Written by Ömür Arslan, attorney at Arslan Advocaten specialising in social security law. Registered in the specialisation register of the Netherlands Bar for tenancy law and social security law.
Nederlands: Lees dit artikel in het Nederlands: Medische urgentie voor een woning afgewezen: bezwaar en bewijs
Türkçe: Bu makaleyi Türkçe okuyun: Tıbbi gerekçeyle konut aciliyeti reddedildi: itiraz ve kanıt
Has your application for medical housing urgency been rejected? Check which local conditions were applied and request the medical advice and the application file. An illness or disability does not automatically give you a right to priority. What often matters is why your current home is medically unsuitable, why other solutions are not enough and why moving is necessary. You can usually lodge an objection against an administrative decision within six weeks.
A rejection can be hard to take when climbing stairs, sleeping or living independently is already difficult. Even so, an effective response requires more than explaining once again that you have health problems. You need to show where the assessment of your housing problem falls short.
This article deals with medical urgency for social housing. The rules differ by municipality and region. The examples from the Rotterdam region illustrate how such a scheme can work; they are not national conditions that apply everywhere.
What is medical housing urgency?
An urgency declaration can give you priority when looking for suitable social housing. It is no guarantee that a home will become available immediately. The declaration may specify a particular search area, type of home, time limit and obligations.
Medical urgency concerns the connection between your health and your housing situation. It is therefore not only about the severity of a condition, but also about why your current home is unsuitable as a result and why moving can solve the problem.
For urgency, the Dutch central government (Rijksoverheid) refers to the municipal housing rules. So start with the scheme that applies to your application and the municipality that decides on it.
Which body rejected your application?
An application may be handled by a housing association or another implementing organisation, while the decision-making power lies with a municipality. Check on whose behalf the decision was taken. This partly determines where you must lodge your objection.
Moreover, an assessment given over the phone or a negative result from an online urgency test is not always a formal decision. If necessary, ask how you can have an application assessed and receive a written decision. Keep the information you receive in the process.
If you are dealing with a landlord’s own priority scheme, the route may differ from an administrative objection. Therefore use the notice of legal remedies in the decision and, if anything is unclear, have the legal nature of the decision checked.
Why a medical diagnosis is not enough
A diagnosis describes a health problem. For housing urgency, it must also become clear what does not work in the home. Think of essential rooms that cannot be reached, stairs you cannot manage or a specific housing circumstance that is demonstrably linked to serious symptoms.
Describe activities and limitations in concrete terms. How often do you have to use stairs, can you go outside independently and what happens when you try? Also state whether the situation is temporary or is expected to continue.
A general letter from your practitioner may therefore need to be supplemented. The relevant question is often not only how ill you are, but why your current home in particular causes a medical problem and which features a suitable home must have.
The ground for rejection determines your approach
Read which reason the body considers decisive. Perhaps the medical necessity is not accepted, information is missing, or it is argued that the home can be adapted. General conditions regarding income, registration, region or your own ability to find a solution may also play a role.
Your objection must address every ground on which the rejection rests. If the application was rejected on two independent grounds, it may not help to challenge only the medical advice. So make a list of the reasons given and the related facts.
For each ground, note what you believe is incorrect and which evidence supports that. This shows whether additional medical examination is needed, or rather information about the available housing, your registration or an adaptation that was examined earlier.
An example of local rules: the Rotterdam region
SUWR, the organisation that handles housing urgency applications in the Rotterdam region, deals with urgency for several municipalities in that region. For the category of serious and chronic medical problems, the organisation describes physical or psychological problems that mean someone can no longer continue to live in their current home and the home cannot be suitably adapted. See SUWR on medical urgency.
In addition, general conditions and possible grounds for refusal apply. SUWR mentions, among other things, registration, income, your own options and prior solutions. How exactly these apply must be checked against the applicable bylaw and your situation. See SUWR’s conditions.
If you live in another region, do not copy these conditions into your application. Ask which housing bylaw and policy rules apply there. Even within a region, it matters on behalf of which municipality the decision was taken and which version applies to your application.
Requesting and checking the medical advice
A rejection may be based on advice from an independent doctor. Request the advice and check which question was asked, what information was available and how the conclusion was reasoned. Reading only the final sentence often gives too little insight.
Check whether relevant limitations were taken into account. For example, does the advice only state that you can walk short distances, while the housing problem actually concerns repeatedly climbing stairs? Then it is important whether the advice sufficiently assesses the actual physical demands of the home.
Also check whether the information is up to date. An old letter may still be useful, but not if the situation has demonstrably changed and that change was not taken into account. When providing new information, state clearly since when the described limitation has existed.
What information should you ask your practitioner for?
Ask for factual information that is relevant to the dispute. Think of the diagnosis, limitations, progression, treatment and expected duration. Explain which everyday activities in the home cause problems, so that the information can address them.
A practitioner does not have to take over the legal decision on urgency. A request simply to state that you must be given another home therefore does not always produce the most useful document. An accurate description of the medical facts can add more.
Do not automatically share your entire file. Discuss which information is needed and through which channel it can be sent to the medical adviser. This keeps the information focused on the question that has to be assessed.
Psychological symptoms and the housing situation
Psychological problems can also be relevant to a medical urgency ground, depending on the local scheme. The supporting evidence requires the same careful link between symptoms, home and the necessary solution.
Describe which features of the current situation cause or worsen the problems and why moving to a suitable home is expected to help. Where possible, have a practitioner provide factual information about that connection. A general wish to make a fresh start somewhere else is not always sufficient.
Also distinguish between a housing problem, a safety problem and a need for treatment or support. Sometimes several bodies must be involved at the same time. An urgency application is then one part of the support required, not a substitute for all other help.
Home adaptation under the Wmo as an alternative
The body may argue that your home can be adapted. Ask which adaptation is specifically meant, whether it is technically feasible and whether it sufficiently resolves your limitations. A general reference to the Wmo (Social Support Act) does not always answer these questions.
If a Wmo assessment has already taken place, enclose the relevant report or decision. A rejection of an adaptation can be important, but does not automatically prove that you meet all the urgency conditions. Each scheme has its own assessment.
If you are referred from the urgency desk to the Wmo and back again, record these referrals. Ask both bodies for clarity about the concrete solution. This makes it clearer where practical help is lacking and which decision may need to be challenged.
Finding another home yourself: what is reasonably possible?
Many schemes look at your own ability to solve the housing problem. Your search history may therefore be relevant. Keep your responses to listings, rejections and information about suitable available housing.
Describe why certain homes are not a realistic alternative. This may relate to necessary accessibility, the rent or other conditions. Avoid merely saying that nothing is available; show what that conclusion is based on.
At the same time, a preference for a specific neighbourhood does not automatically mean that the urgency should be limited to that neighbourhood. Medical necessity, necessary care and personal housing wishes must be carefully distinguished. Support a location-specific need with concrete information.
Personal responsibility and earlier choices
A rejection may also be based on the way in which the housing problem arose. The body may, for example, argue that you let a solution slip or caused a foreseeable problem. What this means depends on the local rules and circumstances.
Respond to that reasoning with facts. What information did you have at the time, which alternatives were available and why did you make a particular choice? A decision made under acute pressure may need to be assessed differently from a free preference, but that requires supporting evidence.
Do not conceal a home you previously turned down or a tenancy that was ended. Explain the context and enclose the relevant correspondence. A complete account makes a careful assessment more feasible than a file in which important facts only come to light later.
Children, informal care and the whole household
A housing problem can affect several family members. Describe who belongs to the household and which person has the medical limitation. Make clear which features of a home are necessary for the household as a whole.
In some schemes, informal care (mantelzorg) can be a separate urgency ground. It is therefore wise to check whether the application is being assessed under the correct category. The need to live closer to family is not automatically the same as meeting an informal care ground.
Record concrete care arrangements: what help is given, how often and why distance is a substantial problem. Use the criteria of the applicable scheme as your starting point and make the facts match them.
Relying on exceptional circumstances
Some schemes contain a hardship clause or another way of deviating from the rules in exceptional circumstances. Ask whether such a provision applies and which standard goes with it. The existence of an exception does not mean that every difficult situation falls within it.
Describe what makes your situation exceptional compared with the cases the ordinary rules are intended for. Explain the consequences of a rejection and substantiate why a standard alternative does not work. Repeating the original application without additional arguments is often insufficient.
Also have it assessed whether all circumstances were considered together. Sometimes the problem consists of several limitations that seem less serious on their own, but together create an untenable housing situation. The supporting evidence must make that connection visible.
Objecting within the right time limit and to the right body
For an administrative decision, an objection period of six weeks usually applies. Follow the instructions in your rejection. SUWR also refers to the details in the decision for the objection route; see objecting to a rejected urgency application.
State which decision you are challenging and ask to inspect the file. Do not wait until all medical documents have come in if that would cause the time limit to expire. You can lodge your objection in time and ask, with reasons, for the opportunity to supplement your grounds.
State the outcome you want and address each ground for rejection. For example, request additional medical examination if the existing advice does not assess the strain of climbing stairs, and also explain why a proposed home adaptation is not a solution.
Evidence checklist for medical housing urgency
| Question in the file | Useful supporting evidence |
|---|---|
| What does not work in the home? | A concrete description of rooms, stairs, access and daily activities. |
| Which limitation causes this? | Targeted medical information about functioning and expected duration. |
| Why would moving help? | An explanation of which features of another home would reduce or solve the problem. |
| Why is adaptation insufficient? | A technical survey, Wmo report or a reasoned assessment of alternatives. |
| Can you find suitable housing yourself? | Search history, responses, rejections and relevant available housing. |
| Which exceptional circumstances apply? | Verifiable information about combined problems, care and the concrete consequences of a rejection. |
Organise the enclosures clearly and refer to them in the relevant argument. An objection with a great deal of medical information but no explanation about the home may miss the very core of the urgency question.
Urgent proceedings and temporary solutions
An objection to a rejection does not immediately result in an urgency declaration or a home. So also discuss temporary support if the current situation cannot wait. Which options exist depends on the specific problem and the local services.
While an objection or appeal is pending, a provisional measure from the administrative court can be explored. The urgency must be substantiated and the court must be able to assess why a temporary decision is needed.
An application to the court does not create an available home. So formulate carefully which temporary measure you are requesting and what it can mean in practice. Link the legal procedure to the practical options for housing and support.
Fictional example: climbing stairs and a missing alternative
A woman with a long-term mobility impairment lives on an upper floor without a lift. Her urgency application is rejected because adapting the home would supposedly be possible. However, the file does not yet contain any assessment of whether the stairwell is suitable for the intended facility.
A targeted objection asks what the assumed alternative is based on. In addition, it describes the medical limitation, the daily use of the stairs and the required features of a home. A technical or Wmo assessment can clarify whether an adaptation is feasible.
This fictional example does not guarantee urgency. It shows how an objection can have a concrete assumption in the decision reviewed, instead of merely stressing once again that moving is desirable.
Describing the home you need in concrete terms
Describe which features are medically necessary: for example, access without stairs or enough space for a necessary mobility aid. Keep these requirements separate from preferences regarding the view, neighbourhood or finish.
A concrete profile helps to assess whether moving can solve the problem and whether a proposed alternative is genuinely suitable. Where necessary, have an expert explain why a particular feature is necessary.
Do not make the profile narrower than your limitations justify. An unnecessarily restricted search can reduce the available solutions. At the same time, a home that leaves a substantial medical problem in place need not be regarded as suitable without explanation.
Use the same functional profile in your application, your objection and your discussions with the Wmo. This prevents different bodies from continuing to refer you back and forth on the basis of differing descriptions.
Frequently asked questions about rejected medical urgency
Does a chronic illness automatically entitle you to urgency?
No. The local conditions and the connection with your home are decisive. You usually have to substantiate why your current housing situation is medically unsuitable and why suitable alternatives are not sufficient.
Can my GP grant urgency?
A GP does not decide on the urgency declaration. Medical information can support the application, but the competent body assesses the conditions. Ask for relevant factual information rather than just a legal conclusion.
Is medical urgency the same everywhere?
No. Municipalities and regions apply their own housing rules and procedures. Check which scheme applies to your application. An example from Rotterdam is no proof that the same conditions apply in another municipality.
Do I have to apply again if my health deteriorates?
A substantial change may be a reason for a new assessment. Have it checked whether you can submit new information in a pending objection or whether you also need to make a new application. State clearly since when the change has existed.
May I stop responding to listings during the objection?
Continue to comply with the obligations and instructions that apply to your registration or any declaration. Your search efforts may also be relevant evidence. If in doubt, ask which responses are expected and which homes are suitable according to the search profile.
What can Arslan Advocaten do for my objection?
You can have the rejection, the medical advice and your housing details assessed. This can include looking at which conditions were applied and what additional supporting evidence is needed. Contact Arslan Advocaten and state the date on which you received the decision. Also read about administrative law.
Read also
Wmo support refused or reduced: objecting to the municipality
Social assistance benefit reclaimed because of alleged cohabitation: objecting to the municipality
Engaging a medical expert in a UWV case: when does an expert report help?
