News

Solihull Council has agreed not to stand in the way of a judicial review sought by three residents of Lyndon Croft Residential Home who are campaigning against its closure.

The council decided in March to close the home, stating that it could not be refurbished to meet new national minimum standards bought in under the Care Standards Act 2000 while the residents were still living there, and would cost "virtually as much" to extend and refurbish as it would to rebuild from scratch.

They have offered the home's 29 residents the choice of moving to temporary or permanent placements while the work is carried out. Twenty-five residents have accepted one option or the other. Four have yet to say.

The council agreed not to challenge the residents' application for judicial review of the decision to close the home in an effort to speed up proceedings.

"Everyone is agreed that the sooner we can get this matter before the court the better," said social services director Michael Hake.

"We still believe that closure of the home is best for the welfare of the residents given that the home has to close for rebuilding anyway," he said. "We have got a local authority home that, from what we can see, does not meet our local registration standards - and our local standards are not dissimilar to national standards. We could not meet the standards by 2007 without virtually moving every wall in the home."

However, the residents bringing the action against the home believe the council has misconstrued the new requirements that will be imposed by the Care Standards Act and that closure would be a breach of their right to private and family life.

They also argue that it would be in breach of a promise in the home's brochure of "a home for as long as we are able to meet your needs and as long as you want to be with us".

The judicial review is now expected to be heard in late September or early October.

Elsewhere in the country, eight residents of the Granby Way home in Plymouth are still awaiting the outcome of their judicial review hearing against Plymouth Council's decision to close their home. High Court judge Mr Justice Scott Baker reserved judgement on the case after the three-day hearing in July, warning that "it might be some time".

In a separate case in June, 89-year-old Flossie Hands applied for a judicial review against Birmingham Council's decision to transfer Florence Hammond House to the private sector.

Hands' application failed due to insufficient proof that privatisation would necessarily lead to closure (News, page 4, 28 June).

However, Mr Justice Harrison went on to suggest that once a contract had been drawn up between the council and a private company there could be grounds for the case returning to the High Court if the agreement would result in closure.