Join our mailing list
Get exclusive deals and learn about new products!
Reliable shipping
Flexible returns
Why do most welfare applicants fail to challenge adverse decisions despite a continuing sense of need?
The book addresses this severely under-researched and under-theorised question. Using English homelessness law as their case study,the authors explore why homeless applicants did -- but more often did not -- challenge adverse decisions by seeking internal administrative review. They draw out from their data a list of the barriers to the take up of grievance rights. Further, by combining extensive interview data from aggrieved homeless applicants with ethnographic data about bureaucratic decision-making, they are able to situate these barriers within the dynamics of the citizen-bureaucracy relationship. Additionally, they point to other contexts which inform applicants' decisions about whether to request an internal review. Drawing on a diverse literature -- risk, trust, audit, legal consciousness, and complaints -- the authors lay the foundations for our understanding of the (non-)emergence of administrative disputes.
Dave Cowan is Professor of Law and Policy in the School of Law, Bristol University.
Simon Halliday is the Nicholas de B Katzenbach Research Fellow at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, Oxford University.
Caroline Hunter is a Senior Lecturer in Housing Law at the School of Environment and Development, Sheffield Hallam University.
Paul Maginn is a Post-doctoral Research Fellow, Centre for Social Research, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia.
Lisa Naylor was formerly a Research Assistant at the Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research at Sheffield Hallam University.
| Publication Date: | 01 August 2003 |
| Publisher: | Bloomsbury Academic |
| Imprint: | Hart Publishing |
| ISBN-13: | 9781841133836 |
| Format: | Hardback |
| Page Count: | 232 |
| Weight (oz): | 17.92 |