A MIGRANT prevented his family from being evicted from a retirement home after claiming he didn’t understand the rules.
Shahidul Haque, 59, moved his wife, 28, and two daughters, both three, into David Smith Court in Reading, Berkshire, last year.
naHaque said he did not realise he was not allowed to move his wife, 28, and three-year-old daughters into the specialist accommodation[/caption]
Lawyers claim Haque could not understand the tenancy agreement at the accommodation, which is reserved for people aged over 55.
They argued Haque was never shown the contract in his native language Sylheti, which is mainly spoken in Bangladesh.
But local councillors accused him of “gaming the system” and slammed the ruling as “bonkers”.
Speaking to GB News, Reading Councillor Raj Singh said: “I have no sympathy for what I have read on the interviews.
“If he was able to fill out forms for housing and asylum seekers, then how can he claim he did not understand the contract details.
“It’s for me bonkers.”
The owners sought to kick Haque and his out after receiving noise complaints from retirees at the home.
But lawyers say that removing the family-of-four would breach Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The article of the ECHR protects the right to a family life.
Haque moved into the property last July after being made homeless and later submitted an application for his family to the UK.
His wife, Jakia Sultana Monni, and their twin daughters then moved into his one-bedroom contained flat in December.
But residents complained to Southern Housing of “excess noise” and “anti-social behaviour” from the family.
Officials then held a meeting with Haque to inform him there was a breach of his contract agreement.
The case went to Reading County Court as Southern Housing sought possession of the property.
Taiwo Temilade, acting on behalf of Southern Housing, said the family’s behaviour was “negatively affecting” residents.
Mr Temilade said: “The Defendant’s two young children have become a source of excess noise levels and anti-social behaviour…
“… negatively affecting other residents within the estate through misuse of safety features and generally rambunctious behaviour.”
But defence lawyers pointed to his “limited English skills” and said the agreement was never explained to Haque in his native language.
Barrister Isabel Bertschinger argued: “The terms of the tenancy agreement were never explained via a Sylheti interpreter…
“…or translated into Sylheti in a written document such that the Defendant could understand them.”
She claims he told Southern Housing the local council had not offered him alternative accommodation.
Ms Bertschinger told the court Haque was on benefits and considered disabled.
She continued: “Disabled tenants are more likely to struggle to manage anti-social behaviour by others who live or visit their home.
“The Claimant’s decisions to continue to seek possession of the property are incompatible with the Defendant’s rights under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
“He is disabled and has limited English language skills, and that he is in receipt of benefits and therefore has a low income.
“His wife and children have only recently arrived in the UK and would be particularly vulnerable if made homeless.
“To evict him from his home would have a serious and drastic impact on the Defendant’s health and wellbeing.
“To prevent him from living with his wife and children would have a severe and disproportionate impact on his family life.”
At a hearing last month, Deputy District Judge Simon Lindsey said there were a “number of issues” in the case.
Judge Lindsey said: ‘Fundamentally, I think the defendant probably should not be in this property with his wife and two children.
“But the question of how he came to be in this place appears to be unresolved and we have to get to that another time.”
The case is due to be heard at Reading County Court on January 6.
naHaque, who is on benefits and disabled, arrived at David Smith Court in Reading last July[/caption] Published: [#item_custom_pubDate]
