Focus on…. Housing Health and Safety Rating System

| |by

Landlords have a legal requirement to ensure that a property is safe before letting it to a new tenant and local authorities have a statutory duty to keep the housing conditions in their area under review. It is now almost thirteen years since the introduction of the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Introduced under the Housing Act 2004 and implemented in April 2006, it is the approach used to assess risks to health and safety in the home.

The rationale for its introduction was to standardise the way Environmental Health Practitioners (EHP) rated the risk to health and safety to occupants of dwellings and in doing so, replaced the more basic housing fitness standard assessment tool, introduced in the Housing Act 1985, which was based on whether the conditions in a property met a defined minimum level.

The new system was designed to be more comprehensive, and a range of different issues are now banded under a set of 29 categories which range from the more serious Category 1 and 2 where there is a serious danger to health and safety, through a range of other problems decreasing in severity such as design that might cause sprains and strains (Category 28). Some of the hazards include:

  • Excess cold (because of increased heat loss)
  • Fire (by allowing fire and smoke to spread to other parts of the dwelling)
  • Lead (from old paint)
  • Domestic hygiene, pests and refuse (by providing access and breeding places for pests, which are a source of infections), and
  • Noise

MHCLG’s Local Authority Housing Statistics Data Return provides useful information on the presence of Category 1 hazards in each local authority area in England. The data for 2017/18 showed that out of a total of 2,676 local authority owned dwellings in England with a Category 1 hazard, only 49 could be found in the North.

The total estimated cost of removing the Category 1 hazards from these dwellings in the North amounts to £97,450 – an average of £1,989 per dwelling.

There was a total of 6,533 dwellings in the private rented sector which, following an inspection, were found to have one or more Category 1 hazards according to Local Authority Housing Statistics Data Return. In the absence of an estimated cost to remove hazards in the private sector, I have used the average cost for the local authority removal as a proxy to give an indication of costs. Using this £1,989 average above equates to an indicative cost of £12.9m to remove Category 1 hazards from private rented dwellings in the North.

Whilst tackling the most dangerous hazards is expensive, Cambridgeshire Insight carried out analysis that shows there are wider benefits to doing so. Taking one example, their analysis shows that tackling all instances of excess cold would cost some £6bn. However, this would result in savings of £848m per year to the NHS and would pay for itself in 7.14 years.

Despite the more stringent assessment system that the HHSRS introduced, a survey by the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health found that the vast majority of EHPs felt that the HHSRS should be updated. Subsequently, MHCLG has now commissioned a review to identify the extent to which the HHSRS needs to be updated and revised, including exploring the scope for setting minimum standards as part of the HHSRS framework.

The MHCLG project specification sets out to:

  • Identify which parts of the HHSRS are out of date and need to be revised
  • Demonstrate whether there would be scope for introducing a sampling and cloning approach – and where this approach might be appropriate
  • Indicate whether the current penalties for non-compliance are appropriate and proportionate
  • Show whether there is a need for additional worked examples in the guidance
  • Help establish the feasibility of using digital technology to develop an app for the HHSRS, and
  • Consider whether minimum standards should be included in the framework.

In 2017/18 the total number of private sector dwellings with Category 1 hazards which were made free from hazards as a direct result of action of local authorities was 5,559 in the North and 18,582 nationally. Whatever the outcome of the review and any subsequent change to legislation, it is clear that there is an ongoing battle for EHPs and NHC members to ensure that people are safe to live in their own homes.

In 2005 the World Health Organisation estimated that in the UK over 2.7 million people were injured at home, almost twice as many as those injured at work and over eight times those injured on the road. Consideration clearly needs to be given to wider health and safety issues in the home. But how are landlords and local authorities to determine what is a safe home in future?

Bookings are now being taken for the NHC’s 4th Annual Health and Safety in Housing Conference which will be held in Leeds on 13th June. Delegates will be given an update on the HHSRS from the Regulator and issues such as the implications of the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2019 will be discussed. We are running a session looking specifically at the legal aspects of the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2019 with our Supporter members Ward Hadaway on 7th March – you can see more details here.

Independent Affordable Housing Commission

| |by

The new independent Affordable Housing Commission (AHC) is chaired by Lord Best and includes housing experts and parliamentarian commissioners.   The Smith Institute will act as secretariat to the commission and the NHC will be supporting the commission by holding an event on 1 March 2019 (this event focuses on the North East and Yorkshire and Humber – there are other events taking place in other regions)

In preparation for its launch, the AHC published the results of a national poll, showing that two thirds of people believe that there is a national crisis over affordable housing and 52% believe it will get worse over the next decade.

The AHC has identified four key groups for whom the affordability of their accommodation is causing serious difficulty:

  1. Struggling renters: these are required to spend more than a third of their income on rented accommodation; they are often in the private rented sector (PRS), although the problem is also evident in in the social housing sector.
  2. Frustrated homeowners: those unable to buy a property without spending over a third on housing costs; many, who struggling to save and without significant parental support, are destined to remain in the PRS.
  3. Those reliant on state support: households that rely on Housing Benefit/the housing component within Universal Credit, but current arrangements provide inadequate support, taking many below the poverty line.
  4. Those who face affordability issues in older age: whose incomes drop suddenly in retirement but whose rents remain the same (something which could become a bigger issue for generation rent in the future), but also older owners in unsatisfactory homes who cannot afford to upgrade their property or acquire somewhere suitable.

The AHC is keen to hear a range of views on how these problems of housing affordability can be ended and is hoping to bring together a small number of major policy initiatives which could make a dramatic difference. The AHC is keen to ensure that attention is focussed on the issues that matter most.

The AHC has produced a note providing more detail on the scope of the AHC’s research and further information on the Commission can be found on the  Affordable Housing Commission website.

The NHC has been invited to submit evidence to the AHC and we are keen to seek views, comments and evidence from members to inform our response.

The deadline for NHC to submit its views to the Commission is the 4th April 2019.

You can feed into the work of the Commission by

  1. Attending the AHC/NHC event on 1st March details here – to book please email events@northern-consortium.org.uk
  2. Submitting your comments directly to the Commission via the Affordable Housing Commission website
  3. Submitting your comments to the NHC to contribute towards our response on behalf of members – please submit comments by 22 March

If you have any queries or wish to submit your evidence, please email to Karen Brown, Senior Policy Advisor  karen.brown@northern-consortium.org.uk

All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) Housing in the North looks further at impact of housing on health

| |by

The cross-party forum for parliamentarians to discuss and advance northern specific housing challenges, the APPG Housing in the North, met again this week to explore further how housing can play a central role in supporting personal health. The group, made up of MP’s and Lords of all political persuasions, heard from a range of speakers outlining how we can achieve this ambition whether in identifying where funding should be targeted or understanding what good practice already exists and how it can be disseminated across the region.

Last October the Smith Institute published the Hidden Costs of Poor-Quality Housing in the North.  Commissioned by the Northern Housing Consortium and supported by Liverpool City Region Combined Authority and Karbon Homes, the report highlighted the nearly 1 million owner-occupied homes in the North that currently fail to meet the decent homes standard and the health impacts this can have on residents.

In the time since, the prevention agenda in health has only grown in importance with the recently released NHS Long Term Plan announcing a focus on prevention which could save 500,000 lives. The challenge outlined at the APPG was to now underline and acknowledge the role housing should play in this approach.

It is clear that sub-standard housing can have negative health and wellbeing impacts on any household. We all could suffer at some point from falls or respiratory problems because of poor housing conditions. Similarly, households pay more if their homes are not energy efficient and there is a growing body of academic literature from organisations such as Public Health England and the Kings Fund linking poor housing to health inequalities.  Despite this evidence, Northern Housing Consortium members continue to tell us of the challenges they face in striving for greater collaboration with health services.

One area the North can look to for inspiration is Greater Manchester, where housing providers have established a key partnership with the GM Health and Social Care Partnership.  ‘Connecting health and housing’ has become a central tenet of Greater Manchester Housing Providers highlighted by the ambition to reduce the pressures on health and social care by investing in new modern homes and support packages for an ageing population. With this in mind, the APPG was delighted to welcome colleagues at the centre of this collaboration to discuss what learning we should take when it comes to the integration of health and housing and how good practice can be spread across the North.

The benefits of a collaborative approach are widespread. Homes with a category 1 hazard are estimated to cost the NHS £1.4 billion.  The impact of poor housing on residents’ health, such as the development of respiratory and circulatory diseases, set against the treatment costs, if the causes of the ill health are not dealt with, are significant. For example, the relatively small cost of fitting a handrail on the steps of a vulnerable person’s home to prevent a fall will be far more cost-effective than treating the subsequent fall injury. This is not simply about monetary gain; it is about a respect for people in aid of assistance and support, demonstrated through the prevention of illness and injury.

The All Party Parliamentary Group Housing in the North took place 26th February 2019 at the House of Commons, Westminster.  Meeting notes and further information will be available soon via the Northern Housing Consortium website.

Focus On – Housing Health and Safety Rating System

| |by

Landlords have a legal requirement to ensure that a property is safe before letting it to a new tenant and local authorities have a statutory duty to keep the housing conditions in their area under review. It is now almost thirteen years since the introduction of the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). Introduced under the Housing Act 2004 and implemented in April 2006, it is the approach used to assess risks to health and safety in the home.

The rationale for its introduction was to standardise the way Environmental Health Practitioners (EHP) rated the risk to health and safety to occupants of dwellings and in doing so, replaced the more basic housing fitness standard assessment tool, introduced in the Housing Act 1985, which was based on whether the conditions in a property met a defined minimum level.

The new system was designed to be more comprehensive, and a range of different issues are now banded under a set of 29 categories which range from the more serious Category 1 and 2 where there is a serious danger to health and safety, through a range of other problems decreasing in severity such as design that might cause sprains and strains (Category 28). Some of the hazards include:

  • Excess cold (because of increased heat loss)
  • Fire (by allowing fire and smoke to spread to other parts of the dwelling)
  • Lead (from old paint)
  • Domestic hygiene, pests and refuse (by providing access and breeding places for pests, which are a source of infections), and
  • Noise

MHCLG’s Local Authority Housing Statistics Data Return provides useful information on the presence of Category 1 hazards in each local authority area in England. The data for 2017/18 showed that out of a total of 2,676 local authority owned dwellings in England with a Category 1 hazard, only 49 could be found in the North.

The total estimated cost of removing the Category 1 hazards from these dwellings in the North amounts to £97,450 – an average of £1,989 per dwelling.

There was a total of 6,533 dwellings in the private rented sector which, following an inspection, were found to have one or more Category 1 hazards according to Local Authority Housing Statistics Data Return. In the absence of an estimated cost to remove hazards in the private sector, I have used the average cost for the local authority removal as a proxy to give an indication of costs. Using this £1,989 average above equates to an indicative cost of £12.9m to remove Category 1 hazards from private rented dwellings in the North.

Whilst tackling the most dangerous hazards is expensive, Cambridgeshire Insight carried out analysis that shows there are wider benefits to doing so. Taking one example, their analysis shows that tackling all instances of excess cold would cost some £6bn. However, this would result in savings of £848m per year to the NHS and would pay for itself in 7.14 years.

Despite the more stringent assessment system that the HHSRS introduced, a survey by the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health found that the vast majority of EHPs felt that the HHSRS should be updated. Subsequently, MHCLG has now commissioned a review to identify the extent to which the HHSRS needs to be updated and revised, including exploring the scope for setting minimum standards as part of the HHSRS framework.

The MHCLG project specification sets out to:

  • Identify which parts of the HHSRS are out of date and need to be revised
  • Demonstrate whether there would be scope for introducing a sampling and cloning approach – and where this approach might be appropriate
  • Indicate whether the current penalties for non-compliance are appropriate and proportionate
  • Show whether there is a need for additional worked examples in the guidance
  • Help establish the feasibility of using digital technology to develop an app for the HHSRS, and
  • Consider whether minimum standards should be included in the framework.

In 2017/18 the total number of private sector dwellings with Category 1 hazards which were made free from hazards as a direct result of action of local authorities was 5,559 in the North and 18,582 nationally. Whatever the outcome of the review and any subsequent change to legislation, it is clear that there is an ongoing battle for EHPs and NHC members to ensure that people are safe to live in their own homes.

In 2005 the World Health Organisation estimated that in the UK over 2.7 million people were injured at home, almost twice as many as those injured at work and over eight times those injured on the road. Consideration clearly needs to be given to wider health and safety issues in the home. But how are landlords and local authorities to determine what is a safe home in future?

Bookings are now being taken for the NHC’s 4th Annual Health and Safety in Housing Conference which will be held in Leeds on 13th June. Delegates will be given an update on the HHSRS from the Regulator and issues such as the implications of the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2019 will be discussed. We are running a session looking specifically at the legal aspects of the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2019 with our Supporter members Ward Hadaway on 7th March – you can see more details here.

Ward Hadaway Guest Blog – Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018

| |by

On 20 March 2019, the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018 (The Act) comes into force in England and Wales amending sections 8 to 10 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. The Act creates an obligation on landlords to make sure dwellings provided are fit for human habitation from the start of their tenancy and remain so throughout.

Failure to do so will provide tenants (both private and social) with a statutory right to take action against their landlord for breach of contract and for compensation. A landlord cannot contract out of the covenant implied into the tenancy agreement or levy any contractual penalty on the tenant for relying on the Act.

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985

Currently landlords have no contractual obligation to keep a dwelling in a condition that is ‘fit for human habitation’. Section 11 Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 contains obligations to keep the structure of a dwelling and installations for supplying heat and water in repair, but no positive obligations to deal with improvements, design defects and other issues that affect fitness for habitation, such as poor ventilation or fire safety.

 Definition of ‘fitness for human habitation’

The scope of the Act is broad; ‘fitness  for human habitation’  takes into consideration factors such as repair, stability, freedom from damp, natural lighting, ventilation, water supply, drainage and sanitary conveniences and facilities for preparation and cooking of food and disposal of waste water.

In addition, the Act goes further to include ‘any prescribed hazard’ under s.2 (1) of the Housing Act 2004. So, in deciding whether a dwelling is ‘unfit’ regard shall be had to whether there is a risk of harm to the health and wellbeing of the tenant.  Previously such hazards could only be enforced by local authorities.

What type of tenancies does the 2018 Act apply to?

The Act will apply to all leases of less than seven years granted on or after the 20 March 2019 (the commencement date), including new periodic tenancies; all fixed term tenancies granted before the commencement date that become periodic tenancies after the commencement date; and all periodic tenancies in existence (at the commencement date and 12 months after the commencement date).

Impact

The Act will not affect the terms and conditions of the tenant’s agreement with regards to the tenant’s responsibilities, and landlords will not be liable for the property being rendered ‘unfit for human habitation’ as a result of the tenant’s behaviour and actions.

What we can expect to see is a raft of new claims in relation to condensation dampness, which can clearly have a negative impact on tenant’s health.   Currently, condensation that is not caused by disrepair is not a matter of or contractual breach.  In the future, we can expect to see complex, technical arguments over the cause of condensation; whether it arises as a result of design or construction defect, could be improved by better heating, insulation or ventilation or as a result of how the property is being utilised.

Registered Providers need to be very much aware of their obligations under the Act, and review their asset management strategies to consider how best to avoid such claims (by prioritising improvement programmes) and how best to defend such claims (by responding to, and accurately recording complaints, and where possible using technology to monitor use of a property).

To book your place on this event click here.

Plus Dane and Refugee Resettlement

| |by

 

In 2016, Plus Dane, in partnership with SHAP, was awarded the Refugee Resettlement Contract for Halton Borough Council; Halton are a great Council to work with and there was a coalition of the willing. The contract fitted well with the social and moral purpose of our organisation. And so began a new strand of work for us. It has been challenging and we’ve needed to be open to continuous learning and readjustment as we evolve our knowledge and skills – but more than anything, it has been hugely rewarding.

So far we have supported 107 people from 25 Families, helping them settle into new homes and new communities. A plethora of statistics and evaluation surround them, many of which I could cite, but the key for me is these people are like no others we work with. The majority of these families have left Syria. It is unimaginable for us to contemplate the personal horrors they have experienced, the lives and families they left behind and the absolute enormity of the step they took to flee their own countries.

As the main service provider, we are responsible from the moment families have been identified as coming to live in Halton. I know that without a second thought our team has been up at the crack of dawn waiting at the airport to welcome people into a new life that must feel so alien to them.

Our role includes sourcing new homes. We did this in a way that avoided taking away properties that had already been advertised on property pool, as we really wanted to increase our chances of smoothing community cohesion. We work successfully with both social and private sector landlords to achieve this, sharing tips and advice all the time.

These homes need to be decorated and furnished to a standard set by the Home Office. This is where being the main service provider as well as a social landlord proves a real asset. Our initial supported housing team are able to draw on the expertise of colleagues right across the business, often with limited notice and usually to very tight timescales.

Our Trades help assemble furniture and put up curtains and poles. They bring our apprentices along too, which in turn helps them appreciate and achieve some of the wider Corporate Social Responsibility we strive to embed in their training. Environment teams help clear large quantities of recyclable cardboard and often give a helping hand to move items within the home, remove dumped items from some of gardens etc.

As for colleagues who are sometimes referred to as ‘not front line’– our Finance colleagues helped to completely re-evaluate the way Home Office funds were provided to the families. Previous providers had pre-loaded cash onto cash cards. In our view, this was creating a dependency culture and provided a false sense of household income, rather than giving the families a chance to learn the value of English money for everyday long-term living. Our finance team have developed a programme of delivering steady amounts of cash over a period of five weeks (the average waiting time for benefits). This also gives the opportunity to do training around setting up and using bank accounts, cash points, using contactless etc. The families have said they find this of real value.

Our resettlement support enables us to enrich our wider workforce. For example, learning that we needed better language skills saw us employ bilingual staff that now also provide support to other areas of the business, including translating some of our tenancy advice documents.

Through one of our partners, we also have the use of a bank of skilled interpreters, one of which is a trained midwife. This enables us to provide up to date pregnancy, labour and post birth advice and assistance to our new mums … can you imagine arriving here as a new refugee and trying to navigate NHS maternity services and give birth to your new child without that level of support?

Housing remains one of the big issues for our families and we have learnt some key cultural lessons from them as we have progressed. One of the most important lessons has been to understand the women’s inability to socialise in a culturally acceptable way in the configuration of some properties we initially provided. This issue was made worse by the spread of the properties and the lack of existing diversity in Halton. By working with the women, we are now attempting to put on as many daytime events in conjunction with DWP and ESOL providers to give them a chance to meet and socialise in a safe environment in a bid to combat isolation.

Halton hopes to host around 60 more individuals under the program in the coming 12 months and we will keep learning lessons and applying them. Our existing families act as buddies and mentors for new arrivals, helping to cook traditional hot meals on their day of arrival (especially appreciated after such a long journey). We are now planning a big EID party to be hosted in Halton, with invites going across the Liverpool city region, to help give our wider Syrian community a chance to come together.

What has struck me most about this work is the collective partnership and pride I see all the time. At a recent celebration event, the families, our staff and key partners, such as the police, all shared the same openness to learn together and take forward a new life for people who need it so desperately. That pride was never more evident than in the face of a young man I met whose wife had just given birth to our first ‘refugee baby’. One of our team had been with them at the hospital, but the whole room celebrated this young life who will be able to give so much to her new community in years to come.

Now if that’s not what housing associations and councils working together should be aiming to achieve, what is?

Barbara Spicer CBE, Chief Executive at Plus Dane and NHC Board Member

(Written with the support of Laura Stanley, Senior Refugee Resettlement Coordinator, and John Foster, Supported Housing Manager)

A video link is as follows:  https://youtu.be/-Nn7IOiZ8PU

 

Guest Blog: The Housing Association Digital Forum wants new members

| |by

Karl Dickman, Product Manager at Home Group, explains why he set up the Housing Association Digital Forum and how already it’s been a great success.

I started the Housing Association Digital Forum in September 2018 with the first participants invited from the North East, and Yorkshire and Humber.

I set it up, primarily, because I was fed up of spending hours travelling to London, often requiring overnight stays, to attend conferences where all I heard were speakers telling me how amazing their digital journey had been. I’d never hear of any failures, nor get the chance to ask speakers questions. I wouldn’t learn much more than I could have from googling their company and looking at news about their digital transformation.

With 12 years’ experience in the digital sector I knew there were many failures we weren’t being told about.  It got me to wonder how many organisations who went to these conferences were about to embark on their own journey thinking that nothing would go wrong? Additionally, how many people were in the crowd trying to understand where others had made the same mistakes, and how to learn from them?

From that, the Housing Association Digital Forum was born.

The premise was simple. This was an open and honest forum where people involved in their own companies’ digital programmes could attend. It’s essential to collaborate and share knowledge. So, badges come off at the door, and all ideas and comments are respected.

With help from National Housing Federation we organised the first forum, and the feedback we’ve had so far has been excellent. There have been lots of candid and open conversations about when mistakes have been made, and what happened to recover it.

We’re now looking to expand the forum – we want more members from the North East, and Yorkshire and Humber, and we’re opening it up to members in the North West with the help of the Northern Housing Consortium. A Housing Association in London is now looking to set up a similar forum which is great.

The next forum will take place on Friday 29 March 2019 between 1pm and 4pm at the offices of Thirteen Group, Hudson Quay, Middlesbrough.  The suggested topics for the next forum are “How do we know we’re building the right thing?”, the need for a digital strategy and what this looks like” and “Digital skills for customers and colleagues”.

You don’t need to be in a digital role to take part in the Forum – this is open to anyone involved in new projects. To register your interest for the next meeting, please contact callum.smith@northern-consortium.org.uk

Our continuing support for social housing staff

| |by

Liam Gregson, Member Engagement Officer, Northern Housing Consortium

With austerity swelling social housing’s role as an ‘ambulance service’ for vulnerable groups, it is unsurprising that the mental health problems faced by residents has come increasingly into focus.

Research by the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute has suggested that one in three people living in social housing has a mental health problem and last September the mental health charity Mind published research putting forward even starker findings:

• Newly analysed data from Mind has shown more than two in five (43 per cent) people with mental health problems living in social housing have seen their mental health deteriorate as a result of where they live;
• More than one in seven (15 per cent) experienced stigma from housing officials during the social housing application process;
• More than one in four (27 per cent) had problems with benefits such as universal credit or housing benefits;
• Nearly three in ten (28 per cent) experienced stigma from neighbours or flatmates.

Whilst Mind’s research is based on the relatively small national sample of 2009 people, I’m sure all would agree that providing the necessary support for residents who suffer from mental health problems is no less a priority.

NHC members will be more than aware of their role in striving to support some of the most vulnerable in society. From the threat of homelessness, the challenges posed by Universal Credit, or domestic issues within the home; frontline staff can come into contact with residents under serious strain and it is integral that those staff are best placed to help.

Alongside Mind’s research came a call for social housing providers to do more to ensure staff are “well equipped to support tenants who have mental health problems.” This is a call the NHC has long aimed to respond to.

Last October, alongside our partners HACT, we convened a Mental Health and Housing Conference where delegates heard of the innovative ways in which housing providers were collaborating with health services as well as new research that underlined the role housing can play in delivering recovery outcomes (you can read more about the conference HERE).

In February we began a series of training courses to support our members in addressing the wellbeing challenges they can face in their day-to-day roles. New dates are available on our website and we would be more than happy to also run the course for our members in-house.

With our course: Mental Health and Supporting Residents, we will help frontline staff understand mental illness and how these issues can drive behaviour within residents. By looking at how problems can present themselves, dealing with difficult situations (including within the parameters of the Mental Capacity Act), and personal resilience; the course aims to prepare colleagues to deliver the kind of support that goes beyond traditional customer service.

Organisations will also be aware of their responsibility towards the wellbeing of all colleagues including those whose work can carry an emotional toll. Our course: Managing the Mental Wellbeing of your Team will help managers to look after the mental health of themselves and their team members. By the end of the course delegates will be equipped to have conversations about mental health, have the knowledge to manage potential trigger situations, and know how to start building a resilience that will maximise performance whilst preserving personal wellbeing.

The training is conducted by experienced practitioners in the field of mental health support and coaching. Nicky McGee, a Mental Health Nurse and Crisis Clinician, has supported vulnerable residents in a variety of roles covering welfare advice, personal budgets and sustainable tenancies, and independent living and care. Glynis Osborne, Senior Development Consultant and founder of Thinking Success UK, has a background in psychology and has built a successful career in integrating resilience and communication skills into her role as a performance coach.

Overall the NHC will continue to focus on mental health and engage with members through roundtables and events to continue a dialogue around these challenges and share good practice and learning. Together we can all ensure social housing is both a great sector to work in and a happy place to call home.

Places for Mental Health and Supporting Residents (11th June) and Managing the Mental Wellbeing of your Team (14th June) are available to book via our events page HERE.

All NHC training sessions can be tailored to your needs and delivered in-house. For further information follow this LINK.

Research from Mind cited above can be accesses here:
https://www.mind.org.uk/news-campaigns/news/one-in-three-social-housing-tenants-with-mental-health-problems-unhappy-with-home-making-mental-health-worse/#.XEBbjVX7TIV

Guest Blog: ‘A vision for social housing’: report by Social Housing Commission on tenants’ rights

| |by

The Social Housing Commission (the Commission) is an independent cross-party body which was set up by housing charity Shelter. On 08 January 2019 the Commission returned a year’s worth of findings in the form of a report entitled ‘Building for our future: A vision for social housing’ which aims to bolster tenants’ rights in the wake of the Grenfell Fire disaster.

Click here to view the report.

When 72 people were killed at Grenfell, there were widespread reports of a broken culture of regulation, reporting of hazards and tenants’ interests being side-lined. The Commissioners, including former Labour leader Ed Miliband and former Conservative party chair Baroness Sayeeda Warsi hope that a ‘decisive generation shift in housing policy’ will be what is required to address the ‘housing crisis’ currently facing the sector.

Proposals

The primary driver of the Report’s vision is the proposed building of more social housing in the next 20 years. This would achieve 3.1m new social homes by 2040 for 3 groups of vulnerable renters: the homeless, younger trapped renters, and older renters. This figure is based on the Commission’s calculation of the number of households who will be failed by the current market conditions over the next 20 years.

This recognition of the varying needs of residents challenges the Government’s current stance on social housing as merely either a safety net or a route to home ownership. The Government has, however, stressed that the launch of its £9bn affordable homes programme will meet the demand – communities secretary James Brokenshire said that “providing quality and fair social housing is a priority for this government, and our social housing green paper seeks to ensure it can both support social mobility and be a stable base that supports people when they need it”.

The Commission also recommend that existing social housing stock that has been sold-off is replaced, in a bid to increase the sustainability of Right-to-Buy schemes.

The Report proposes that a new consumer regulator is established ‘to protect renters and ensure their voices are heard’. This regulator would set and enforce more specific minimum standards for RPs on the safety and quality of homes.

Reforms would also help to reduce the barriers to complaining, such as the ‘serious detriment’ test which sets the standard for when the current Regulator of Social Housing (which focuses on economic matters) should intervene in a dispute between landlord and tenant.

Elsewhere, the Commission proposes that tenants have more authority on the day-to-day running of their housing, for example by giving residents a voice when it comes to renovations.

Proposals to substantively change laws include the removal of Section 106 exemptions on certain new developments and conversions, and reform of the Land Compensation Act 1961 Section 14 and 17 to prevent prospective planning permission artificially inflating the cost of land which has been designated for housing.

Impacts

The Government currently spends £21bn annually on housing benefit. The Report states savings to this bill could be achieved by getting more people into social housing paying lower rents. This is supported by analysis done by Capital Economics which predicts that two-thirds of the cost of supplying the extra housing called for in the Report could be offset by the savings from housing benefit and an increase in tax revenue.

The Report claims that the construction industry could be given a boost by the influx of building, and the associated tax receipts that the new houses would generate would help the economy more generally.

The economic boost of building is cited as a way to pay for the cost of the increase by some, however, the report recommends a rise in the rate of building higher than that seen in the two decades following the end of the second world war. As idealistic as this is, this surely raises questions as to whether the industry could be prepared for such an increase; with reports from house builders citing a range of factors that constrain the market at present, such as a lack of materials and skilled labour.

In summary, despite these specific proposed changes, the Report aims to go deeper regarding the perception of social housing itself. The report highlights similar themes touched upon in the Government’s Social Housing Green Paper which stated that societal changes in attitude are needed if the industry is to provide for the future. Commissioner and campaigner Doreen Lawrence spoke in the report about how people in power do not “understand what this experience [being a social tenant] is like’, adding that ‘the case for investing in social housing is overwhelming’.

Good practice on how residents and landlords work together to keep their home and building safe

| |by

The Social Housing Green Paper published last year included a specific question around how residents can be supported by their landlords to ensure their homes are safe.

A Call for Evidence – available here –  has been issued to understand what safety issues are most important, the extent to which current engagement works and what good practice exists that can be learnt from.

The Call for Evidence asks for views from residents and those managing multi-occupancy residential buildings on how residents are currently supported to keep their homes safe.

Government has also published its implementation plan for changes to the regulatory framework around building safety in response to the recommendations in the Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety.  The implementation plan – available here – summarises the work that has already been undertaken to make existing buildings safe and to kick-start system reform.

The starting point for reform is to consider the best practice that currently exists and also, what barriers exist.

We know that there is a lot of good practice which demonstrates how residents and landlords are working together to keep their homes and buildings safe.  The NHC is intending to submit evidence to the inquiry on supporting residents to report building safety issues and we need your help with our evidence gathering. For example,

  • Do you have any examples of good practice on engagement with residents and provision of information relating to responsibilities around fire or structural safety you would like to share?
  • Have you ever been refused entry to an occupant’s property where you have had a structural or fire safety concern – if so, what did you do next?
  • How effective do you think existing mechanisms are in enabling you to gain access to an occupant’s property when you have a concern about safety?

Anyone with an interest in this issue is welcome to submit their views.   If you would like to submit evidence of good practice or discuss any of the issues raised by this Call for Evidence please contact:  Karen Brown karen.brown@northern-consortium.org.uk by 5th February.

Many thanks for your assistance in this matter.