Asked by: Josh Babarinde (Liberal Democrat - Eastbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what additional funding and resources he plans to allocate to local authorities to aid housing repairs.
Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
All registered providers of social housing are required to deliver the outcomes of the regulatory standards set by the independent Regulator of Social Housing. This includes providing an effective, efficient, and timely repairs service for the homes and communal areas they are responsible for, including setting timescales for completion, and communicating these to tenants.
The government has introduced additional safety legislation to protect tenants from health and safety hazards through the introduction of Awaab's Law which came into force for damp, mould, and all emergency hazards on 27 October 2025.
On the 28 January the government also announced further measures to support local authorities in building and maintaining safe and decent social and affordable homes, including a new, modernised Decent Homes Standard. Details can be found in the Written Ministerial Statement (HCWS1283).
Finally, my Department launched a call for evidence with the Ministry of Justice on 4 December to hear from tenants, landlords, legal professionals and claims management companies about their experiences of housing disrepair claims. It can be found on gov.uk here. The exercise will allow us to gather further evidence on how the current process works, including the roles of companies and solicitors in these cases. We want to understand what doesn't work or is unclear so that we can make sure the process is as effective as possible. The call for evidence will be open for 12 weeks and close on 12 February 2026.
Asked by: Bob Blackman (Conservative - Harrow East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the withdrawal of legal aid in cases involving sodium valproate on the long-term care needs on people who have brought such cases forward.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Legal aid was granted in respect of a multi-party action product liability dispute under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 against Sanofi, the manufacturers of Epilim, a sodium valproate containing medication. The availability of legal aid in connection with this matter was subject to a means and merits test.
Legal aid funding was subsequently withdrawn on the basis that the case no longer met the merits test because the prospects of success in the case were assessed as being poor. This determination was subject to an appeal before the Special Cases Review Panel, a panel consisting of independent lawyers, in October 2010. When determining whether legal aid should be withdrawn all relevant factors were taken into account. The assessment of long-term care needs following a withdrawal of legal aid is not a process that is part of the legal aid scheme and there is no statutory provision which requires or envisions this happening.
At the material time the Legal Services Commission (LSC), an executive non-departmental public body of the Ministry of Justice, was responsible for the operational administration of the legal aid scheme. Decisions about funding in individual cases were made independently in accordance with the statutory framework in place. At the relevant time this would have included the Access to Justice Act 1999 and the Funding Code Criteria and Guidance. Exceptional Case Funding (ECF) would not have been available for this matter as the case was in scope of legal aid under the Access to Justice Act 1999.
In 2013, the LSC was replaced by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA), an Executive Agency of the Ministry of Justice, created by the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO). Under LASPO, the scope of civil legal services funded under legal aid was significantly reduced. ECF as provided for under s.10 LASPO allows legal aid to be granted in respect of cases which fall outside the scope of civil legal aid services where it can be shown that, without legal aid, there would be a breach or a risk of a breach of the individual’s human rights or assimilated enforceable EU rights. However, as with in-scope legal aid eligibility is subject to a financial eligibility test and a legal merits test, including where appropriate, the prospect of success test.
The nature and availability of ECF is published on GOV.UK and the LAA publishes detailed guidance on how to apply for ECF Legal aid: apply for exceptional case funding - GOV.UK. All solicitors have an obligation in accordance with professional body rules to advise clients about funding options available including legal aid whether provided as in-scope funding or ECF.
The independence of decision making in individual cases under LASPO was preserved by the creation of the statutory role of the Director of Legal Aid Casework. The Lord Chancellor may not issue directions or guidance in relation to an individual case. It is this separation that enables the LAA to make decisions without influence from the Ministry of Justice or from Ministers. This is an important part of the legal aid system and ensuring access to justice.
All applications for legal aid, whether in-scope or ECF, are considered on a case-by-case basis against the statutory framework and any applicable general guidance issued by the Lord Chancellor. Legal aid will be granted in all cases where the appropriate eligibility criteria are met.
Asked by: Bob Blackman (Conservative - Harrow East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what information his Department holds on the withdrawal of legal aid certificates in litigation cases relating to harm caused by sodium valproate; and whether people involved in such cases were aware of the availability of Exceptional Case Funding.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Legal aid was granted in respect of a multi-party action product liability dispute under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 against Sanofi, the manufacturers of Epilim, a sodium valproate containing medication. The availability of legal aid in connection with this matter was subject to a means and merits test.
Legal aid funding was subsequently withdrawn on the basis that the case no longer met the merits test because the prospects of success in the case were assessed as being poor. This determination was subject to an appeal before the Special Cases Review Panel, a panel consisting of independent lawyers, in October 2010. When determining whether legal aid should be withdrawn all relevant factors were taken into account. The assessment of long-term care needs following a withdrawal of legal aid is not a process that is part of the legal aid scheme and there is no statutory provision which requires or envisions this happening.
At the material time the Legal Services Commission (LSC), an executive non-departmental public body of the Ministry of Justice, was responsible for the operational administration of the legal aid scheme. Decisions about funding in individual cases were made independently in accordance with the statutory framework in place. At the relevant time this would have included the Access to Justice Act 1999 and the Funding Code Criteria and Guidance. Exceptional Case Funding (ECF) would not have been available for this matter as the case was in scope of legal aid under the Access to Justice Act 1999.
In 2013, the LSC was replaced by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA), an Executive Agency of the Ministry of Justice, created by the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO). Under LASPO, the scope of civil legal services funded under legal aid was significantly reduced. ECF as provided for under s.10 LASPO allows legal aid to be granted in respect of cases which fall outside the scope of civil legal aid services where it can be shown that, without legal aid, there would be a breach or a risk of a breach of the individual’s human rights or assimilated enforceable EU rights. However, as with in-scope legal aid eligibility is subject to a financial eligibility test and a legal merits test, including where appropriate, the prospect of success test.
The nature and availability of ECF is published on GOV.UK and the LAA publishes detailed guidance on how to apply for ECF Legal aid: apply for exceptional case funding - GOV.UK. All solicitors have an obligation in accordance with professional body rules to advise clients about funding options available including legal aid whether provided as in-scope funding or ECF.
The independence of decision making in individual cases under LASPO was preserved by the creation of the statutory role of the Director of Legal Aid Casework. The Lord Chancellor may not issue directions or guidance in relation to an individual case. It is this separation that enables the LAA to make decisions without influence from the Ministry of Justice or from Ministers. This is an important part of the legal aid system and ensuring access to justice.
All applications for legal aid, whether in-scope or ECF, are considered on a case-by-case basis against the statutory framework and any applicable general guidance issued by the Lord Chancellor. Legal aid will be granted in all cases where the appropriate eligibility criteria are met.
Asked by: Bob Blackman (Conservative - Harrow East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential merits of making Exceptional Case Funding available to women and families on their legal cases relating to harm caused by sodium valproate.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Legal aid was granted in respect of a multi-party action product liability dispute under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 against Sanofi, the manufacturers of Epilim, a sodium valproate containing medication. The availability of legal aid in connection with this matter was subject to a means and merits test.
Legal aid funding was subsequently withdrawn on the basis that the case no longer met the merits test because the prospects of success in the case were assessed as being poor. This determination was subject to an appeal before the Special Cases Review Panel, a panel consisting of independent lawyers, in October 2010. When determining whether legal aid should be withdrawn all relevant factors were taken into account. The assessment of long-term care needs following a withdrawal of legal aid is not a process that is part of the legal aid scheme and there is no statutory provision which requires or envisions this happening.
At the material time the Legal Services Commission (LSC), an executive non-departmental public body of the Ministry of Justice, was responsible for the operational administration of the legal aid scheme. Decisions about funding in individual cases were made independently in accordance with the statutory framework in place. At the relevant time this would have included the Access to Justice Act 1999 and the Funding Code Criteria and Guidance. Exceptional Case Funding (ECF) would not have been available for this matter as the case was in scope of legal aid under the Access to Justice Act 1999.
In 2013, the LSC was replaced by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA), an Executive Agency of the Ministry of Justice, created by the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO). Under LASPO, the scope of civil legal services funded under legal aid was significantly reduced. ECF as provided for under s.10 LASPO allows legal aid to be granted in respect of cases which fall outside the scope of civil legal aid services where it can be shown that, without legal aid, there would be a breach or a risk of a breach of the individual’s human rights or assimilated enforceable EU rights. However, as with in-scope legal aid eligibility is subject to a financial eligibility test and a legal merits test, including where appropriate, the prospect of success test.
The nature and availability of ECF is published on GOV.UK and the LAA publishes detailed guidance on how to apply for ECF Legal aid: apply for exceptional case funding - GOV.UK. All solicitors have an obligation in accordance with professional body rules to advise clients about funding options available including legal aid whether provided as in-scope funding or ECF.
The independence of decision making in individual cases under LASPO was preserved by the creation of the statutory role of the Director of Legal Aid Casework. The Lord Chancellor may not issue directions or guidance in relation to an individual case. It is this separation that enables the LAA to make decisions without influence from the Ministry of Justice or from Ministers. This is an important part of the legal aid system and ensuring access to justice.
All applications for legal aid, whether in-scope or ECF, are considered on a case-by-case basis against the statutory framework and any applicable general guidance issued by the Lord Chancellor. Legal aid will be granted in all cases where the appropriate eligibility criteria are met.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how much her Department spent on (a) legal advice and (b) other support services for migrants who arrived in the UK illegally who are in accommodation by contract in 2025.
Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office does not hold the requested data on the provision of legal advice. Asylum seekers may be eligible for legal aid, which is administered by the Legal Aid Agency in the Ministry of Justice.
Regarding other services, the Asylum Accommodation and Support Contract (AASC) Statement of Requirements provides a detailed breakdown of all services that accommodation providers must deliver, along with the standards expected of them. The full document is available here:
The Home Office publishes information on asylum expenditure, including services such as AASC and AIRE, within its Annual Report and Accounts. These can be found on GOV.UK here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/ho-annual-reports-and-accounts
Asked by: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how the Legal Aid Agency monitors whether legally aided housing cases are being actively resolved.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The scope of legal aid for housing matters is set out under paragraphs 33-35 of Schedule 1 to Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This includes civil legal services relating to loss of home and ancillary housing, debt and welfare benefit service, provision of accommodation and assistance to an individual who is homeless or at risk of homelessness and risk to health and safety in rented accommodation.
Legal aid for housing matters may be provided as Legal Help which includes advice and assistance on the matters set out above or Legal Representation which would include representation before a court or tribunal. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also funds the Housing Loss Prevention Advice Service (HLPAS) which covers early legal advice on housing, debt and welfare benefits issues to individuals with evidence showing they are at risk of possession proceedings, loss of their home or illegal eviction; and on-the-day emergency advice and advocacy to anyone facing possession proceedings.
Eligibility for legal aid subject to strict statutory criteria and the provision of and payment for legal aid services is governed by Contracts with legal aid providers. Both legal aid legislation and the Contracts contain a number of provisions to ensure that public funds are used proportionately and appropriately.
Legal aid provided under Legal Help or Legal Representation is subject to a strict financial eligibility test and a legal merits test as set out in the Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) Regulations 2013. To qualify for Legal Representation in respect of any housing matter the proportionality test as described at regulation 8 must be met and continue to be met throughout the duration of proceedings.
Regulation 40 of the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012 requires all legal aid providers to report to the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) any changes in circumstances which would materially affect a client’s eligibility for Legal Representation alongside other matters which may impact on eligibility, for example, failure to accept an offer to settle or to use and alternative dispute resolution method or issues relating to the client’s conduct. The LAA may withdraw a determination that the individual qualifies for Legal representation if it concludes the eligibility criteria are no longer met or it is satisfied that the client is requiring proceedings to be conducted unreasonably so as to incur unjustifiable expense.
Legal Representation is subject to scope and cost limitations setting out what work may be undertaken and the maximum amount of legal aid costs that may be claimed. To extend either scope or costs an application must be made to the LAA setting who will consider whether the additional funding should be authorised with reference to the applicable regulations. This ensures appropriate and proportionate use of legal aid funding.
Clause 2.4 of the Standard Civil Contract 2024 Standard Terms requires legal aid providers to work with the LAA to achieve value for money and to ensure that public money is spent with probity, accountability and in the public interest.
Additionally, any claims for payment for legal aid work are subject to assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Civil Contract 2024. In particular under paragraph 6.9 sets our hat all assessments of Contract Work are to be on the Standard Basis as defined by Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
CPR 44.3(2) states that: “Where the amount of costs is to be assessed on the standard basis, the court will— (a) only allow costs which are proportionate to the matters in issue. Costs which are disproportionate in amount may be disallowed or reduced even if they were reasonably or necessarily incurred.”
The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) does not play an active role in case progression where all providers of legal aid services are independent providers of services who are bound to act in the best interest of the client taking into account the provisions of their legal aid contract and any relevant professional body rules. However, in addition to the reporting obligations referred to above, automatic enquiries are triggered on Legal Representation cases that have had no legal aid activity for a period of more than 365 days. Failure to respond to these enquiries may result in the withdrawal of legal aid. Furthermore, the LAA has a representations process which allows opponents (or other third parties) to report to the LAA circumstances which may affect an individual’s eligibility for legal aid.
There is no specific guidance on “appropriate use of public funds for disputes that do not materially affect housing safety or security”. However, statutory and contractual provisions governing the appropriate use of public funds in all civil cases are set out in the Regulations and Contract referred to above. Supporting guidance on the application of the statutory and contractual framework is set out in the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance under s.4 LASPO and the Costs Assessment Guidance both of which legal aid providers have a contractual obligation to comply with when carrying out legal aid work.
The average cost of a housing case under each legal aid scheme for the last five financial years is set out in the table below. These costs will include all housing cases within scope of legal aid as set out above. Average costs have been broken down by the type of legal aid provided.
Financial Year | In-court housing advice under HLPAS or its predecessors | Legal Help | Legal Representation |
2020-21 | £87 | £433 | £3,444 |
2021-22 | £107 | £376 | £3,963 |
2022-23 | £110 | £354 | £3,694 |
2023-24 | £103 | £337 | £3,531 |
2024-25 | £99 | £313 | £3,508 |
Asked by: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average cost to the Legal Aid Agency was per housing dispute in each of the last five years.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The scope of legal aid for housing matters is set out under paragraphs 33-35 of Schedule 1 to Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This includes civil legal services relating to loss of home and ancillary housing, debt and welfare benefit service, provision of accommodation and assistance to an individual who is homeless or at risk of homelessness and risk to health and safety in rented accommodation.
Legal aid for housing matters may be provided as Legal Help which includes advice and assistance on the matters set out above or Legal Representation which would include representation before a court or tribunal. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also funds the Housing Loss Prevention Advice Service (HLPAS) which covers early legal advice on housing, debt and welfare benefits issues to individuals with evidence showing they are at risk of possession proceedings, loss of their home or illegal eviction; and on-the-day emergency advice and advocacy to anyone facing possession proceedings.
Eligibility for legal aid subject to strict statutory criteria and the provision of and payment for legal aid services is governed by Contracts with legal aid providers. Both legal aid legislation and the Contracts contain a number of provisions to ensure that public funds are used proportionately and appropriately.
Legal aid provided under Legal Help or Legal Representation is subject to a strict financial eligibility test and a legal merits test as set out in the Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) Regulations 2013. To qualify for Legal Representation in respect of any housing matter the proportionality test as described at regulation 8 must be met and continue to be met throughout the duration of proceedings.
Regulation 40 of the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012 requires all legal aid providers to report to the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) any changes in circumstances which would materially affect a client’s eligibility for Legal Representation alongside other matters which may impact on eligibility, for example, failure to accept an offer to settle or to use and alternative dispute resolution method or issues relating to the client’s conduct. The LAA may withdraw a determination that the individual qualifies for Legal representation if it concludes the eligibility criteria are no longer met or it is satisfied that the client is requiring proceedings to be conducted unreasonably so as to incur unjustifiable expense.
Legal Representation is subject to scope and cost limitations setting out what work may be undertaken and the maximum amount of legal aid costs that may be claimed. To extend either scope or costs an application must be made to the LAA setting who will consider whether the additional funding should be authorised with reference to the applicable regulations. This ensures appropriate and proportionate use of legal aid funding.
Clause 2.4 of the Standard Civil Contract 2024 Standard Terms requires legal aid providers to work with the LAA to achieve value for money and to ensure that public money is spent with probity, accountability and in the public interest.
Additionally, any claims for payment for legal aid work are subject to assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Civil Contract 2024. In particular under paragraph 6.9 sets our hat all assessments of Contract Work are to be on the Standard Basis as defined by Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
CPR 44.3(2) states that: “Where the amount of costs is to be assessed on the standard basis, the court will— (a) only allow costs which are proportionate to the matters in issue. Costs which are disproportionate in amount may be disallowed or reduced even if they were reasonably or necessarily incurred.”
The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) does not play an active role in case progression where all providers of legal aid services are independent providers of services who are bound to act in the best interest of the client taking into account the provisions of their legal aid contract and any relevant professional body rules. However, in addition to the reporting obligations referred to above, automatic enquiries are triggered on Legal Representation cases that have had no legal aid activity for a period of more than 365 days. Failure to respond to these enquiries may result in the withdrawal of legal aid. Furthermore, the LAA has a representations process which allows opponents (or other third parties) to report to the LAA circumstances which may affect an individual’s eligibility for legal aid.
There is no specific guidance on “appropriate use of public funds for disputes that do not materially affect housing safety or security”. However, statutory and contractual provisions governing the appropriate use of public funds in all civil cases are set out in the Regulations and Contract referred to above. Supporting guidance on the application of the statutory and contractual framework is set out in the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance under s.4 LASPO and the Costs Assessment Guidance both of which legal aid providers have a contractual obligation to comply with when carrying out legal aid work.
The average cost of a housing case under each legal aid scheme for the last five financial years is set out in the table below. These costs will include all housing cases within scope of legal aid as set out above. Average costs have been broken down by the type of legal aid provided.
Financial Year | In-court housing advice under HLPAS or its predecessors | Legal Help | Legal Representation |
2020-21 | £87 | £433 | £3,444 |
2021-22 | £107 | £376 | £3,963 |
2022-23 | £110 | £354 | £3,694 |
2023-24 | £103 | £337 | £3,531 |
2024-25 | £99 | £313 | £3,508 |
Asked by: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what guidance is issued to Legal Aid providers on the appropriate use of public funds for disputes that do not materially affect housing safety or security.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The scope of legal aid for housing matters is set out under paragraphs 33-35 of Schedule 1 to Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This includes civil legal services relating to loss of home and ancillary housing, debt and welfare benefit service, provision of accommodation and assistance to an individual who is homeless or at risk of homelessness and risk to health and safety in rented accommodation.
Legal aid for housing matters may be provided as Legal Help which includes advice and assistance on the matters set out above or Legal Representation which would include representation before a court or tribunal. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also funds the Housing Loss Prevention Advice Service (HLPAS) which covers early legal advice on housing, debt and welfare benefits issues to individuals with evidence showing they are at risk of possession proceedings, loss of their home or illegal eviction; and on-the-day emergency advice and advocacy to anyone facing possession proceedings.
Eligibility for legal aid subject to strict statutory criteria and the provision of and payment for legal aid services is governed by Contracts with legal aid providers. Both legal aid legislation and the Contracts contain a number of provisions to ensure that public funds are used proportionately and appropriately.
Legal aid provided under Legal Help or Legal Representation is subject to a strict financial eligibility test and a legal merits test as set out in the Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) Regulations 2013. To qualify for Legal Representation in respect of any housing matter the proportionality test as described at regulation 8 must be met and continue to be met throughout the duration of proceedings.
Regulation 40 of the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012 requires all legal aid providers to report to the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) any changes in circumstances which would materially affect a client’s eligibility for Legal Representation alongside other matters which may impact on eligibility, for example, failure to accept an offer to settle or to use and alternative dispute resolution method or issues relating to the client’s conduct. The LAA may withdraw a determination that the individual qualifies for Legal representation if it concludes the eligibility criteria are no longer met or it is satisfied that the client is requiring proceedings to be conducted unreasonably so as to incur unjustifiable expense.
Legal Representation is subject to scope and cost limitations setting out what work may be undertaken and the maximum amount of legal aid costs that may be claimed. To extend either scope or costs an application must be made to the LAA setting who will consider whether the additional funding should be authorised with reference to the applicable regulations. This ensures appropriate and proportionate use of legal aid funding.
Clause 2.4 of the Standard Civil Contract 2024 Standard Terms requires legal aid providers to work with the LAA to achieve value for money and to ensure that public money is spent with probity, accountability and in the public interest.
Additionally, any claims for payment for legal aid work are subject to assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Civil Contract 2024. In particular under paragraph 6.9 sets our hat all assessments of Contract Work are to be on the Standard Basis as defined by Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
CPR 44.3(2) states that: “Where the amount of costs is to be assessed on the standard basis, the court will— (a) only allow costs which are proportionate to the matters in issue. Costs which are disproportionate in amount may be disallowed or reduced even if they were reasonably or necessarily incurred.”
The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) does not play an active role in case progression where all providers of legal aid services are independent providers of services who are bound to act in the best interest of the client taking into account the provisions of their legal aid contract and any relevant professional body rules. However, in addition to the reporting obligations referred to above, automatic enquiries are triggered on Legal Representation cases that have had no legal aid activity for a period of more than 365 days. Failure to respond to these enquiries may result in the withdrawal of legal aid. Furthermore, the LAA has a representations process which allows opponents (or other third parties) to report to the LAA circumstances which may affect an individual’s eligibility for legal aid.
There is no specific guidance on “appropriate use of public funds for disputes that do not materially affect housing safety or security”. However, statutory and contractual provisions governing the appropriate use of public funds in all civil cases are set out in the Regulations and Contract referred to above. Supporting guidance on the application of the statutory and contractual framework is set out in the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance under s.4 LASPO and the Costs Assessment Guidance both of which legal aid providers have a contractual obligation to comply with when carrying out legal aid work.
The average cost of a housing case under each legal aid scheme for the last five financial years is set out in the table below. These costs will include all housing cases within scope of legal aid as set out above. Average costs have been broken down by the type of legal aid provided.
Financial Year | In-court housing advice under HLPAS or its predecessors | Legal Help | Legal Representation |
2020-21 | £87 | £433 | £3,444 |
2021-22 | £107 | £376 | £3,963 |
2022-23 | £110 | £354 | £3,694 |
2023-24 | £103 | £337 | £3,531 |
2024-25 | £99 | £313 | £3,508 |
Asked by: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what checks and balances are in place to ensure that Legal Aid funding in housing disputes is used proportionately.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The scope of legal aid for housing matters is set out under paragraphs 33-35 of Schedule 1 to Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. This includes civil legal services relating to loss of home and ancillary housing, debt and welfare benefit service, provision of accommodation and assistance to an individual who is homeless or at risk of homelessness and risk to health and safety in rented accommodation.
Legal aid for housing matters may be provided as Legal Help which includes advice and assistance on the matters set out above or Legal Representation which would include representation before a court or tribunal. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also funds the Housing Loss Prevention Advice Service (HLPAS) which covers early legal advice on housing, debt and welfare benefits issues to individuals with evidence showing they are at risk of possession proceedings, loss of their home or illegal eviction; and on-the-day emergency advice and advocacy to anyone facing possession proceedings.
Eligibility for legal aid subject to strict statutory criteria and the provision of and payment for legal aid services is governed by Contracts with legal aid providers. Both legal aid legislation and the Contracts contain a number of provisions to ensure that public funds are used proportionately and appropriately.
Legal aid provided under Legal Help or Legal Representation is subject to a strict financial eligibility test and a legal merits test as set out in the Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) Regulations 2013. To qualify for Legal Representation in respect of any housing matter the proportionality test as described at regulation 8 must be met and continue to be met throughout the duration of proceedings.
Regulation 40 of the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012 requires all legal aid providers to report to the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) any changes in circumstances which would materially affect a client’s eligibility for Legal Representation alongside other matters which may impact on eligibility, for example, failure to accept an offer to settle or to use and alternative dispute resolution method or issues relating to the client’s conduct. The LAA may withdraw a determination that the individual qualifies for Legal representation if it concludes the eligibility criteria are no longer met or it is satisfied that the client is requiring proceedings to be conducted unreasonably so as to incur unjustifiable expense.
Legal Representation is subject to scope and cost limitations setting out what work may be undertaken and the maximum amount of legal aid costs that may be claimed. To extend either scope or costs an application must be made to the LAA setting who will consider whether the additional funding should be authorised with reference to the applicable regulations. This ensures appropriate and proportionate use of legal aid funding.
Clause 2.4 of the Standard Civil Contract 2024 Standard Terms requires legal aid providers to work with the LAA to achieve value for money and to ensure that public money is spent with probity, accountability and in the public interest.
Additionally, any claims for payment for legal aid work are subject to assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Standard Civil Contract 2024. In particular under paragraph 6.9 sets our hat all assessments of Contract Work are to be on the Standard Basis as defined by Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).
CPR 44.3(2) states that: “Where the amount of costs is to be assessed on the standard basis, the court will— (a) only allow costs which are proportionate to the matters in issue. Costs which are disproportionate in amount may be disallowed or reduced even if they were reasonably or necessarily incurred.”
The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) does not play an active role in case progression where all providers of legal aid services are independent providers of services who are bound to act in the best interest of the client taking into account the provisions of their legal aid contract and any relevant professional body rules. However, in addition to the reporting obligations referred to above, automatic enquiries are triggered on Legal Representation cases that have had no legal aid activity for a period of more than 365 days. Failure to respond to these enquiries may result in the withdrawal of legal aid. Furthermore, the LAA has a representations process which allows opponents (or other third parties) to report to the LAA circumstances which may affect an individual’s eligibility for legal aid.
There is no specific guidance on “appropriate use of public funds for disputes that do not materially affect housing safety or security”. However, statutory and contractual provisions governing the appropriate use of public funds in all civil cases are set out in the Regulations and Contract referred to above. Supporting guidance on the application of the statutory and contractual framework is set out in the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance under s.4 LASPO and the Costs Assessment Guidance both of which legal aid providers have a contractual obligation to comply with when carrying out legal aid work.
The average cost of a housing case under each legal aid scheme for the last five financial years is set out in the table below. These costs will include all housing cases within scope of legal aid as set out above. Average costs have been broken down by the type of legal aid provided.
Financial Year | In-court housing advice under HLPAS or its predecessors | Legal Help | Legal Representation |
2020-21 | £87 | £433 | £3,444 |
2021-22 | £107 | £376 | £3,963 |
2022-23 | £110 | £354 | £3,694 |
2023-24 | £103 | £337 | £3,531 |
2024-25 | £99 | £313 | £3,508 |
Asked by: Lord Wills (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what is the maximum amount of non-means-tested legal aid that they envisage being made available for each individual bereaved person and family at inquests in England and Wales for (1) legal assistance, and (2) advocacy, under the Public Office (Accountability) Bill.
Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Bill will provide non-means tested legal help and advocacy for bereaved families at inquests where a public authority is named as an interested person. As under the current system, the amount paid will depend on the work carried out by the provider on the inquest, which will be different for each case depending on its duration and complexity.