Father living in retirement flat fights eviction, cites human rights unless rehoused
A Reading housing association seeks possession after a man moved his wife and young children into specialist over-55 accommodation; he says removal would breach his Article 8 rights
A 59-year-old father-of-nine facing a possession claim for a one-bedroom flat in a retirement complex in Reading has told a court he will use human rights law to oppose eviction unless his family is rehoused in more suitable accommodation.
Southern Housing, which owns David Smith Court, a development for people aged 55 and over, has taken Shahidul Haque to Reading County Court seeking possession after Mr. Haque moved his 28-year-old wife and twin three-year-old daughters into the single-room flat he had occupied since July 2024. Mr. Haque says he did not realise the tenancy forbade other residents and that the terms were never translated into his first language, Sylheti.
Mr. Haque, who has lived in the United Kingdom since 1997 and holds a British passport, is registered disabled and receives benefits for diabetes, obstructive sleep apnoea, hypertension and depression. He told the Daily Mail he moved alone into the flat in July and did not understand that family members could not join him later. His current partner arrived in the UK on a spousal visa and their children, born in Bangladesh, are British citizens, court papers say.
In written defences filed at Reading County Court, Mr. Haque's barrister, Isabel Bertschinger, argued that the tenancy terms were not explained to him via an interpreter nor translated into Sylheti, and that eviction would disproportionately interfere with his rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects private and family life. Ms. Bertschinger said Mr. Haque's health conditions, limited English and low income would make homelessness particularly harmful to his family.
Southern Housing’s solicitor, Taiwo Temilade, told the court the presence of children in the retirement complex had led to repeated complaints from residents about excess noise and anti-social behaviour. Mr. Temilade said the children had repeatedly activated emergency alarm cords and that their conduct had adversely affected other tenants.
Deputy District Judge Simon Lindsey heard the case on Aug. 4 and declined to make an immediate order for possession, saying “there are a number of issues” to be resolved and that how the family came to be living in the property remained unclear. He added that, on the face of the evidence, the defendant probably should not be living in specialist accommodation for older people but that the circumstances required further examination. The case is listed for a full hearing on Jan. 6 at Reading County Court.
Court documents say Mr. Haque moved his wife and daughters into the flat on Dec. 20, 2024, after applying in October for them to join him from Sunamganj, Bangladesh. The tenancy charge for the one-bedroom self-contained flat is stated to be £110.70 per week. Mr. Haque told the court he and his family need a larger home and said they would leave if the housing association or the local council provided suitable alternative accommodation.
Mr. Haque’s legal team argued that disabled tenants are more vulnerable to the effects of anti-social behaviour by others and that removal of his family would have a “serious and drastic impact” on his private and family life. Southern Housing declined to comment when contacted.
The case has drawn criticism from some local politicians. Isobel Ballsdon, a Conservative councillor on Reading Borough Council, said the situation was “outrageous” and questioned the fairness of allocating specialist retirement accommodation to a family with young children. Another councillor, Raj Singh, said on a television programme that he had little sympathy and questioned how Mr. Haque could have completed housing forms if he did not understand contract terms.
The dispute comes amid wider debate in the United Kingdom about the interpretation of Article 8 in housing and immigration cases. The Attorney General has recently indicated the government would consider changes to how courts apply Article 8 where ministers believe the right is being used to frustrate deportations and other public interest measures.
Mr. Haque’s legal team says the family has no alternative accommodation and that the local council has not offered rehousing. The court will consider the arguments on whether possession would be a proportionate interference with the family’s rights and whether the tenancy terms were sufficiently explained when Mr. Haque signed the agreement.
The matter remains before the courts, with the January hearing expected to address translation of tenancy information, the welfare needs of a disabled tenant and his small children, and the competing rights of other residents in specialist housing for older people.