complainant had failed to move out.

The Respondent also submitted that she was needs to sell the property to buy a family home as she had planned to return to Ireland from abroad in May 2018.

The issue for determination in this Complaint is whether the Respondent discriminated against the Complainant under the “housing assistance ground” contrary to section 3 and 6 of the Equal Status Act 2000 (as amended) by refusing or failing to complete the HAP Application Form.

The Equal Status Act 2000 was amended with effect from 1st January 2016 such that discrimination in relation to “providing accommodation or any services or amenities related to accommodation or ceasing to provide accommodation or any such services or amenities” is now prohibited under the new “housing assistance ground” which provides 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 38A of the Act requires the complainant to establish, in the first instance, facts from which the discrimination alleged can be inferred. It is only where such a prima facie case has been established that the burden of proof shifts to the respondent to rebut the inference of discrimination.

Having carefully considered all the evidence adduced, I am satisfied that the Complainant requested the Respondent landlord to complete the appropriate forms in order to avail of HAP. The housing agencies assisting the Complainant also endeavoured to get the Landlord to complete the form and offered assistance to do same but to no avail. In the circumstances I find that 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 submitted that she had completed the HAP form in October 2018 however the form was incomplete and so DLRD CC could not authorise the payment of HAP to the Complainant.

I find that the Complainant has established a prima facie case of discriminatory treatment by the Respondent Landlord on the housing assistance ground and that the Respondent Landlord has failed to rebut this case.

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.”

In considering the amount of compensation that I should award, I have considered the effect the discriminatory treatment has had on the Complainant. Having regard to all the circumstances and pursuant to section 27(1)(a) of the Acts, I deem it appropriate to order the Respondent to pay €5,752.00 to the Complainant in compensation for the effects of the prohibited conduct concerned.

HAP, Forms, Tenant, Landlord