A MOTHER has been living next door to her daughter’s abuser due to “significant obstacles” put in place by an unlawful Westminster City Council housing policy.

A High Court judge has ruled the council needs to rewrite its policy after the child survivor of sexual abuse and her mother were denied a safe home.

Lawyers in the case say just 12 per cent of tenants forced to leave their homes because of abuse are found new tenancies in social housing. Often women are left with an impossible choice between losing their security of tenure if they flee abuse.

But Westminster has a housing policy that creates “significant obstacles” for those seeking a transfer in these circumstances, according to lawyers who brought the case against the council.

Sam Tippet, from the Public Interest Law Centre, said: “It’s a relief that the court has found Westminster Council’s policy unlawful. We hope that the council now makes due amends, and finds this family a safe place to live as a matter of urgency. Time and time again those fleeing abuse are being forced by councils to give up social housing. Survivors are having to fight to save their housing security at a time when they are suffering extreme trauma and fear. Councils must take responsibility and properly protect survivors when they most need it instead of causing them further harm and distress.”

The case had centred on the council policy on “reciprocal transfers”, which aims to help those who cannot return home when fleeing abuse by allowing them to retain their tenancy. The lawyers argued Westminster’s policy “effectively imposed a residence requirement, subjecting those who were not Westminster tenants to a more onerous set of conditions than those who were Westminster tenants”.

They brought the case saying there had been a breach of the Equality Act and Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

They also said Westminster had failed to “have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children under the Children Act 2004”.

The court made a series of rulings against the council and ordered it to review its policies, reconsider the claimant’s application and pay the mother damages.

Judge Simon Tinkler said there had been “an incredibly traumatic effect on the claimant and her child”, and added: “It is now over two years since the search for replacement accommodation started and her child moved abroad. Both the claimant and her child are suffering serious medical issues as a consequence of the situation.”

A city council spokes-person said: “We are sorry about any distress that this person may have experienced.

“We care about the welfare of all our residents and regret that they have not received a good service from the council.

“We are working with the residents’ legal team to address their needs and find them suitable accommodation within the borough. As part of our efforts to address this, we are reviewing the council’s allocation policy to ensure that people living both within and outside the borough are treated fairly in line with the Equality Act.”