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

Stark impact of government 'social cleansing' housing policy in Brent

Post eviction scene?

Brent Council expects 512 families to lose their homes through being unable to afford their rent in private accommodation as a result of  the Housing Benefit cap in January 2012, a further 714 in February and 799 in March. 

The weekly loss of benefit will be:
1 bedroomed accommodation £7.69
2 bedroomed £34.40
3 bedroomed £98.74
4 bedroomed £200
5 bedroomed £282.24

Clearly the cuts will affect people with large families disproportionally.

Jacky Peacock, Executive Director of Brent Private Tenants Group, in quietly setting out the figures at today's meeting organised by Barry Gardiner at Brent Town Hall. did more to bring home the seriousness of the situation than any passionate politician's speech could have done.

She reported that in 2009 there were 22,281 privately rented homes in Brent, representing about 84,000 people. There were more children in privately rented housing than in social housing.  Tenants were young and not so young professionals often having to stay in rented accommodation into their 40s or 50s, half of all  renters were on housing benefit. There were students, migrant workers and older tenants with regulated tenancies.

She said that in 2010/11 Brent Council had to find private lettings for 548 families and between April and October another 173. Anyone moving into 'temporary accommodation' as a result of losing their home could expect to be in it for 10-11 years. Many rents in the cheapest third of rental accommodation were already above the capped amounts.

Rents had already increased by 5.7% this year and landlords were expecting another 6% over the next 12 months. One third of privately rented homes fall below Decent Homes Standards and 15% have serious damp problems compared with 8% owner occupied and 10% social housing. Private tenants were four times more likely to live in a cold home with resultant health problems. May were forced to go to bed to keep room rather than  try to keep warm sitting in their room.

Jacky said we had never seen a situation like this before: families would be forced to move out of London to find affordable accommodation with the resultant dislocation of support from friends and families and disruption of children's education.

Cllr Janice Long, Brent lead member for housing, told the full hall that she had nothing but doom to convey.  She said she could see no light at the end of the tunnel. She told tenants that the worse thing they could do was to not pay the rent and get into debt - it would  be better to move, She said that if they got accepted as homeless by the Council that was not the end of the problem as there was no spare bed and breakfast accommodation - it would be provided outside of Brent. She said that making the argument that children's education would be disrupted if the family moved far away wouldn't wash - they would have to find a school elsewhere.

Looking forward to the future Janice said that 'affordable' housing wasn't the answer as the Coalition government had changed the definition of 'affordable' to 80% of the market rent - making it not affordable to Brent residents on the average Brent wage. In addition the government would cut housing benefit to those without a job whom they deemed able to work.

She said, 'The Council is not to blame. It's the government that has decided on the social cleansing of London."

Contributing from the floor Shahrar Ali admired Cllr Long's honesty but wondered if rather than merely manage the consequences of the cuts ('You sometimes sounded like a member of the Coalition') the Council should be doing more to engage in the fight against them.  We heard about landlords harassing 80 year olds to get them out of property, landlords giving tenants notice to quiet who tried to get the landlord to improve insulation through the Green deal, a 25 year teacher who could not afford to move out of her mother's home, people who had the income:price ratios to get a mortgage but not the hefty deposits now required, a woman who been forced to move six times in rapid succession losing deposits and fees with each move.

The social cost in terms of health problems, disrupted education and temporary accommodation costs would outweigh the 'savings' made by the government through their benefit cap, according to several contributors. However, as I murmured to my neighbour, most of those costs would be shifted to already hard-pressed local authorities and away from central government budgets.

In my contribution I told the meeting that my experience at Chalkhill School was that families were already being evicted as tenancies came to an end and there were already increased numbers in temporary accommodation. Families were being offered accommodation as far away as Birmingham and Milton Keynes. Sometime ago I met a Nepalese family who had moved to Milton Keynes who had to move again because of racial harassment from local youth there.Brent families, used to living in a multiracial environment, might face similar problems.

I noted that the recent consultation on the Wembley Plan stated that developers were not currently willing to build affordable housing because of low profits. Plans had been put on the back burner and they were instead investing in private student accommodation. The Council needed to negotiate with Quintain, the main developer, to ensure the housing was built. Cllr Janice Long confirmed that the Wembley Plan's definition of affordable was the old one, rather than the new 80% of affordable rent definition.

When  I asked that more be done about locating and taking over empty housing, Janice Long at first said that often such housing had a story attached to it, but later said that the present Compulsory Purchase of Empty Properties policy inherited from the last Brent administration was gummy (lacked teeth) and could do with strengthening. Jacky Peacock said that despite problems her experience was that if the local authority had a robust CPO policy on empty properties and implemented it, for every one property compulsorily purchased owners would put anothet100 on the market.  Jacky also agreed that with Sarah Cox that other empty property in Brent could be purchased and converted to housing where appropriate.

Chris Williamson, Labour MP a member of the shadow housing team, said that the previous Labour government hadn't got everything right on housing but would learn from its mistakes. The Labour Party wanted to bring the private rented sector up to standard but accepted its role in society. He stressed that the Labour Party was in 'listening mode'. He said that the supply of affordable housing needed government intervention and investment in it would provide a stimulus to the economy.

The meeting ended with a call for a big campaign on the issue and requests for people to join the Brent Private Tenants' Rights Group. LINK Navin Shah, Labour AM for Brent and Harrow, reminded the audience that they would have a chance to express their views electorally in next year's Mayoral and London Assembly election.

Find out more from  Brent Private Tenants' Rights Group 36-38 Willesden Lane, Kilburn, London NW6 7ST Tel: 020 7624 4327 info@bptrg.org   Website: www.bptrg.org

What should the council do about Coalition instigated cuts? The debate begins.

Today's Any Questions? with Labour Councillors and representatatives of Brent Fightback  was a lively affair.  Janice Long and Jim Moher (with Lesley Jone as a later substitute for Moher) appeared for Brent Labour Councillors and Pete Firmin and Sarah Cox for Fightback. Pete Firmin is chair of Brent TUC.

Janice Long said she was unwilling to refuse to implement cuts as someone else making them would be worse. Cllr Moher said that he was the only member of the Executive to make changes in proposals as the results of representations and had not implemented the proposed cuts to school crossing patrols. He said the Council had protected front-line services but had to exercise the 'judgement of Solomon' in deciding what to cut. In response to ex-Labour councillor Graham Durham, who called on the council to unite with other London Labour councils and refuse to implement the cuts, he said that the situation now was far more difficult than the 1980s when Durham had been a councillor.

Sarah Cox said the Coalition had no mandate for the cuts in the NHS and it was time to resist bad laws. She said the Council should have put together a 'needs budget' and taken it out to the people of Brent as a basis for a united campaign by the council, its workers, and the Brent public against the Coalition's policies. Pete Firmin said that Labour councillors hadn't taken up opportunities when they could have worked with local activists, such as attending the Fightback lobby of Sarah Teather, MP for Brent Central. He said other London Labour councils were backing the public sector strike on November 30th but no such backing had come from Brent Labour council. Labour's  deputy leader, Cllr Butt, had referred a caller who wanted to oppose the overnight closure of Central Middlesex A and E Department, to Brent Fightback. The council itself needed to get organised against such cuts.

Janice Long said with the council having to choose between closing libraries and enabling people to carry on living in their houses she had to say that having a house was more important.  Her statement was challenged as conflating local government cuts and the government's cap on housing benefit.

Questioned by Shahrar Ali, Brent and Harrow  Green Party candidate for the London Assembly, about the cost of the new Civic Centre, Janice Long said the cost to Brent residents was neutral and it would reduce the council's carbon footprint and provide more space. It would  pay for itself over 25 years.  Cllr Moher said that the cost of the interest on the £102m project would be a further £25m but the Civic Centre would save the council £4m a year compared with the current buildings. He admitted that it was a difficult project to justify in the current situation of cuts and recession.

Pete Firmin said the we needed transparency and honesty about the Civic Centre and that another connected issue was the concentration of services in Wembley rather than in the various localities of Brent.

Cllr  Moher said that he was right behind the November 30th strike as an individual but that the council itself wanted to see lower public sector pensions because of their cost.  He supported a pension based on 'career average' earnings rather than a 'final salary' scheme. He justified this on the basis of the immense burden on council tax papers of the pensions of high salaried senior officers but a member of the audience pointed out that this would also affect the low paid - the average salary based on 40 years service was much lower than one base don final salary.

In response to join the NUT and other unions at the Torch, Bridge Road, Wembley at 9.30am on November 30th, Janice said that she hadn't known about that, but the Brent Central Labour Party would be on the march.

There was a brief discussion about whether campaigners should stand an 'anti cuts' candidate in the forthcoming Wembley Central by-election. There were a variety of views on this and it will be discussed at a later Fightback meeting.

Earlier in the day there had been speeches from Chris Coates about the Brent SOS Libraries Campaign and its success in mobilising people, raising money and getting  high profile support form famous authors. Jeremy Taylor, President of Brent Teachers Association and NUT representative at Preston Manor High School, spoke about the impact of cuts on students at his school and how the changes in pensions would affect teachers. He expressed concern both for teachers and students if teachers were forced to go on teaching well into their 60s when the job required so much energy. He demonstrated that the changes in pension contribution represented a wage cut in real terms.

In a wide-ranging speech Kishan Parshotam, Chair of Brent Youth Parliament and a Brent UK Youth Parliament member said that the BYP was campaigning against negative stereotyping of youth and for their voice to heard. He said that they supported the reduction of the voting age to 16 so that politicians would have to listen to their concerns. The cuts in libraries would mean over-crowded study areas and poor ICT access for the most needy students, particularly in the south of Brent, who lacked those facilities at home.

He told the audience that in discussions 8 and 9 year old children were well able to talk about how cuts would affect them and should not be under-estimated.

As well as councillors, campaigners and residents, the meeting was attended by Dawn Butler, ex-Labour MP for South Brent, but she made no contribution during the open sessions. Cllr James Powney trotted past the venue just before the Assembly started but kept his head down and did not come in.

I think a valuable debate and perhaps even a dialogue was opened up during the day. Brent Fightback wants to involve a broader spectrum of people and this was a modest start. We now need to consider how to involve more people at a time when everyone is feeling hard-pressed and those most affected by the cuts are concentrating on day to day survival.

Shahrar Ali's take on the day is HERE