The Panel will receive a presentation from Denise Gandy, Executive Director of Housing Demand, Homes for Haringey, and Alan Benson, Head of Housing Strategy and Commissioning, Haringey Council.
Minutes:
The Panel received a presentation from Alan Benson, Head of Housing Strategy and Commissioning, Haringey Council, and Denise Gandy, Executive Director of Housing Demand, Homes for Haringey.
Ms Gandy commenced the presentation by explaining the Homelessness Reduction Act received Royal Assent in April 2017 and that it would be implemented in April 2018. The following points were noted:
- It was the first major change to homeless legislation in 15 years and the most significant in 40 years.
- Rather than replacing existing legislation, the Act created additional duties, relating to prevention (prevent more people from becoming homeless in the first place by identifying people at risk and intervening earlier) and relief (intervene rapidly if a homelessness crisis occurs, so it is brief and non-recurrent).
In response to questions, the Panel was informed that if prevention and relief activity failed then the usual tests (priority need and intentional homelessness) would be applied to ascertain if the person was owed the full homelessness duty.
In terms of the duty to provide advisory services, Ms Gandy explained that this required free homelessness advice and information services to be provided to all residents and for advice to be designed with certain vulnerable groups in mind, including care leavers, former armed forces, people leaving custody, victims of domestic abuse, people leaving hospital and people with mental health issues. The Panel noted that the advice must include:
- Prevention on homelessness
- Securing accommodation when homeless
- The rights of applicants and local authority duties
- Help available to people threatened with homelessness
- How to access available help
In response to questions, Ms Gandy explained the legislation would extend the period during which someone might be threatened with homelessness from 28 days to 56 days. In addition, it was noted an applicant would be threatened with homelessness if they had been served a valid section 21 notice to end the Assured Shorthold Tenancy of their only available accommodation, that had expired or would expire within 56 days.
In terms of assessments and personalised housing plans, the Panel was informed that:
- Local authorities needed to carry out an assessment of circumstances and needs of all eligible applicants within 56 days.
- The assessment should include circumstances leading to the threat of homelessness, housing needs and support needs.
- Following the assessment, a Personalised Housing Plan would be drawn up to set out the “reasonable steps” the authority and the applicant would take (and other agencies/people as appropriate).
The Panel was informed that “reasonable steps” should be tailored to the individual and that the plan should be realistic. In response to questions about prevention and relief the Panel was informed that:
- Prevention Duty
o Local housing authorities (LHAs) must take reasonable steps to prevent homelessness for any at risk eligible applicant, regardless of priority need. It was noted that this could involve assisting applicants to stay in their current accommodation, or helping them to find a new place to live.
- Relief Duty
o LHAs must take reasonable steps to help the applicant secure suitable accommodation. Help could be, for example, providing a bond guarantee, funding a rent deposit or working with a private landlord to make properties available.
Ms Gandy advised LHAs could not refer the prevention duty to another LHA. However, it was noted that the relief duty could be referred if the applicant had no local connection and had a connection to another LHA area. The Panel was informed that a local authority may end the prevention and relief duty, if:
- The applicant had suitable accommodation for at least 6 months
- After 56 days (except where a valid s21). It was also noted that the relief duty must end after 56 days for an applicant who had priority need and was not intentionally homeless.
- The applicant had refused a suitable offer
- The applicant had deliberately and unreasonably refused to cooperate
- The applicant ceased to be eligible
- The application was withdrawn
- The applicant was intentionally homeless from accommodation provided
In response to questions about duties owed to applicants who deliberately refused to cooperate, Ms Gandy advised that local authorities needed to make every effort to engage applicants through a personalised plan. In addition, it was explained that a warning notice must be served if an applicant continued to refuse to cooperate.
Ms Gandy concluded her presentation by providing information on other aspects of the Act and the Code. This included information on the duty to refer and local connection in relation to care leavers. The Panel was informed that in addition to having a local connection to the local authority who looked after them, a care leaver would also have a local connection with an area if they had lived there for 2 years, including time before their 16th birthday. In terms of the Code, it was noted guidance on out of area placements shouldn’t limit the search to a specific area if accommodation wasn’t affordable. In addition, it was noted households would retain local connection for 5, rather than 2, if placed into private rented accommodation outside the borough.
The Panel went on to consider the implications and Haringey’s response to the legislation. The following points were highlighted by Mr Benson:
- Implications for Haringey:
o The number of homeless applications was likely to increase significantly. It was noted that “sector” estimates suggested a 50% - 300% increase in applications across London.
o The new approach would be administratively burdensome and there were significant budget implications for: additional staffing resource; the procurement of a new IT solution; additional storage responsibilities; increases in requests for review and legal challenges. However, it was noted that the Act was meant to be “cost neutral” after 2 years.
o Further welfare reforms, including the full rollout of Universal Credit in October 2018, likely to exacerbate difficulties associated with homelessness and securing housing options.
- Haringey’s Response
o It was noted a Task and Finish Group had been set up and that a new staffing structure was in place.
o The development of a new Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy
o The use of the Flexible Homelessness Support Grant to enhance the local service offer
o The work that was taking place on a new Housing Related Support Commissioning Plan
o The work that was taking place to review the implications of other policies. For example, it was noted that the Housing Allocations Policy would need to change to reflect new “reasonable preferences”.
o Modelling work that was taking place on the possible impacts of homelessness demand and TA usage across the Council and wider public sector, including mental health services.
o The development of a communication and partner engagement plan in order to raise awareness and manage expectations.
Following the officer presentation a variety of areas were discussed, including:
- Issues in relation to rough sleeping, including on Stroud Green Road especially under the bridge at Finsbury Park.
- Objectives and procedures in relation to the Severe Weather Emergency Protocol.
- Concerns about the level of resource that would be required to deliver services under the Act.
- The importance of support provided by street outreach and homelessness advocacy services.
- The role of customer services
In addition, a number of issues were considered in relation to the processes and procedures that were in place concerning the use of the capital budget to purchase existing properties. It was noted that this included the use of retained Right to Buy receipts, which had previously been returned to Government.
AGREED:
1. That the update on the Homelessness Reduction Act be noted.
2. That the Head of Housing Strategy and Commissioning be asked to provide further information to the Panel, via email, on the Severe Weather Emergency Protocol.
3. That the Head of Housing Strategy and Commissioning be asked to provide further information to the Panel, via email, on the processes and procedures in place concerning the use of the capital budget to purchase existing properties.