Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Ngnamkey Mhozou Florence  Kabran

Syed Mubarak Ali

Complainant

Respondent

Anonymised Parties

{text}

{text}

Representatives

Joe 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-00055416-001

06/03/2023

The Complainant submits that she is on  the housing list with Cork City Council but is entitled to Housing Assistance Payment (HAP), as a private tenant. She argues that that she has been discriminated against by the Respondent by his refusal to sign the HAP form in respect of her rental property.

The Complainant gave sworn evidence that she was a tenant in the property since 13 April 2021. She is currently paying €650 per month rent. She was registered on the housing list of Cork City Council  and signed a HAP Assistance in September 2022, but she maintains that the Respondent refused to submit the necessary documentation in order for her to complete her HAP application. Numerous representations were made by her to the Respondent, as well as through her representative organisation, Threshold. An ES 1 one form was sent to the Respondent on 18 January 2023, which was not answered. Evidence was given that the the Complainant’s has lost out on HAP assistance of €6000 over the past twelve months.  

The Respondent did not attend the hearing into this complaint.  I am reasonably satisfied that the Respondent was on notice of the date, time, and location of the hearing.

The Relevant Law

Section 6(1) of the Equal Status Acts 2000-2015 (the Acts) prohibits discrimination on the ground of being in receipt of rent supplement.  This section is to be read in conjunction with Section 3 of the Act which defines “discrimination” in general and specifically defines the “housing assistance ground.” 

Section 3(1) provides that:

“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 that discrimination in relation providing accommodation is prohibited under all the existing protected grounds and inserts the housing assistance ground as follows:

“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.”).

To initiate a claim, a complainant must initially inform the party being accused in writing about the details of the allegation and express their intent to pursue a claim in the event of an unsatisfactory response. This notification should occur within two months from the occurrence of the latest discriminatory incident.

However, under s.21(3) of the Acts, this time limit can be extended or disregarded. The relevant provision provides:

(3)( a ) On application by a complainant the Director of the Workplace Relations Commission or, as the case may be, the Circuit Court ] may —

(i) for reasonable cause, direct that in relation to the complainant subsection (2) shall have effect as if for the reference to 2 months there were substituted a reference to such period not exceeding 4 months as is specified in the direction, or

(ii) exceptionally, where satisfied that it is fair and reasonable in the particular circumstance of the case to do so direct that subsection (2) shall not apply in relation to the complainant to the extent specified in the direction,

and, where such a direction is given, this Part shall have effect accordingly.

( b ) In deciding whether to give a direction under paragraph (a)(ii) the Director of the Workplace Relations Commission or, as the case may be, the Circuit Court shall have regard to all the relevant circumstances, including —

(i) the extent to which the respondent is, or is likely to be, aware of the circumstances in which the prohibited conduct occurred, and

(ii) the extent of any risk of prejudice to the respondent’ s ability to deal adequately with the complaint.”

The Complainant sent the ES 1 form  to the Respondent on 18 January 2023 which is over two months from the initial refusal of the Respondent,  which was stated in  evidence as the end of October 2022. However, I am satisfied that both the Complainant and Threshold had made continuous representations to the Respondent in the intervening period, and I do not believe there was any risk to the Respondent’s ability to adequately deal with the complaint of discrimination, which in reality is ongoing. Having full regard to the aforementioned circumstances , I find that it is fair and reasonable for me to waive the notification period in this case.    

Findings

In the absence of the Respondent, I am reliant on the uncontested evidence of the Complainant when making a decision in this case. The Complainant’s evidence was that Respondent did not send in  the necessary HAP documentation.  

Conclusion

I am satisfied, based on the uncontested facts she has set out, that the Complainant has established that she was discriminated against on the housing assistance ground when the Respondent refused to submit the necessary documentation in order for the Complainant to complete her HAP application.

Pursuant to Section 25(4) of the Equal Status Act, and given the unchallenged evidence presented, I find that the Complainant experienced discrimination on the basis of housing assistance, contravening sections 3 and 6 of the Act. Regarding remedies, Section 27(2) of the Act restricts the potential award to €15,000, the maximum allowable by the District Court. Taking into account all pertinent facts and the impact of the discrimination on the Complainant, I hereby direct the payment of €6,000 as compensation, corresponding to the rental deficit observed over a 12-month duration, as verified by the Complainant.

Equal Status Acts 200-2015, HAP, Housing Assistance.