HPA meaning

In this issue: Social housing Children's social care Governance Public procurement Social care Local government finance Licensing Planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Social housing Rent repayment orders and ‘person managing’ (Global 100 v Ross and others) Global 100 appealed to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), challenging a First-tier Tribunal (FTT) ruling which had allowed the respondent property guardian’s application for rent repayment orders (RROs) under section 43 of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 (HPA 2016). The London Borough of Haringey had entered into a contract with GGM concerning a council-owned building to provide live-in property guardianship services. In turn, GGM authorised its related company, Global 100 (G100), to issue licences to live-in guardians, a group that included the respondents to the appeal. No payments were made by the respondents to the Local Authority; instead, the authority received only a monthly sum from GGM. The respondents brought proceedings...

Kimberly Moh & others v Rimal Properties Ltd; Dr James Kelly & others v Bostall Estates Ltd [2024] UKUT 324 (LC) (18 October 2024) What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling delivers a clear, concise and practical recap of the approach to working out relevant time limits in practice, while also flagging a potential pitfall for the inattentive reader. Under section 41(2)(b) of the Housing and Planning Act 2016 (HPA 2016), it was accepted that the window for applying for a rent repayment order strictly expires on the very day the application is lodged. The judge therefore had to carefully decide when the ‘period of 12 months ending’ on that date starts, so as to determine whether the statutory offence (under HA 2004, s 72) was committed within that timeframe. In her given reasons, the judge approved the general common law ‘corresponding date rule’, concluding it governs periods calculated both ‘before’ and ‘after’ the event date. Thus, a period of 12 months ‘before’ an event...

Cooper and others v Ludgate House Ltd [2026] EWHC 484 (Ch) What are the practical implications of the case? The decision serves as a clear warning to parties proposing Part 36 settlements with several strands. The court will price each strand independently to determine whether the offer was bettered at trial. Accordingly, whether single‑issue or composite, any Part 36 proposal should be drafted so it can be readily quantified by the court; the tribunal must be able to identify, with confidence, who actually succeeded. Where an offer bundles disparate elements, each must be susceptible to valuation on the evidence before the court. It is not sufficient, as occurred here, simply to contend that the proposal outweighed the differential between the claimant’s damages and the defendant’s figure where no substantive evidence addresses that issue. Parties should, therefore, be slow to fold into a Part 36 offer terms that do not sit squarely within the pleaded claim. In this matter, the defendant’s Part 36 proposal purported to resolve any prospective...

Right to enter land for survey purposes under CPA 1965 once compulsory purchase order is confirmed The Compulsory Purchase Act 1965 (CPA 1965) authorises acquiring authorities to access land to undertake surveys, but only once a compulsory purchase order (CPO) has been confirmed. Under CPA 1965, s 11(3), an acquiring authority may enter land (or any part of it) subject to compulsory purchase in order to: survey, value and take levels of the land probe or drill to discover the nature of the soil set out the line of the works, provided at least three and no more than 14 days’ notice is given to the owners or occupiers Owners or occupiers must be compensated for any damage caused by entry, and any dispute about compensation can be referred to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber). Right to enter, survey and value land under HPA 2016 before CPO is confirmed Overview As noted above, the power to enter land...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived, not maintained, and provided for background reference only. Starter homes policy 2014 starter homes consultation In December 2014, the government set out plans for a new Starter Homes initiative, starting a consultation on planning changes to back the delivery of 100,000 additional low-cost homes for young first-time buyers. It observed that rising house prices left ‘too many hard-working people in their twenties and thirties’ unable to get onto the property ladder, and proposed to: introduce a national Starter Homes exception sites policy so homes could be built on underused or unviable brownfield land, not presently allocated for housing, on both public and private sites secure, via planning obligations or conditions, that newly built Starter Homes were only available to purchase or occupy by young first-time buyers and sold at least 20% below open market value remove duties on developers to fund section 106 affordable housing contributions, including any tariff-based payments to general infrastructure pots, and exempt the...

Requirements of section 53 An applicant who intends to make, or has made, a development consent order (DCO) application under the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008) may seek the Secretary of State’s authorisation to enter land owned by third parties to: undertake surveys and take levels, and/or support compliance with environmental impact assessment and habitats regulations assessment requirements Under PA 2008, s 53, the Secretary of State may authorise entry onto third party land only where it is connected with: a DCO application—whether relating to that or any other land—that has been accepted by the Secretary of State a proposed DCO application a DCO that includes provision authorising the compulsory acquisition of that land, or an interest in it, or a right over it For a proposed DCO application, authorisation can be given only if it appears to the Secretary of State that the prospective applicant is considering a distinct project of real substance...

Unless an express statutory power exists, a compulsory acquisition of land does not permit taking adverse interests in, or rights over, the land acquired, where interests or rights benefit land that is not included in the acquisition...