Complainant

Respondent

Parties

Stephen  Hickey

Kevin Days

Representatives

Freya Casey Threshold

 Non-Attendance

Act

Complaint/Dispute Reference No.

Date of Receipt

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

CA-00058804-001

11/09/2023

The Complainant is eligible for the Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) and was paying €950 per month to the Respondent landlord for an apartment. The Complainant asserts that the Respondent did not fully complete his section of the HAP form, which prevented the Complainant from availing of HAP while living in the apartment. The Complainant contends that the Respondent's failure to complete the HAP payment process contravenes the Equal Status Act 2000, as amended (the Act).

The Complainant gave evidence under affirmation. He stated that the Respondent provided a verbal assurance to conform with HAP procedures when the Complainant initially applied for the property. Had the HAP payment been made available, it would have covered the entirety of the monthly rent of €950. The Complainant informed the Respondent on 28 August 2022 that he would be submitting a HAP application. On 22 October 2022, the Complainant filled out the HAP application and requested the Respondent to collect the forms, leaving a key for him to enter as the Respondent owns the shop below the apartment. However, the Respondent did not collect the forms.

The Complainant followed up with a text on 5 November 2022, instructing the Respondent where the forms were located, as per his previous message. He followed up again on 20 November 2022 to ask if the forms had been filled out. The Complainant began going into the shop, pleading with the Respondent to sign the forms. The Complainant asserts that the Respondent started questioning him about his employment and wages, insinuating that he should be able to afford the rent without HAP assistance. On 7 December 2022, the Complainant messaged the Respondent again to request that he fill out the HAP forms.

In January 2023, the Respondent told the Complainant he would sign the forms. Despite calls and texts to check if they were completed, the Complainant received no response. By this point, the Complainant had used all his savings and was working 60 hours a week to keep up with rent and bills, adversely affecting his health. The Respondent eventually brought the completed forms to the Complainant. However, the HAP Department sent more forms to the Respondent, as the ones he had filled out were missing information. According to the Complainant, the Respondent, upon receiving these forms, said, "I have no time for that, and I can’t be bothered."

The Complainant contacted Threshold regarding these issues, and they advised him to follow up with HAP. On 3 May 2023, Threshold contacted the Respondent about various issues the Complainant was facing within the tenancy. The most recent instance of discrimination before the application for dispute was submitted occurred on 28 July 2023, when the Respondent stated he would not be completing the HAP forms. The Complainant vacated the property at the beginning of May 2024. The HS1 form was posted to the Respondent on 8 June 2023 and hand-delivered on 25 June 2023.

The Respondent did not attend the hearing.

The Relevant Law

Section 6(1) of the Equal Status Acts 2000-2015 (the Act) 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.”

I am satisfied that the Complainant  complied with the notification requirements under section 21 of the Act when he posted, and hand delivered the  HS1 on dates  in June 2023.  

Findings:

In the absence of the Respondent, I must rely on the uncontested evidence provided by the Complainant when making a decision in this case. The Complainant's evidence indicated that the Respondent did not complete the necessary HAP documentation, which ultimately had severe financial and health implications for him.

Conclusion:

Based on the uncontested facts presented by the Complainant, I am satisfied that the Complainant has established that he was discriminated against on the grounds of housing assistance when the Respondent refused to submit the necessary documentation for the Complainant to complete the HAP application. I am also satisfied that this case falls on the serious end of the spectrum, as HAP, if accepted, would have covered the entirety of the Complainant’s monthly rent of €950.

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 €8000 as compensation.

Equal Status Act 2000, HAP.