Man in retirement housing fights eviction with Article 8 defence after moving family into one‑room flat
Resident at a Reading retirement complex says evicting his wife and young children would breach his right to family life; housing provider seeks possession
A 59-year-old man who moved into a retirement flat in Reading last year is contesting a possession order after he housed his wife and two young daughters in the single-room accommodation, arguing that evicting his family would breach his rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Southern Housing, which owns David Smith Court, a complex restricted to people aged over 55, has sought possession in Reading County Court, saying the presence of the couple’s children has led to repeated complaints of excess noise and misuse of safety features. The man, identified in court documents as Shahidul Haque, told media he and his family have nowhere else to go and that they require a larger home before they would move.
Haque, who is Bangladesh-born and holds a British passport, moved into the one-room self-contained flat at David Smith Court in July 2024. He says his 28-year-old wife, Jakia Sultana Monni, and their three-year-old twin daughters joined him on Dec. 20 after he applied in October for them to come to the UK from Sunamganj in Bangladesh. Haque is registered disabled and receives benefits for diabetes, obstructive sleep apnoea, hypertension and depression.
Southern Housing’s solicitor, Taiwo Temilade, told the court that the children had 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." The landlord has alleged Haque breached the terms of his tenancy by allowing the family to live in accommodation that is designated for older people.
Haque and his lawyers have argued he did not understand the tenancy restrictions because the tenancy terms were not translated into his first language, Sylheti, and were not explained to him via an interpreter when he signed the agreement. In a written defence, his barrister, Isabel Bertschinger, said the family would be particularly vulnerable if made homeless and that eviction would have a "serious and drastic impact" on Haque’s health, well-being and private life.
"To evict him from his home would have a serious and drastic impact on the Defendant's health and wellbeing and therefore on his private life," Bertschinger told the court, adding that disabled tenants are more likely to struggle to manage anti-social behaviour by others who live or visit their home.
At a hearing on Aug. 4, Deputy District Judge Simon Lindsey declined to order immediate possession, saying there were "a number of issues" to resolve and noting that while the defendant probably should not be living at the property with his wife and two children, the circumstances under which the family came to be there required further examination. The matter has been listed for a full hearing on Jan. 6 at Reading County Court.
Haque said the flat, which he pays about £110.70 a week for, is too small for a family and that he would agree to leave if Southern Housing or the local authority found more suitable accommodation. He told the Daily Mail he had previously lived in a four-bedroom home in east London, became homeless after a divorce and was later placed in social housing before being transferred to Berkshire.
Southern Housing declined to comment. In court documents, its solicitor urged the court to grant possession on the grounds of breach of contract and impact on other residents.
The case has drawn criticism from some local councillors. Conservative councillor Isobel Ballsdon described the situation as "outrageous," saying accommodation for people who are retired is not suitable for children and raising concerns about fairness for other groups in need of housing. Councillor Raj Singh, speaking on broadcast media, questioned how someone who completed housing forms could claim not to have understood contract details.
Haque’s legal team has framed the defence around Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects private and family life. Government ministers and legal officials in the UK have recently debated how courts apply Article 8 in housing and immigration cases; the Attorney General has said some changes to interpretation would be considered.
The court will now examine evidence about how the tenancy was explained and signed, the family's housing needs, the impact on other residents and whether eviction would constitute a disproportionate interference with Haque's family and private life under Article 8. A full hearing is scheduled for Jan. 6.