Brent holds no information on tree losses and plantings in its parks

Trees on BHP's Kings Drive Estate, Wembley

As the importance of trees for cleansing the air attracts attention following recent  'Red Alert' air pollution days in Brent and the rest of London, it is surprising to find that Brent does not keep a record of tree losses and replanting in its parks, and that Brent Housing Partnership has not replaced trees lost on its estates.

Maintenance of parks and BHP Estates is out-sourced by the Council to Veolia. The lack of information on parks may need further investigation to ensure that there is not a net loss of trees. The Council will soon take over BHP and I hope they will adopt a ;olicy of tree replacement.

I deliberately excluded Fryent Country Park and the Welsh Harp Open Space from the request as they are natural rather than formal open spaces.

This is the Council's reponse to my FoI request:
 

1. The number of a) street, b) BHP & other social housing estates and C) park trees (excluding Fryent Country Park and Welsh Harp Open Space) removed by the council and its contractors from January 1st 2016-December 31st 2016. 

a) (Street) - 220 (approx)
b) (BHP) - 62
c) (Parks) - The Council does not hold this information 

2. The overall pattern of reasons for removal (eg safety, redevelopment, disease) expressed as an approximate percentage. 

a) (Street) -
End of life (dead/decayed/diseased) - 60% Damage to pavements, walls etc. - 30%
Other (insurance claims, vandalism etc.) - 10%
b) (BHP) -
Unsafe 12 trees 19%

Rot/decay 22 trees 35%

Dead 28 trees 45%

c) (Parks) - The Council does not hold this information 

3. Of those trees the numbers where stumps were left.
a) (Street) - Almost all but no precise figures available. b) (BHP) - 62 (all)
c) (Parks) - The Council does not hold this information 

4. Of those trees the numbers where they were replaced by a) semi mature trees b)saplings
a) (Street) - All replaced by saplings, 155 in the last season but this runs from September and is not recorded by calendar year
b) (BHP) - None
c) (Parks) - The Council does not hold this information 

5. The number of new trees planted: a) street trees b) social housing estates c)parks and d) new developments/regeneration (eg Wembley Park, Alperton, South Kilburn) in the stated period. 

a) (Street) - 155 in last season
b) (BHP) - None
c) (Parks) - The Council does not hold this information
d) (Regeneration) - 240 (mostly funded by S106 money)

I think 5a is probably a mistake as 155 is the same number as street replacement trees. I wanted the figures for new planting in addition to replacement.

Register today for Thursday's International Day of People with Disabilities event at Brent Civic Centre

From Brent Housing Partnership and Brent Council

1st December 2016, 10am to 3pm, Grand Hall, Brent Civic Centre

Brent Council and Brent Housing Partnership will host a free event to celebrate International Day for Disabled People on Thursday 1 December from 10am to 3pm at Brent Civic Centre.

The theme for the event is "”Achieving Goals for the Future We Want” . This year’s event will incorporate a job fair and a health and wellbeing zone. Brent residents who are disabled and their carers often face physical, social, economic and attitudinal barriers that exclude them from participating fully and effectively as equal members of society. Residents attending this event will find out what support is available locally for disabled people from public, private and community and voluntary organisations.

Places are limited so please confirm your attendance by no later than Monday 28 November.
You can register by sending an email to equailty@brent.gov.uk or by contacting Jenny Duncan from the Equality Team on 020 8937 3164.

When registering, please also let us know if you have any special requirements. Light refreshments will be provid

Brent Council recommended to bring housing management in-house

BHP's King's Drive Estate, Wembley

Brent Council is set to bring its housing management back in house if a recommendation going before Cabinet is approved. The issue brought tenants and leaseholders out in force at a recent Scrutiny Committee LINK.

They were determined to make the case for tenant involvement in any new arrangement and that any in-house arrangement be superior to that which existed before housing management was allocated to Brent Housing Partnership (BHP), an arms-length organisation.

Three options were considered - an enhanced BHP, in-house and a partnership arrangement. 

The report states:

In light of the evaluation it is concluded that the In-house option offers the best prospect of achieving the service transformation to deliver high-quality services at significantly reduced costs, benefitting from the Council’s wider experience in doing so in recent years. Accordingly, this report recommends to Cabinet that the In-house option be the preferred option. If agreed consultation will then be undertaken with all tenants and leaseholders and the results of this will be reported to Cabinet for a final decision.

2. Recommendations

That Cabinet:

 2.1  Agree that the preferred option for future housing management service provision to the Council’s tenants and leaseholders is Option 2, an In-house service, subject to consultation; 


2.2  Authorise officers to undertake consultation with Council tenants and leaseholders on the preferred option as set out in paragraph 2.1 and to then provide a further report to Cabinet on the responses to that consultation to inform a final decision on future housing management service arrangements.


 2.3  Instructs officers to report further on appropriate arrangements to provide for effective oversight and scrutiny by members and residents of the housing management service should the final decision be that the service be provided in-house. 


 

Tenants demand 'If BHP goes its replacement must be better and include tenants representation'

Brent Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee met last night to discuss options for a new housing management system system in the borough which will go to Cabinet on Monday. LINK

The meeting was extremely well attended by Brent Housing Partnership tenants and lease holders. At least two of the options would mean the end of BHP which is an ALMO (arms length management organisation) and semi-independent from Brent Council.

Tenants were forthright in stating that any return to an in-house housing management service would have to be much better than that which existed in Brent before BHP was formed.

Strong contributions to the discussion were made by Cllrs Conneely and Nerva but there may have been others as I arrived late from the Planning Committee which met at the same time.

In the current Brent Cabinet structure an in-house service would be monitored and overseen by an operational director and the lead member for housing.

This was felt to be be unsatisfactory given that lack of accountabulity and monitoring  contributed to BHP's current difficulties.

The first strong recommendation  from Scrutiny therefore was that if housing management is brought in-house there has to be a formalised, housing specific, oversight/scrutiny/sub-committee made up of councillots and residents represenattives of all types of tenure (eg tenants, leaseholders) preferably elected and with clear links with other levels of residents association.

A further recommendation was that if the in-house option was chosen that there should be complete transparency regarding the HRA (Housing Revenue Account) and it should be ring-fenced. 

Thirdly a much better and effective communications strategy needs to be put in place.

Lastly. if Cabinet opts for a joint venture any contract must come back to Scrutiny before being agreed.
 

Community Day - Kings Drive - Saturday

Is this the end of Brent Housing Partnership?

There was a bit of a jamboree at Brent Civic Centre as Brent Housing Partnership showed their film Stories of Brent LINK but beneath the public relations glow things are not well with BHP, Brent Council's arms length management organisation (ALMO) for housing.

BHP was put under 'special measures' in March due to under-performance. LINK

Now the Brent Cabinet is to consider the future of the organisation LINK in the additional context of the government's housing reforms  which include high value council housing disposal,where the council is forced to sell high value stock;  'pay to stay' in which council tenants with an income of more than £40,000 income will have to pay higher rents from April 2017 - moving towards market rents, 'right to buy' and a 1% reduction in social rents.

In addition the volume of housing stock has been reduced by the South Kilburn regeneration and redevelopment and existing right to buy.

A further pressure, the potential cost of which is not revealed, is a claim for 'significant additional costs' from Wates, the BHP's asset management service which has been carrying out extensive refurbishment on the BHP's estates. 

The question arises as to whether the BHP is fit for purpose in this new situation. Officers recoemmend that the period for BHP's Recovery Plan be extended until September 30th 2016 while a review of options takes places.

These are the options:

-->

Continuation with BHP .  

   
3.29 Formally this is the most straightforward option but practically will require further and significant reform to assure continued progress, to generate significant cost reductions and to achieve wider outcomes. New operating arrangements and service structures will be needed to achieve this. Preliminary examination of a new Target Operating Model has recently been completed that may provide an initial basis for the development of these. In addition a reformed council client-side function will be required to provide strategic direction and greater assurance, and opportunities to generate additional efficiencies and savings through improved integration between the council and BHP will also be needed. The scope of services to be provided will also need to be considered including what contribution BHP could, in time, make in other areas to the council’s objectives.

 
Bringing the Service Back In-house

 
3.30 The majority of stock-holding councils provide housing management services directly. Simply bringing the service into the council will not in itself assure improved performance and while there may be some direct savings the challenge to generate significant further savings and service could be more fully integrated across a range of council services and functions and this could also support the achievement of wider outcomes but specific expertise and coherence in the service would need to be maintained

3.31 A number of councils with ALMOs have in recent years brought the service in- house. This would require termination of the existing Management Agreement. From the experience of other authorities a minimum period of 6 months would be needed and in a number of cases the process has taken a year. Consultation with tenants and leaseholders would be required in advance.

Service Provision through a Partnership

3.32 A housing management partnership would be formed with another housing management provider with an existing high-quality housing management service in order to raise performance and generate significant economies and efficiencies. This could be a significant local housing association provider. The scope of the partnerships activities (e.g. whether it included affordable housing development) may also be a significant consideration in choosing a suitable partner and in the extent of interest from prospective partners.

3.33 There are two main routes by which this partnership could be established. The council could directly select a suitable partner in place of BHP and enter into the necessary legal arrangements with them to establish a jointly owned housing management company. Alternatively BHP could itself be converted into a partnership housing management organisation, jointly owned and governed by the council and the selected partner. Again consultation with tenants and leaseholders would be required in advance.

4.0 Financial Implications

4.1 The HRA expenditure Budget is £56.9m. This budget is used for the management and maintenance of the HRA stock and for the repayment of the HRA debt. BHP Management Fee for the current year is £7.5m. This fee is for managing and maintaining the HRA properties on behalf of the Council.

4.2 The Housing and Planning Act will have a significant impact on Brent’s council housing and its financial position in coming years. The implications for which are currently being scoped with more comprehensive analysis to follow once the details are published.

4.3 The three options outlined in this report for the management of the council’s stock will each have differing implications in terms of the impact on the HRA and will need to be developed through the formal review process. However, it should be noted that all of the options will result in an initial cost of change, which will need to be factored into the each appraisals.

Brent Housing Partnership scorched at Scrutiny

Current works on BHP properties on Pilgrims Way Estate. Wembley (roof, windows, boiler) this morning

Things did not bode well at first last night when the public found that the Scrutiny Committee was not listed on the Civic Centre event screens, but eventually they found that the meeting was indeed on and a few were in the public gallery. Transparency was not improved when yet another delegation by Philip Grant was refused on officer advice. I hope to publish more on that from Philip later.

There were two main items on the agenda: a performance report from Brent Housing Properties (BHP), Brent Council's 'arms length' council housing provider, and the Committee's plans for future work.

Dan Filson opened with a couple of rebukes concerning an inadequately anonymised case study in the BHP report and bureaucratic language that seemed to ignore the actual people who were BHP tenants and leaseholders. Today the report has been removed from the Council website.

Recent government proposals formed the backdrop to many of the concerns and a stumbling block was that social housing providers had yet to receive any detail on how some of the proposals would be implemented.

The budget proposal for a 1% annual social housing rent reduction over a four year period starting in 2016 LINK was a concern because it would amount to a reduction in rent receipts of £10m by the end of the period. For comparison the BHP's repairs expenditure is about £2m per year.  it would also affect the income of housing associations ansd their ability to build new homes adding to the problems caused by the right to buy proposals.

There was a range of potential impacts from benefit changes as well as the proposal that high value properties should be sold off. Lead member for Regeneration, Cllr Margaret McLennan suggested that the latter would affect Council proposals for building larger 4-5 bedroomed houses for the borough's high number of larger families. It was unclear exactly how the high value social homes would be  identified, regionally or by borough. If the latter there were homes in particular areas of the borough that would be affected and could amount to one third of the total.

The higher rents to be imposed for tenants with a joint household income of more than £40,000 was discussed as well as the problem of the removal of benefits from young people.

The Committee were keen to assess the effectiveness of consultation and tenant involvement as well as engagement with young people. There were detailed questions on the makeup of the BHP Board and representation of tenants and leaseholders.

Dan Filson was bitingly critical of the BHP's performance in filling 'voids', getting new tenants into empty properties, remarking that in some boroughs such figures would lead to dismissals. He reminded BHP that every delay resulted in the Council paying for people in temporary bed and breakfast accommodation. The turnaround time for 'major voids' was 79.3 days against a target of 61 and for 'standard voids'  55.7 against 24.

The Committee questioned in some detail the data on complaints:

It was unfortunate that with 'job completion' the main issue there was no discussion of the performance of the BHP's contractors such as Wates for major projects and Veolia for grounds maintenance.

The BHP were given a number of requests for further information by the Committee and Dan Filson asked for a paper clearly setting out the issues for the Committee, the Council and the public.

Brent Council to lease out two floors of Civic Centre as staff numbers reduce

Tonight's Cabinet will consider a proposal to lease out the 7th and 8th floor of the Civic Centre to an unnamed commercial organisation. LINK

This follows a review of the accomodation. The proposed 'Partner Village space' has attracted no partners who could afford it and parts of the first floor are empty. 

The proposals will see increased density of workstations on floors 2-6 with the Council anticipating some staff transferring out of the Centre when Veolia takes over the Public Realm contract and Wates takes over Brent Housing Partnership maintenance. 120 extra workstations will be added to floors 2-6.

The report also anticipates further Brent Council staffing cuts as out-sourcing continues and reductions in staff are made as a result of budgetary constraints. Revenue from the lease will be used to supplement the budget.

The report notes:

The security aspects of having a third party commercial occupier will need to be carefully considered. Therefore the Council should not and will not accept any tenant unless deemed acceptable to the image of the Council and the Civic Centre; the one under current consideration is well known to the Council and is reputable with an International standing. However in regard to security issues it should be noted that the Civic Centre already has other 3rd parties using the building: Capita, Serco, Metropolitan Police, Europa, Wates Living Space and Brent Housing Partnership. 

Along with contractual conditions and appropriate management controls it is envisaged that as part of a HR refresh about working in the Civic Centre staff can be reminded again about the need to ensure a clear desk policy is operated and that confidential discussions should take place only in appropriate settings. Therefore at this stage it is suggested that the current physical security arrangements remain in place.

Confusion over Council's policy on rent rises

I live on a Brent Housing Partnership estate which has a mixture of flats, maisonettes, terraced houses and town houses. These are occupied by a mixture of 'right to buy' freehold owners (or purchasers from an original right to buy owner), leaseholders, BHP tenants, private tenants and probably some sub-lets.

Two bedroomed flats and houses are privately let for between £800 and £1,200 a month, social housing tenants pay much less.

Some of the privately owned homes have been fitted with double glazing while the BHP properties have not. Energy bills for the latter are therefore much higher.

There is considerable and much appreciated green space on the estate.

I give this as background to the Housing Assess Management Strategy Report that is going to the Brent Executive tomorrow.  The report contains a mixture of measures which involves  disposing of some properties and selling the freehold on some blocks.  It involves plans to build a small number of new units of existing estates, initially between 70 and 100, to cater for larger families and a long-term 7 year plan for 1,000 new 'affordable' homes.  Importantly there are plans for refurbishment of existing stock. Clearly new homes and refurbishment will be very welcome.

The plans will be financed by the sell-offs, some borrowing and controversially rent increases.The latter has caused concern amongst Labour Party members as well as tenants because the documents going to the Executive seem to indicate that existing tenants' rents will increase over the next 5 years to 'converge' at 80% of market rents, which by some definitions is an 'affordable rent' - a figure the Council has challenged in the past..  At the same time the new properties will be immediately let at an affordable rent with some caveats (see extract below).

The concern is that the convergence strategy will result in a likely doubling of rent for existing tenants over the next 5 years at a time when incomes are static but the cost of living is rising and benefits have been cut.

What I and others have been trying to work out from the documentation going before the Executive is whether that is what is really envisaged and hopefully, as a result of protests due to representations that will be made, it will become clearer. The figures quoted do not seem to equate to a doubling of rent.

Meanwhile here is an extract from the Appendices that readers

The extract below from the Appendices sets out the rent strategy and I leave readers to try and interpret wht it means concretely:

Rent Policy

Strategic Approach

For rents to continue to increase in line with the  rent convergence regime- a maximum annual increase in 2014 of RPI +0.5% plus £2 per week and from 2015 CPI+ 1% plus £2 per week for existing tenants - subject to any direction by Government

Following rent convergence for the annual increase  to be set at CPI+1%

For properties to be re-let at target rents

For consideration to be given annually to restraint in rent increases for 4-bedroom and larger properties in order to assure affordability under the overall benefits cap

For new-build and newly-acquired properties (except where required for decant) to be let at affordable rents in line with the thresholds set out within the Council’s Tenancy Strategy.

Context

Rents are the primary income to the HRA business plan and provide the funding to support stock investment and for new development.

In recent years the Council has increased rents in  line with the government’s rent convergence regime. The government has recently issued guidance

that rent convergence should end from 2015/16 at which point the majority of the HRA stock will not have achieved convergence. Currently the Council retains the discretion to not follow the recent guidance. Further clarification of the

position by Government is expected by early 2014 and account will need to be taken of this.

The government has also issued recent guidance that from 2015 rent increases will be linked to a different inflation index – and be based on CPI plus 1% rather than RPI plus 0.5% as previously.

Approach

In order to provide a secure basis for the funding of the Asset Management Strategy, a rent policy for the next five-year period will operate. The policy will be for rents for existing tenants to continue to rise in line with the principles of the government’s previous Rent Convergence regime unless government directs otherwise. For 4-bed and larger units rent increases may be constrained in order to assure affordability under the Overall Benefits Cap.

In order to support viability, new homes will be let at Affordable Rents. These will be limited to varying percentages of the market-rent depending on the size of the unit in order to assure affordability for those affected by the Overall Benefits Cap.

Source: http://democracy.brent.gov.uk/documents/s20059/rg-hra-app1.pdf

Brent Council to provide incentive for council tenants to downsize

With the 'Bedroom Tax' leading to protests across the country and some Labour Councils joining Brighton and Hove Green Council in announcing that they will not evict tenants in arrears solely because of the tax, Brent Council has announced that it will introduce an incentive for tenants to down-size.

So far neither they or their arm's length Brent Housing Partnership have defined what constituents an 'extra bedroom'. Some housing associations have reclassified small extra rooms as boxrooms rather than bedrooms thus avoiding tenants getting caught by the tax.

This is the  proposal to be discussed by the Executive at tonight's Brent Town Hall meeting:

"The Size Criteria, or ‘Bedroom Tax’ will be implemented for underoccupiers of social housing stock from the 1st April 2013, and tenants will receive a reduced amount of Housing Benefit to pay the rent with. Given the current demand on social housing, particularly from homeless households who will be affected by other Welfare Reform measures, transferring underoccupiers to right sized accommodation is favoured, and needs to be encouraged. The currently financial incentive offered to households to motivate the move is a flat rate of £1,000. The proposal is to increase this to £2,000 per bedroom released, per household (to a maximum amount of £6,000) to encourage underoccupiers to move to smaller homes. The cost of providing the increased incentive payments is offset against savings to both the Temporary Accommodation (TA) budget and the Housing Revenue Account (HRA)."

Brent Executive approves budget and Tokyngton Library sale

The Brent Council Executive tonight passed the 2013/14 budget, which involve cuts in services, frozen Council Tax and increased charges,  without discussion. It also approved rent increases in Brent Housing Partnership and Stonebridge properties and substantial rises in service charges. The Budget which also includes a free on Council Tax will now go before the full Council Meeting where it will rubber-stamped unless there is a (very unlikely) revolt by non-Executive Labour councillors.

A Local Welfare Assistance Scheme was approved which due to government cuts of 13% reduces the amount of emergency payments available to the vulnerable.

Labour Leader Muhammed Butt declared an interest in the sale of the former Tokynton Library to the Islamic Cultural Association (see LINK) and vacated the chair and left the room for the discussion of this item. Cllr Ruth Moher, taking the chair,  told the meeting that the sell-off did not involve councillors and had been carried out according to Council standing orders.

Brent Council Tax unchanged but rents increase in 2013-14 budget

The Budget Report going before the Brent Executive on February 11th recommends no change in the barometer Band D Council Tax and little change in the other rates.  This decision contrasts with early budget documentation that built in Council Tax rises over the next three years.  Since then Eric Pickles has declared that rises above 2% have to be approved by a local referendum and attacked Councils who were considering raising the tax to protect services. His mix of bribery and threatened opprobrium seems to have done the trick.

Brent Housing Partnership tenants will pay an average rent increase of 3.74% and there will also be rises in service charges. The table below shows that almost 4,000 households will face an increase of nearly £5 a week or £250 annually raising an additional million pounds.  Hillside Housing Trust (Stonebridge) rents will rise by 3.1% on average.

The new approach to social housing is explicit in the report's comment from the Brent Housing Partnership:

BHP agrees with the recommendation to increase rents on average by 3.74%. We recognise that this will place an additional financial burden on the 32% of Brent Council tenants that are currently are not in receipt of housing benefit. However BHP recognises that Brent is now operating a self financing housing business and that this increase is necessary to ensure the success of the Council's business plan.

Brent to join with other boroughs to out-source 'Public Realm' including waste and parks maintenance

In a report to go before the Executive on October 15th LINK officers are recommending that the Council join with Barnet, Hounslow and Richmond in a 'super contract' see my previous blog HERE that will cover:

• Household waste collections and recycling
• Street Cleansing operations
• Graffiti clearance
• Winter maintenance
• Cleansing of public conveniences
• Grounds maintenance to parks and open spaces (including Brent Housing Partnership HP estates)
• Grounds maintenance to cemeteries and grave digging
• Highway verges and shrub beds
• Playground inspection and maintenance
• Warden service
• Commercial waste

Brent's contract with Veolia ends on March 31st 2014. The contract, across the 4 boroughs and BHP which may not all buy into all the services, would be worth £700m over the 16 year contract period..

In a controversial move the report recommends:

The Executive to give approval to an exemption from Contract Standing Order 88 to allow an advert to be placed and a pre-qualification process to be run without the approval of evaluation criteria and certain other pre-tender considerations, subject to approval of such matters at a future Executive

And further recommends, as a consequence of the problem of the lack of a Brent Council depot when the last contract was awarded to Veolia, that the Council acquire a depot. Andy Donald Director of Regeneration and Major Projects, appears to be leading on this:

That the Executive agree to an amendment of £6.2m to the Council’s capital budget for 2012/13 to procure a new depot as set out in section 3.6 of the report. If a suitable site is identified, due to the reasons set out in paragraph 3.6.6, that the final terms of any acquisition including the purchase price be delegated to the Director of Regeneration and Major Projects and the Director of Finance and Corporate Services in consultation with their respective Lead Members. Such purchase price to be contained within the amendment to the Council’s capital budget as set out within this report

As a lay person it seems to me that this is not a particularly transparent or accountable  process when the Executive is not fully involved in an exceptionally large contract.

The proposal has come as a surprise to people in Barnet where a large number of staff are involved. In Brent waste management and recycling are already out-sourced to Veolia and it is the Parks and Sports staff who are most affected. The report states:

For Brent, whilst the majority of staffing implications are for staff currently employed by the current contractor, there are implications for existing Brent staff in Sports and Parks and Highway Operations. The proposal is that in excess of 50 council staff providing grounds maintenance and a number of staff in other services are transferred to the successful provider. In addition, if the decision is to create a single client arrangement a small number of staff in waste and recycling would be affected,

TUPE will apply and presumably this will also be the case for the cleaning and grounds maintenance contractors currently employed by Brent Housing Partnership, which also comes under Andy Donald's umbrella.

Housing issues that will hit the fan in 2012

This is an edited version of an article in the Winter 2011 issue of  Partnership News from Brent Housing Partnership:

Brent Council is to consult on a new Brent Tenancy Strategy following new powers introduced by the Localism Bill which was passed in November 2011.  Any resulting changes will be introduced in 2012-13. Existing social housing tenants will not be affected but some new tenants will be.

New papers regarding the 15,000 households on Brent's housing waiting list will give council's more freedom to decide who qualifies to go on the list. This includes additional priority for households who are in work (but see Janice Long briefing below).

Other changes in social housing mean that homeless households in priority need can choose to wait for a council home to become available or, if they agree, be offered a suitable private rented sector home. New rules mean that the council can place some homeless families in private accommodation without giving them the option of waiting for a council home.

Under the new rules councils and housing associations will be able to grant a fixed tenancy of 2 years, 5 years or longer as well as retaining the option to grant a lifetime tenancy.

In future tenancy holders will only be able to pass their social housing tenancy on to one person, either a spouse or a partner, ending the possibility of other family members suc ceeding to the tenancy. This will do away with the discretionary (otherwise called second succession right), unless Brent Council decides to adopt its own rules.

Housing associations will be able to set an affordable rent up to 80% of local market rents on new homes and some existing homes when they are re-let. (This suggests we will have to redefine what 'affordable' means! MF). This is to cover the costs of changes in the way new social housing is funded.

Cllr Janice Long, lead member for housing, issued the following briefing note for the well attended Brent Town Hall meeting on housing organised by Barry Gardiner MP, REPORT,

Temporary Accommodation and Housing Benefit.

In January the 9 month transition for Housing Benefit comes to an end.  Many households will have a rent higher than their Housing Benefit.

The housing benefit caps are

1 bed = £250, 2 bed = £290, 3 bed = £340, 4 bed and above = £400

There are 3000 families in Temporary Accommodation.  This figure is fairly stable

BUT

As at 13/11/11 there were 268 households in hotel accommodation. This is a 70% increase in comparison to 2010/11, when there was an average of 157 households in hotels at any one time.  This figure is likely to rise.

B&B accommodation is more cramped, often not in Brent, is unsettling for the family and is much more expensive for the Council.

 All the households have been written to.  Landlords have also been contacted to see if a lower rent can be negotiated. 

One badly affected group are single people under 35 renting one room.  They are now only allowed a Single room rate, ie they must live in shared accommodation with a communal kitchen and bathroom (HMO). There are 124 people affected.

There is huge difference between their rent and the new HB rate.  All these people will be called or written to and be given advice.

A special team in Housing Solutions has been set up to deal with the extra cases.  Brent has also won a grant from DWP to have a team in the Revenue and Benefits teams to deal with extra queries and workload.

The effect on housing applications is:

As at the end of October 2011, 807 households had made a homeless application, this is an increase of 29% when compared to the figure as at the end of October 2010 (625 applications). Homeless applications which were accepted as at the end of October 2011 totaled 275. This is an increase of 33% against the October 2010 figure (207 acceptances).

Refer any casework to the complaints team: martin.beasley@brent.gov.uk or Tania.phillips@brent.gov.uk or customer.relation@brent.gov.uk

If residents live in private rented accommodation and the rent is above the Housing Benefit cap they will probably have to move or they will go into rent arrears.  But they must be given a legal notice to quit by the landlord.

BHP Casework should go to BHP.Complaints@brent.gov.uk

Universal Credit

Universal Credit begins to be introduced in 2013.  I will get some worked examples of the impact. One example to mull over:

The maximum a family can get under Universal Credit is £26000

If the rent for a four bedroom flat is at the cap of £400, the annual rent will be £19,200. That will leave 6,800pa to pay gas, electric, water rates, TV licence, phone, clothes, travel costs.  Food is optional. There is a fear that people will go into debt or take out loans they cannot pay.

Tenancy Strategy

Following the passing of the Localism Bill Brent is reviewing its housing policies including the tenancy strategy.  There will be full consultation but areas be covered include:

Homelessness Duties

Allocation policies

Fixed Term Tenancies

Affordable Rent

Cllr Ali referred to Councils that have prioritised working people.  Brent is not planning to do this but will aim to target help on households who are actively looking for work.  Given the job shortage it is a step to far to take away your home if you can’t get a job.  

Affordable rent is at 80% of Market Rent.  Due to high demand private sector rents are already high in Brent.  It will prove very difficult for many social housing tenants to be able to pay these rent levels. In 2010 the average (median) income in Brent was £22,064.  Half of social tenants are in employment. A three bed property at £300 a week will be £14,400 a year. This will mean many families will be in financial difficulties.

Brent Housing Partnership Issues

HRA

The Housing Revenue Account is ring-fenced.  Currently all rents are paid into Central Government and we receive an annual subsidy. From April 2012 we will keep all rents.  Brent is one if the gainers as our current debt is £338.3  This will be reduced by 184.9m leaving Brent with a debt of £153.4 (Figures are subject to final confirmation but should not change much.)  Brent has 9, 225 dwellings.  There will need to be a 30 year business plan to pay off the debt and to plan for investment in the stock.  Eg external decorations, energy work.

Some Council’s currently have no debt and are being given our debt.  There is mumbling but most Council’s are accepting the proposals as it means that they can plan for the future.  At the moment most Council’s cannot plan as they do not know what they will be getting from the current subsidy system.  So business planning and Treasury management will be introduced into management of the HRA.

This does not mean that the backlog of external decorations work will be done in 2012 but there will be a proper timetable of when the work will be done. 

A major difference from the scheme proposed by the Labour Government is that RTB receipts will be kept by the Treasury.  They will be pooled and handed back to Councils for new build. In London this will be done by the Mayor’s office.  So a RTB sale in Brent may not generate a replacement housing unit in Brent.  Also any of the new units will be at Affordable rent levels.

Right to Buy

The Government has announced increased discounts for RTB, the percentage is yet to be confirmed.  The aim is that the receipts will be used to build a “replacement unit”.  However this will be at the Affordable rent level – 80% of markets rates.

Since 1981 the following number of units have been sold in Brent under the RTB 

There are currently 9225 council housing units. Over 800 of the RTBs are now sublet.

In April  2011 there were 3181 families on the waiting list for 3 bedrooms. This was the most popular category of sale.  So RTB has had an impact on the waiting list.

Cllr Janice Long, Lead Member for Housing

November 2011