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
“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
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
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.