Syrian refugee family left homeless after London council refuses them emergency accommodation following eviction

Exclusive: Muhamed and Rouzeh Shouesh, who fled to UK from Syria with their two children in 2012, told by authorities they are 'resilient' enough to deal with homelessness after being evicted

Rouzeh and Muhamed Shouesh, who fled to the UK from Syria with their two teenage children in 2012, are currently having to borrow money to stay in a hotel after Enfield Council said they were “resilient” enough to deal with being homeless (Muhamed Shouesh)

A Syrian refugee family has been left homeless after they were refused emergency accommodation following their eviction from a rented property in London.

Muhamed and Rouzeh Shouesh, who fled to the UK from Syria with their two teenage children in 2012, are currently having to borrow money to stay in a hotel after Enfield Council said they were “resilient” enough to deal with being homeless.

Ms Shouesh, 53, a trained solicitor, said the family was in a high state of stress after finding themselves with no home. Her children, now 19 and 21, are both studying at universities in London but living at home, while she and her husband, an engineer, are trying to find work as well as dealing with ill health.

The family was informed last year that they would be evicted from their rented home in Edmonton after the landlord decided to stop letting the property. They tried to find an alternative but have been routinely turned away by landlords and letting agencies because they receive state benefits.

When the bailiff instructed the family to leave the property last week (19 March), they approached the local authority with their possessions and reported that they were homeless.

They remained outside the council offices from 10am until the end of the day, but were turned away on the grounds that they didn’t qualify as having “priority need” for housing. The council said it was "under no duty" to provide them with accommodation.

A letter from Enfield Council stated that it was “not satisfied” that the family would suffer harm that makes a “noticeable difference to their ability to manage and cope with being homeless when compared to an ordinary person”.

It continued: “Looking at all the facts I believe you and your husband are resilient enough to manage a reasonable level of functionality and I am not satisfied that your ability to manage being homeless, even if that homelessness were to result in you having to sleep rough occasionally or in the longer term, would deteriorate to a level where the harm you are likely to experience would be outside the range of vulnerability that an ordinary person would experience if they were to be in the same situation as you.”

The family, who lived in the city of Qamishli in the north of Syria before fleeing the country, is now staying in a hotel in Muswell Hill, where they are being charged half of the full price because the manager sympathised with them. But they cannot afford to stay there for much longer.

Ms Souesh, who suffers from high blood pressure and Type 2 diabetes, told The Independent: “The UK Government is good, they have helped us. But now we are refugees and have to stay on the streets. This would not happen in Syria, I don’t understand how it can happen in London.

“We are very stressed and worried about our family in Syria. My mum and dad both have cancer. And we are now homeless. We are without a house.

“All of this together puts us in a very bad situation. We are already stressed about the war, we have bad health, we are refugees.”

Enfield Council said the family had failed to provide evidence suggesting they have a priority need for housing under the Housing Act 1996, and that it would be “unlawful and unfair” to move them to house them when other families have “proved greater need”.

Michael McGowan, a local charity worker who has been supporting the family, said he had approached the council when the family was first issued the eviction notice and was told they would be housed if they were left homeless.

He continued: “But when it came to it they were told ‘you are not priority need, you can go and sleep on the streets’.

“This family has done the right thing since they’ve been here. The parents have got national insurance numbers and are trying to find work. They’ve done all they can to assist their children in getting to university.

“I feel ashamed and appalled as a British person that we can say this to people who are refugees.”

An Enfield Council spokesperson said: “We will reassess this case if the family provide additional information. However, while we sympathise with the family’s situation, with the information they have provided we have assessed that they do not have a priority need for housing under the Housing Act 1996.

"It would be unlawful and unfair to move them to the top of the housing waiting list, when other families have proved greater need.”

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said they did not comment on individual cases.