This afternoon.

In his reserved judgment, Mr Justice Max Barrett noted the council knew from at least August 2017 that the man had an access agreement with his former partner as both had signed an ‘agreement of parents’ form issued by the council.

He said social housing “assessment” under Section 20 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 is separate from social housing “allocation” which occurs under an allocation scheme adopted by the Council under various provisions of the 2009 Act.

Section 20 states “household” means: “(a) a person who lives alone, (b), two or more persons who live together, or (C) two or more persons who do not live together but who, in the opinion of the housing authority concerned, have a reasonable requirement to live together”.

Separated father loses challenge against one-bedroom flat allocation (mary Carolan, Irish Times)

20 thoughts on “On Your Own

    1. newsjustin

      But if the court sees him as simply a single man, on his own, he presumably gets bumped down the list in terms of priority for housing.

      Reply
  1. Shifty

    A less than scrupulous mother could use the fact that he lives in a ‘bedsit’ as grounds for removing access to the kids/letting them stay with him.

    Reply
    1. Jake38

      The only people who can pay to access the High Court in Ireland are those with no money (or the appearance of no money) whom the taxpayer pays for, and Redacted.

      Reply
  2. SOQ

    He takes a high court case because DCC won’t give him appropriate social housing for 3 weekend kids In Dublin?

    Assuming mother has adequate and he already has his own… bike. on. your.

    Reply
    1. Rob_G

      He could be denied access to his kids through not having appropriate accommodation for them.

      He has joint access to the children; it seems kind of unfair that his former partner gets a free 3-bedroom gaff from the state, while he only gets a free 1-bed.

      Reply
      1. Cian

        True.
        But if you have another family (4 people) needing full-time accommodation – would it be fair that these get the free 3-bed house and he (and his ex) get a 3-bed and a 1-bed?
        Or should this other (full-time) family be given the 1-bed to allow these two half-time families get a 3-bed each?

        I don’t know which is more unfair.

        Reply
        1. Rob_G

          There is nothing fair about two (I presume) able-bodied adults bringing 3 children into the world, and then expecting the rest of society to pay for them.

          And, not to get all ‘mens’ rights’, but men do get the short end of the stick more or less by default in custody proceedings.

          Reply
    1. Barry the Hatchet

      In fairness it’s not really an article, is it? It’s two sentences. We have no idea of the facts of the case.

      Reply
  3. harry

    saw this chap on Facebook last night.
    late twenties and broken up with the woman, she has a three bed place.
    he is under dcc and only getting 900 in HAP which will rent a bed somewhere.
    Because he has the kids every other weekend his position is that he should get 1900 HAP to rent a place with 3 bedrooms to sleep all his kids every second weekend.
    he believes if he were in sdcc he would get this.

    his position is that he is another victim of government cruelty.

    Reply
  4. Ads

    What’s that Danish film in which the parents swap accommodation according to whose week with the kids it is? Always wondered if this was the norm in Denmark.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *