Plans to evict ‘abusers’ must be fair

The government’s proposals allowing for landlords to evict perpetrators of domestic abuse are laudable and the principle that perpetrators rather than victims should be the ones forced to leave the home is difficult to challenge. However, the legal and practical realities of enforcing the proposed changes deserve closer scrutiny. As ever, whether this truly marks an effective solution to a well-recognised problem will hinge on the details and on an effective implementation framework, neither of which has yet been set out.

Eviction from social housing affects a person’s home and family life, and according to the proposals, future access to housing. Inevitably, with such consequences at stake, any process must be fair and consider and balance the rights of all concerned, including the right to family life. While there can be little argument against effective methods which safeguard victims, changes must also ensure the appropriate scrutiny of allegations to ensure that methods designed to provide protection are not themselves weaponised as a further tool for abuse. If an individual is to lose their home and potentially an entitlement to further social housing, the process leading to this decision must be demonstrably fair.

There are inevitably questions concerning the evidential standard required to trigger the proposed protections, as well as how disputed claims can be adjudicated within an appropriate timescale, when government services and the court system are already so heavily overstretched. There is also the need to ensure that legal advice and representation are available. It seems unlikely that this can be guaranteed under the legal aid system.

An eviction is unlikely to happen in a vacuum; it is well documented that reporting and separation are some of the riskiest times for an escalation of domestic abuse. One can envisage that other protections, beyond an eviction, will be required to ensure the safety of victims, even when their abuser is no longer in the house.

It is here that the practical difficulties arise. Courts are already suffering major delays, but the reforms are predicated on swift protection. The process and the stated aims appear to be at odds.

Fairness is the backbone of the legal system. Any attempt to expedite proceedings in the name of protection risks eroding this, regardless of how serious or emotive the accusations may be. It seems hard to see how fairness and speed can both be achieved.

The concern is not that domestic abusers are to be protected from the consequences of their behaviour, but whether the courts, legal aid system and housing sector have the necessary resources to distinguish between perpetrators and those who merely stand accused. It is important to ensure that where the measures are indeed the crucial protection intended, they can be implemented in a way that ensures victims are protected at a time of heightened risk.

Cara Nuttall, Partner and head of family, Brabners, Manchester