19 August 2022

Public housing tenants win exemptions from moving but legal action from others looms

| Ian Bushnell
Join the conversation
ACTCOSS CEO Emma Campbell

ACTCOSS CEO Emma Campbell: “These people are desperate, they want to stay in their homes, and some are very vulnerable.” Photo: Region.

Most public housing tenants considered for exemptions from being relocated to new homes as part of the renewal program have been allowed to stay in their current premises.

But those who have had their application denied have not given up fighting the move, with some considering legal action.

A Housing ACT spokesperson said as at 29 July, the ACT Government-appointed Tenant Relocation Exemption Panel had granted 14 exemptions of the 19 applications assessed, and denied five.

All up, 45 tenants have applied for exemption but the ACT Council of Social Services believes there will be more to come.

The spokesperson said the panel took into account a tenant’s situation such as age, health and needs.

The moving process was tailored to the individual tenant including preferred areas to live, the number of people and pets in the household, schools, medical services or other organisations the household may need to be close to, and any other special needs.

“Housing ACT is working closely with all tenants who are required to move and is committed to supporting them before, during and after their move to another public housing property,” the spokesperson said.

READ ALSO No appeals for public housing tenants deemed OK to relocate

Housing ACT could not confirm when tenants denied exemptions would have to move, but said it depended on the availability of another property.

“Timing is not set to a particular date for these tenants,” the spokesperson said.

“The process is that Housing ACT will work through all details with tenants and agree on a date for relocation once a suitable alternative property has been agreed.”

Sangeeta Sharmin from Ken Cush and Associates said it was exploring three or four courses of action on behalf of a number of tenants.

But she could not offer more details before proceedings started.

ACTCOSS CEO Emma Campbell said tenants might be able to appeal to ACAT at the point of eviction or have recourse to some kind of judicial review of the process, although that could come with the risk of incurring costs.

She had also heard about a possible class action.

“These people are desperate. They want to stay in their homes and some are very vulnerable,” Dr Campbell said.

“They’re looking at any opportunity if they haven’t been successful through this process.”

READ ALSO Berry hits out at ACTCOSS as public housing relocation hearings get underway

Housing ACT said there had not been any notice to vacate issued in the program and it was not aware of any legal action being taken.

Dr Campbell said the apparent lack of alternative properties available for those entertaining the thought of moving suggested the process had not been well thought through.

She said ACTCOSS had said all along it was not against the renewal program in principle as long as people were allowed to stay in their home if they wished.

It also believed there were opportunities to use land more efficiently to provide more public housing.

“The way the program has been implemented has been the biggest concern for ACTCOSS,” Dr Campbell said.

ACTCOSS noted that many of the identified properties were in the inner north and south, and public housing tenants may be moved to the outer suburbs away from support and services.

Some tenants have been in the same property for decades.

Housing ACT argues it needs to sell some properties to finance new housing, free others up for families and move some tenants to new homes more appropriate to their current situation.

Join the conversation

All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments

Qld housing is worse granted a transfer back in 2015 on very high needs for health & mental health I
was also a DV victim crimes assist was going to pay for the move I was in a 3 bedroom house so I had a empty room for 13 years on ringing the office they were quite rude after a few calls I waited patiently after 6 years I rang asking how much longer I was told they lost my paperwork over 6 months ago and would have to reapply Qld head office plus minister of housing ignored my complaint so worry I would be kicked out of the house I’m in I’ve given up I have no more fight left in me it’s all just made my PSTD/ mental health worse but it does make you wonder when the government say they looking after mental health & DV victims reading this it’s bad in every state

I would like to see Dr Emma Thompson working with the government and not against them in supporting those who have been really doing it tough during the pandemic and throughout this helishing cold winter. Those suffering from mental illness, living on the streets, sleeping under underpasses and those women and children fleeing domestic violence, just to name a few. I’m sure these homeless people would just be happy to have a roof over their heads no matter where they are situated. Not those self-centred and selfish individuals who have been hogging government properties and in many cases houses that are far too big for their circumstances!

“ACTCOSS noted that many of the identified properties were in the inner north and south, and public housing tenants may be moved to the outer suburbs away from support and services”.

1. Can ACTCOSS please provide evidence of tenants being forced to move away from their supports and services.
2. Can ACTCOSS please explain how a destination property is sourced for the tenants in this program. I’d like to understand the full process.

“Dr Campbell said the apparent lack of alternative properties available for those entertaining the thought of moving suggested the process had not been well thought through”.
Can Dr Campbell please provide evidence of the lack of alternative properties.

Dr Campbell is very good at making statements that don’t seem to be supported by facts!

They are not being thrown out into the street, they are being offered an alternative place to live.

Why people living for free believe they have rights far greater than those of us paying full rent disappoints me.

How many of these challenges have been from single occupants living in much needed 3-4 bedroom homes?

All people listed in this article seem to think they are doing good here, allowing these individuals to hog much needed realestate while we have people homeless/sleeping in heir cars, continuing to live with dangerous partners for lack of alternative options.

It truly is ridiculous that people living in taxpayer funded housing can have more rights than private renters.

We have people in unsuitable inner city properties worth millions, whilst other needy people wait for years to get housed.

The sense of entitlement is through the roof.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.