Dublin City Council


CITY COUNCIL NOVEMBER 2009

Question to City Manager City Council Meeting 02/11/2009


Q102. COUNCILLOR CIERAN PERRY

Hsg. To ask the City Manager to detail the DCC response to the decisions of the High Court which have found that the Council breached fair procedures and a tenant’s right to housing by seeking the eviction of anti social tenants under section 62 of the Housing Act, 1966. I am aware that these decisions have been appealed to the Supreme Court. Have DCC any plans to counter these decisions by referring further evictions to an Independent tribunal?

CITY MANAGER’S REPLY:

Dublin City Council is appealing the recent “Pullen v DCC” decision to the Supreme Court. There are three (3) cases now awaiting the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionally/compatibility of section 62 of the Housing Act 1966.

The current legal advice from Senior Council is for Dublin City Council to continue to apply The Housing Acts up to and until the outcome of the Supreme Court as the relevant legislation remains lawful and valid.

 

Question to City Manager City Council Meeting 02/11/2009

Q103. COUNCILLOR CIERAN PERRY
Hsg. To ask the City Manager to detail the number of evictions carried out by DCC over the last five years by area and reason (anti social, rent arrears etc...).

CITY MANAGER’S REPLY:

I set out hereunder the number of evictions carried out by DCC in the last 5 years:

 

2005
Type of Cases
Total Warrants
Evicted
Settled
Arrears
54
10
44
Illegal Occupiers/squatters
1
1
0
Technical
3
3
0
Est. Management
6
6
0
Transfers
0
0
0
Tenant Purchase Arrears
1
0
1
Others, i.e. Loans & Grants and Dangerous Buildings
3
2
1
 
68
22
46

 

2006
Type of Cases
Total Warrants
Evicted
Settled
Arrears
59
6
53
Illegal Occupiers/squatters
1
1
0
Technical
1
1
0
Est. Management
4
4
0
Transfers
0
0
0
Tenant Purchase Arrears
1
0
1
Others, i.e. Loans & Grants and Dangerous Buildings
1
1
0
 
67
13
54

 

2007
Type of Cases
Total Warrants
Evicted
Settled
Arrears
89
13
76
Illegal Occupiers/squatters
2
2
0**
Technical
1
1
0
Est. Management
10
10
0
Transfers
0
0
0
Tenant Purchase Arrears
1
0
1
Others, i.e. Loans & Grants and Dangerous Buildings
1
1
0
 
104
27
77
** 1 Other Surrendered Pre-Eviction so not counted as an eviction

 

2008
Type of Cases
Total Warrants
Evicted
Settled
Arrears
80
12
68
Illegal Occupiers/squatters
0
0
0
Technical
0
0
0
Est. Management
15
15
0
Transfers
1
1
0
Tenant Purchase Arrears
0
0
0
Others, i.e. Loans & Grants and Dangerous Buildings
2
2
0
 
98
30
68

 

2009 (01/1/09 – 31/10/09)
Type of Cases
Total Warrants
Evicted
Settled
Arrears
65
8
57
Illegal Occupiers/squatters
2
1
1
Technical
0
0
0
Est. Management
10
10
0
Transfers
1
1
0
Tenant Purchase Arrears
0
0
0
Breach of Tenancy*
2
2
0
Others, i.e. Loans & Grants and Dangerous Buildings
0
0
0
 
80
22
58
* Breach of Tenancy – rubbish in the garden/not residing as per tenancy agreement

 

Question to City Manager City Council Meeting 02/11/2009

Q104. COUNCILLOR CIERAN PERRY
Tfc. Following the publication by the RPA of the additional information as requested by An Bord Pleanála in relation to the Metro North project could the City Manager tell this Council:
(1) What is the estimated cost of the Utility diversion works?
(2) Is DCC paying for these works?
(3) Has a study been carried out to assess the economic impact of the Utility diversion on the City Centre businesses?


CITY MANAGER’S REPLY:

(1) No estimate of costs has been included in the Additional Information submitted to An Bord Pleanála by the RPA.
(2) The RPA will be solely responsible for any associated costs with Utility Diversion Works required for the Metro North scheme.
(3) We are not aware of whether or not such a study has been conducted by the RPA. If it has it has not been made available to Dublin City Council nor placed in the public domain to date.