Page 120 - Solving Housing Disputes

Recommendations

Housing Disputes Service

1. We recommend the piloting of a new, Housing Disputes Service (HDS) [2.9].

2. We recommend the HDS adopt best practice with respect to those who are
vulnerable by either inherent or situational vulnerability. The HDS digital
system should collect information on vulnerability as early as possible in the
process to enable reasonable adjustments to be made to its process to
accommodate the vulnerability. Data should be collected on protected
characteristics, to provide policy makers with information on who is using the
HDS and to inform systemic interventions taking place with housing
providers [2.25-2.26].

3. We recommend that subject to successful piloting against evaluative
measures, long-term the HDS be established as the specialist housing dispute
body [2.29].

4. We recommend the HDS pilot be phased and take place in two locations, one
metropolitan, one rural [2.31].

5. We recommend that multiple channels be available for parties to contact and
initiate disputes with the HDS, but that any pilot should include the necessary
digital elements for the service. These would include a digital case
management system for HDS officers, a digital filing system and dashboard
for parties to upload and monitor relevant documents and the progress of their
dispute [2.33].

6. During the pilot phase, where the HDS makes an outright or suspended
possession determination that is not appealed it should nevertheless be subject
to review by a District Judge who may direct a hearing [2.40].

7. The HDS should feature a prominent landing page, which should be promoted
to appear as the top result when a user types in expressions like “housing
disputes” or “housing problems” into a search engine. User-facing digital
components of the HDS landing page or filing system should feature design
principles which make them accessible and navigable for lay users. The

114