This page is targeted at housing professionals. Our main site is at www.shelter.org.uk

Multiple, repeat and withdrawn applications

This content applies to England

When an applicant can make a repeat application. Withdrawn and lapsed applications. Applications to more than one authority.

Reapplying to the same authority

There is no limit on the number of applications a homeless person can make to a local authority. Where an authority has accepted the main housing duty towards an applicant and that duty subsequently ends, the same applicant may make a fresh application to that authority.[1]

Threshold for a repeat application

A local authority cannot rely on having previously discharged its duty, and refuse to accept a repeat application, where there has been a 'factual' change of circumstances.[2] For example if an applicant makes a further application following a relationship breakdown which has changed household membership, this should be treated as a new application.

Special rules apply to a reapplication when a new situation of homelessness arises following acceptance of a final 'private rented sector (PRS) offer' as set out below..

Once the application is accepted, the local authority must carry out inquiries into whether any duty is owed to the applicant.

A local authority cannot rely on a discharge of duty by another authority. It can consider what the first authority discovered in its investigations and decided, but it must make its own inquiries and reach its own decision.[3]

Factors to consider

The Court of Appeal has set out criteria for how a local authority should decide whether it has to accept a repeat application:[4]

  • the onus is on the applicant to identify the facts that differentiate a fresh application from her/his earlier application. The authority can reject the application if the facts brought to its attention are fanciful, trivial or not new
  • the local authority should compare the applicant’s factual circumstances at the date of the fresh application with those at the date of its decision on the earlier application
  • when the repeat application reveals new facts, which are neither trivial nor fanciful then the authority must treat the application as valid.

Instances of repeat applications

Repeat applications most commonly occur where the applicant was previously found to be intentionally homeless, not in priority need, or had refused an offer of suitable accommodation.

Case law provides examples of where a local authority had to accept a repeat application. They include the following, where a local authority:

  • found an applicant intentionally homeless whilst she was living in a guest house which it had provided as interim accommodation. The applicant remained in the guest house after the authority's duty had ended, and successfully applied for housing benefit. A year later she was evicted from the guest house.[5]
  • discharged its duty after an applicant refused an offer of suitable accommodation. She and her child returned to her parent’s home from where she had made her application. Subsequently two of her brothers moved into the parental home, one of whom was a heroin addict. Two years after her initial application she again applied as homeless.[6]
  • found an applicant affected by mental health issues and depression not to be in priority need. S/he re-applied to the local authority providing new medical evidence as to the applicant's increased risk of suicide, which the authority failed to investigate on the (incorrect) basis that the new evidence did not disclose any new fact.[7]
  • found an applicant and her husband intentionally homeless. The applicant reapplied two years later including six of her children in the application, following the departure of her husband and her three eldest children ceasing to be dependent on her. The court held that the facts that the new application was not made jointly with her husband, and that the number of people seeking assistance had changed, both constituted a relevant change of circumstances.[8]

Reapplication after PRS offer

If an applicant makes a further homelessness application to a local authority within two years of the date of her/his acceptance of a private rented sector (PRS) offer made in discharge of the main housing duty (ie from the date of acceptance, not the date when the tenancy commenced or the applicant moved in), if the local authority has reason to believe that the applicant may be homeless, eligible for assistance and not intentionally homeless, it must provide suitable interim accommodation while it carries out inquiries regardless of whether the applicant still has a priority need.[9]

If the applicant is threatened with homelessness the authority has a duty to prevent homelessness, regardless of whether the applicant is in priority need, and must take reasonable steps to ensure that the applicant does not lose her/his accommodation.

If the local authority is satisfied that the applicant is homeless, eligible for assistance and not intentionally homeless, the main housing duty is owed.

The main duty will also revive if an applicant secures her/his own accommodation at the expiry of the term of the original PRS offer (usually 12 months) and then becomes homeless again within two years of her/his acceptance of the original PRS offer.[10]

Reapplication following a section 21 notice

For the purpose of a reapplication following a PRS offer, an applicant who has been given a valid notice under section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 is to be treated as being homeless from the date on which the notice expires, or threatened with homelessness from the date the notice is issued.[11]

Reapplication to be by original applicant

The reapplication must be made by the original applicant and not another member of her/his household.

Restricted cases

The reapplication provisions do not apply where the main duty has been ended to a 'restricted case'.[12]

Applying to more than one authority

The Housing Act 1996 does not limit the number of applications that can be made and applicants can apply to more than one local authority at the same time.[13]

A local authority may ask the applicant at the initial interview if s/he has applied to another authority (or authorities). If so, one authority may contact the other authority to agree which will take the responsibility for carrying out inquiries.[14]

If the authority carrying out inquiries reaches an unfavourable decision, the applicant may then ask the other authority to make its own inquiries. Each authority must make its own, independent inquiries in response to all applications. The second authority may take the original authority's decision
into consideration but cannot simply rubber-stamp it.[15]

Find details of local authorities on Gov.uk.

Withdrawn or lapsed applications

Local authorities should have procedures in place to deal with applicants who want to withdraw an application, or where an applicant has not communicated with the authority. The Code of Guidance suggests it would be reasonable to consider an application closed where the applicant has not responded to any form of contact for 56 days or longer. Any further approach from the applicant after this time may need to be considered as a fresh application. Where an applicant renews contact within 56 days the housing authority will need to consider any change of circumstances that may affect the application.[16]

If an applicant dies before a decision is made, the authority may treat another member of the deceased's household as the applicant, if that person consents.[17]

Applications made before 3 April 2018

The current Homelessness Code of Guidance was introduced on 3 April 2018 and the references on this page are to this Code. For applications made before this date, the recommendations of the 2006 Code of Guidance should apply.

[1] s.193(9) Housing Act 1996; para 18.11 Homelessness Code of Guidance, MHCLG, Feb 2018.

[2] R v Harrow LBC ex p Fahia [1998] 1 WLR 1396, HL; Tower Hamlets LBC v Begum [2005] EWCA Civ 340; R (on the application of Griffin) v Southwark LBC [2004] EWHC 2463 (Admin); Gardiner v Haringey LBC [2009] EWHC 2699 (Admin); R (on the application of Hoyte) v Southwark LBC [2016] EWHC 1665 (Admin); R (on the application of Kensington & Chelsea RLBC v Ealing LBC [2017] WEHC 24 (Admin); paras 18.11 to 18.13 Homelessness Code of Guidance, MHCLG, Feb 2018.

[3] Eren v Haringey LBC [2007] EWCA Civ 409; para 18.9 Homelessness Code of Guidance, MHCLG, Feb 2018.

[4] Tower Hamlets LBC v Begum [2005] ECWA Civ 340.

[5] R v Harrow LBC ex parte Fahia (1998) 30 HLR 1124, HL.

[6] Tower Hamlets LBC v Begum [2005] ECWA Civ 340.

[7] R (on the application of Hoyte) [2016] EWHC 1665 (Admin).

[8] R (on the application of Abdulrahman) v Hillingdon LBC [2016] EWHC 2647 (Admin).

[9] s.195A Housing Act 1996, as inserted by s.149(4) Localism Act 2011.

[10] para 18.18 Homelessness Code of Guidance, MHCLG, Feb 2018.

[11] s.195A(2) and (4) Housing Act 1996, as inserted by s. 149(4) Localism Act 2011.

[121] para 18.26 Homelessness Code of Guidance, MHCLG, Feb 2018.

[13] para 18.9 Homelessness Code of Guidance, MHCLG, Feb 2018.

[14] para 18.9 Homelessness Code of Guidance, MHCLG, Feb 2018.

[15] Eren v Haringey LBC [2007] EWCA Civ 409.

[16] para 18.14 Homelessness Code of Guidance, MHCLG, Feb 2018.

[17] para 18.14 Homelessness Code of Guidance, MHCLG, Feb 2018.

Back to top