This case shows the need to look in detail about how a reviewing officer has reached a decision as they may often have cut important corners as in this case. In particular:-

• The reviewing officer had failed to show the she had properly considered her duties under the Public Sector Equality Duty and the Children Act 2004 in relation to the impact of the accommodation offered on the applicant’s disabled son.
• The reviewing officer had failed to consider why the original housing officer had referred to the applicant and her son having needs to remain in the borough.
• The reviewing officer had failed to give adequate reasons for rejecting arguments put by the applicant as to why the property being unsuitable.
• It also shows the importance of those acting for applicants obtaining copies of the local authority’s placement policy

On the other hand the judgment shows that disrepair which can be put right won’t be grounds for treating a property as unsuitable - see paragraph 25

Burke-Noel-v.-Lambeth-LBC-judgment-23.01.25.pdf