Agenda item

The Director of Housing submits a report which seeks feedback from the Housing Scrutiny Commission on the proposals and operational changes outlined in the report.

The Director of Housing submitted a report and presentation which sought feedback from the Commission on the proposals and operational changes outlined in the report.

Caroline Carpendale, Head of Service, delivered the presentation included in the report, and highlighted the following points:

·         The Housing Allocations Policy framed the priorities around local need and was regularly reviewed to ensure it remained fit for purpose around those in housing need across the city.

·         There were 6,178 households on the Register. Overcrowding was the main reason households joined the register.

·         The last major review of the Housing Allocations Policy was undertaken in June 2016.

The proposed review and summary of proposals highlighted in the report were:

·         Giving increased priority to people who were owed a homeless duty (including those at risk of losing their home in the near future, and those already homeless).

·         Giving increased priority to those affected by the most severe levels of overcrowding.

·         A review of households needing wheelchair accessible accommodation and initiatives to assist them to resolve their needs.

·         A review of all applications with Band 1 priorities.

·         A change to the Access, Health, Care & Support criteria to specifically include ill mental health as a result of service in the Armed Forces, and a relaxation of the local connection criteria for divorced or separated spouses or civil partners of Service personnel.

·         Changing local connection rules to exempt people who were victims of domestic abuse, fleering from another local authority area.

The Chair welcomed the report and acknowledged the need to build more social housing. He also welcomed the review on overcrowding.

In response to Commission Members’ questions, the following information was given and noted:

·         Members queried the need to move those overcrowded from Band 2 to Band 1, as the same number of people would be chasing housing. It was answered that the policy reflected those in the greatest housing need, for example, those families living in flats, and would reduce the average length of time that those in overcrowded accommodation would have to wait.

·         Priority for veterans was placed in Band 2, but for those with medical need would be placed in Band 1 – there would be additional criteria for veterans. It was acknowledged that it could take 10-15 years for PTSD to manifest, and that veterans would be assessed for an award in Band 1 irrespective of time.

·         It was noted that Housing Associations were registered providers who have nomination agreements with the Council through which they offered a percentage of vacant stock to let through Leicester Home Choice. Typically this was 50% to 75% of their vacant stock as Housing Associations also had direct waiting lists. The agreements were regularly reviewed. Housing Associations could request a reduction in their nomination requirements but the Council could challenge the request. Officers endeavoured to meet with registered providers on a regular basis. The Chair requested a future paper on housing associations and their impact on tenants in the city be brought to a future meeting of the Commission.

·         Band 1 has many different categories and the Homeless category will be time limited. Band 3 had the lowest need, and the offers achieved in Band 3 are low and need to be managed in terms of customer expectations, for example, those on Band 3 would be provided with information on the length of waiting times. Demand outstripped supply and those in band 3 did have a housing need but at a lower level.

·         In the report the Equalities Manager had given a recommendation that an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) be undertaken and used to inform a decision on adopting proposals. The assessment would be available once consultation had been undertaken with registered suppliers over a four-week period, following which the report would be updated and a full EIA completed at that time.

·         For people requiring 4-5 bedrooms it was acknowledged there was limited availability. The Housing Register was for those who had applied to move and could be complex. The number of bedrooms in the house and numbers in the household, age of people / numbers and age of children would be amongst other considerations taken into account. The tenant could also be asked to consider four-bedroom accommodation even if they wanted five bedrooms due to the limited availability.

·         With regards to four or five-bedroom houses where there was a specific need two houses had been converted into one in the past, but this was not done as a matter of course.

·         Officers tried very hard not to have families in bed and breakfast accommodation for any length of time – legislation stated for no more than six weeks. The cost of those placed in temporary accommodation would be circulated to Members.

Members stated that a version of the Banding Table would be useful for councillors to explain to residents. Officers would include a version on the six-month report ‘Who Gets Social Housing’.

The Assistant Mayor for Housing stated there was a need to review the Housing Register. He said that the 1% rent reduction would cease in 2020 and the council would be in a better position to address the issue of the loss of housing stock, but it would always remain an issue that as quickly as houses were built, the tenant would have the right-to-buy after five years. He continued that council housing would only become available to those most in need, and it was a requirement for any society to provide housing for their citizens, for their health, and to prevent a detrimental effect to their children. The Assistant Mayor stated that Right to Buy should cease to allow councils to invest in their housing stock.

The Chair asked Members to approve a resolution that a letter from the Housing Scrutiny Commission be sent to the Assistant Mayor of Housing, summarising the Commission’s observations and recommendations, to be fed into the review process. The letter would be circulated to all Members of the Commission for approval.

It was AGREED that:

1.    The report and presentation be noted.

2.    A paper on housing associations and their impact on tenants in the city be brought to a future meeting of the Commission.

3.    A version of the Banding Table would be included in the six-month report ‘Who Gets Social Housing’.

4.    A letter from the Housing Scrutiny Commission be sent to the Assistant Mayor of Housing, summarising the Commission’s observations and recommendations, to be fed into the review process.