Page values for "Cheshire East Council (23 005 368) (2025) MHLO 9 (LGSCO)"

"_pageData" values

1 row is stored for this page
FieldField typeValue
_creationDateDatetime2025-04-14 3:45:00 PM
_modificationDateDatetime2025-04-14 3:48:44 PM
_creatorStringJonathan
_fullTextSearchtext{{Case |Date=2024-09-19 |Court=Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman |Parties=Cheshire East Council, NHS Cheshire and Merseyside ICB |Cites=R (Mwanza) v LB of Greenwich (2010) EWHC 1462 (Admin) |Sentence=Supported living accommodation and s117 |Summary=The council ceased paying rent under s117 ...
_categoriesList of String, delimiter: |
_isRedirectBooleanNo
_pageNameOrRedirectStringCheshire East Council (23 005 368) (2025) MHLO 9 (LGSCO)
_pageIDInteger16,396
_pageNamePageCheshire East Council (23 005 368) (2025) MHLO 9 (LGSCO)
_pageTitleString

Cheshire East Council (23 005 368) [2025] MHLO 9 (LGSCO)

_pageNamespaceInteger0

"News" values

1 row is stored for this page
FieldField typeValue
Which_tableStringCases
RSS_titleWikitext
RSS_descriptionWikitext
RSS_pubdateDatetime2025-04-14 2:32:51 PM

"Cases" values

1 row is stored for this page
FieldField typeValue
SentenceWikitext

Supported living accommodation and s117

SummaryWikitext

The council ceased paying rent under s117 when a residential care home was deregistered to become supported living accommodation. During the Ombudsman's investigation the council relied on the three-stage Mwanza test, arguing that it was not specialised accommodation and that the resident had not been placed there involuntarily owing to a lack of capacity; the Ombudsman applied the test without criticism (curiously), though not in favour of the council. It was "accommodation plus" (enhanced specialised accommodation) rather than ordinary housing, and was still required, so remained within the scope of s117. The council agreed to repay £59,149.86 for rent (which had been paid from savings until the resident became eligible for housing benefit), plus interest, and £9,143 legal fees, and to consider the cases of 21 other residents who were also told to claim housing benefit. The Ombudsman noted: "When accommodation is part of a person's section 117 aftercare, it must be free to the person. The Council and the ICB should not advise people to claim housing benefit to pay for accommodation which is part of their section 117 aftercare. ... Aftercare services cannot be withdrawn simply because the status of a person’s accommodation changes from registered residential care accommodation to supported housing accommodation."

DetailText
SubjectList of String, delimiter: ,After-care
Judicial_historyWikitext
Judicial_history_first_pagePage
DateDate2024-09-19
JudgesList of String, delimiter: ,
PartiesList of String, delimiter: ,Cheshire East Council NHS Cheshire and Merseyside ICB
CourtStringLocal Government and Social Care Ombudsman
NCNString
MHLRString
ICLRString
ICLR_IDString
EssexString
Essex_issueString
Essex_pageString
Other_citationsList of String, delimiter: ,
CitesList of String, delimiter: #R (Mwanza) v LB of Greenwich (2010) EWHC 1462 (Admin)
External_linksText*<span class="archive-link">[https://web.archive.org/web/20250115090151/https://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/adult-care-services/other/23-005-368 Cheshire East Council (23 005 368)]</span>&#32;<span class="archive-icon">[https://web.archive.org/web/20250115090151/https://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/adult-care-services/other/23-005-368 <i class="fa fa-university" title="This is an Internet Archive link"></i>]</span> *[https://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/adult-care-services/other/23-005-368a NHS Cheshire and Merseyside ICB (23 005 368a)] *[https://www.lgo.org.uk/decisions/adult-care-services/other/23-005-368b NHS Cheshire and Merseyside ICB (23 005 368b)]
JudgmentFile