Agenda item

The Homes Sub-Committee is asked to:

1.    Note the draft Housing Strategy 2023-2028.

2.    Consider whether there are any comments it wishes to make on the Housing Strategy, which can be taken into account by the Executive during the preparation for submission to Council for adoption.

The Sub-Committee considered a report set out on pages 21 to 40 of the agenda which provided with a draft version of the updated Housing Strategy which covering the 2023-28 period.

Councillor Hale introduced the item. The draft version of the Housing strategy provided a foundation for the development of the forthcoming strategies, including Asset Management Strategy, Resident Engagement Strategy and Homelessness Prevention, and Rough Sleeping Strategy.

The first question considered the conducted consultation – what the impact of it would be and its main conclusions were. It assured that the report from the consultation would be shared with the Sub-Committee members. It was added that one of the largest comebacks from the consultation was around the issue of respect for residents.

The next question considered the previous Housing Strategy and how the previous strategy related to the new one. It was explained that for a long time the Council did not have a housing strategy, and the previous one was from ten years ago. Taking into consideration this long period of time, the previous strategy was not relevant from the perspective of the new strategy. It was added that to develop the strategy, the officers interviewed relevant officers and researched other boroughs. It was also highlighted that the Housing Strategy would be a live document.

The subsequent question considered the data gathering, particularly where and how the data was gathered and then how it was analysed to make the informed decisions. It was explained that census and Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) were two main sources of data. It was acknowledged that data gathering in Croydon had been poor and this issue would need to be addressed in the near future. Then it was explained that this was not included as a priority in the strategy as it was in-ward facing. However, it was assured that data and informed decision-making were key priorities for the housing transformation.

The next question considered the hierarchy between the priorities. It was suggested that potentially the first priority could be an overarching one. It was responded that the priorities were not numbered based on their hierarchy or importance. It was acknowledged that potentially the first priority could have an overarching function.

The next question asked about the potential expansion of the Decent Homes Standard to the private sector and how the licencing scheme would feed into it. It was explained that the strategy ensured that the Council would be able to respond to either of them. If the licensing scheme was introduced, then it would be up to the borough to determine the details. It was mentioned that the licencing scheme could also have a negative effect on the Borough, for instance the supply of rentable accommodations could decrease. Also, if the licencing scheme was introduced, it would most likely not be a borough-wide scheme, instead it would be focused on particular areas.

Then a question was asked about the support for tenants who were living in unacceptable conditions. It was advised that there could be other measures outside of the licensing scheme, for instance additional fines. Then it was mentioned that other protection measures include a designated private sector team, also the capacity of this team would be expanded. It was important to ensure that the Council could use its powers against private landlords.

Another question considered what was done for the elderly residents. It was explained that Croydon had a very high percentage of residents over 65, therefore, it was of significant importance. This would need to be reflected in demand measures, e.g. sheltered accommodations that were in very poor conditions. The focus was predominantly on the accommodation and caring for vulnerable people.

The next question concerned domestic abuse victims and why they were not in a higher priority group for rehousing. It was added that the strategy did not specify the plans for the improvement of access to housing for domestic violence victims. An example of a Council that has a dedicated Housing service for domestic abuse victims was given. It was agreed that the domestic abuse part of the strategy could be strengthened. It was explained that Croydon had a different operating model with most of the domestic abuse services provided through the Family Justice team. It was added that the aspiration of the service would be to upscale and expand the knowledge of the relevant housing officers. It was also added that Croydon Council has been underreporting the figures to DLUHC, therefore, the reporting and data gathering across the services required improvement. This led to a concern about whether this underreporting could result in the insufficient funding for Croydon.

The next question related to collecting information and the report on affordable housing providers. It was explained that the Council was actively working on the supply of new homes. It was acknowledged that the strategy should focus more on improving the level of supply and demand information, and the Council’s approach to London Mayor’s target.

Another question concerned overcrowding issues and how it could be ensured that the system was fair and did not prioritise less overcrowded households. It was advised that there were two crucial areas to help with this issue. First, the housing supply and what kind of housing would be supplied in the borough. The other matter related to the housing allocation scheme, which was due to be reviewed. Then it was asked whether the right to extend would be available to Council’s tenants. It was explained that it would be one of the housing supply measures added to the strategy.

The next questioned considered whether there were any plans to improve the occupational health processes. It was explained that this area could be strengthened. It was also added that the team had been recently expanded.

A request we made for more information on the mental health scheme. It was explained that the Council had been trying to embed mental health into the service provision provided by Croydon Homes. In terms of homelessness, it was highlighted that many cases could have been prevented, if the mental health problems were addressed earlier. Therefore, it would be beneficial for the Council to have a more proactive approach to mental health.

The next question considered the potential use of the garages. It was explained that it was not included in the strategy. However, reviewing underused garages could be beneficial and this could be added to the strategy.

The next question considered the second priority and the Council’s plans to improve energy efficiency. It was also asked whether the Council was seeking any additional funding, such as from the Greater London Authority. It was acknowledged that this section could be expanded. It was added that the energy performance certificate level was particularly low for private sector.

It was noted that satisfaction survey seemed to indicate that antisocial behaviour was one of the main areas of concern. However, it did not seem to be reflected as a high priority in the strategy. It was explained that it was mentioned in the strategy and the Council was committed to tackle anti-social behaviour in both social and private housing sectors. It was highlighted that domestic CCTV devices seemed to be a rising problem and that residents could often be reluctant to report issues to the Council’s officers. It was responded that the Council would like to conduct a survey asking residents what the Council could do better to obtain more insight into the issue. Also, it was acknowledged that there should be closer cooperation with the Police. It was commented that often when the residents report anti-social behaviour incidents to the officers, no action was taken. It was reported that in many cases action was taken, however, the Council could improve its communication and increase visibility of its actions.

The next question asked about expanding the welfare advisory service in the Council. It was responded that there were three welfare advisors in the Council. The Council would like to better promote what support options were available. It was acknowledged that it was important to ensure that income officers also provide necessary support.

The next question was about evictions and what was done to ensure that tenants were not evicted based on arrears only. It was advised that the hardship fund was the main support. This fund was available for any resident who did not receive housing benefits or universal credit for housing. The Council reached out to many of those residents, as it was important to act as early as possible. The Council had also been using NEC system to identify where support was needed and each new tenant was approached by the income officer. A supplementary question about a policy for not evicting tenants was asked. It was explained that the Council did not have such a policy.

The next question asked about working with Education department on temporary accommodation and its impact on children’s access to education. It was explained that this was not considered in the strategy. However, this could be included in the strategy and in the co-produced delivery plan. 

The next question asked about the timeline for the development of the delivery plan. It was explained that the delivery plan should be an addendum to the strategy, and the strategy should be presented to the Cabinet in December.

Actions

1.       A request was made for a copy of the consultation report to be shared with the members of the Sub-Committee.

2.       A request was made for further information on the number of private landlords that have had a prosecution brought against them by the Council as a result of poor housing standards.

3.       A request was made for a summary of the escalation process used by the Council in the event of non-payment of rent by a tenant.

4.       A request was made for the number of prosecutions against the private landlords.

5.       As the delivery plan was still being developed, the Sub-Committee agreed that it would like be briefed on its content once available.

6.       A request was made for further information on the financial impact of the underreporting figures to DHLUC.

Conclusions

1.       The Sub-Committee commended the amount of work that had been invested in the creation of the new Housing Strategy and welcomed the co-production approach used.

Recommendations

1.       The Homes Sub-Committee recommends that Housing Strategy includes details of how the Council will improve the availability of priority housing for domestic abuse victims and residents from other vulnerable backgrounds. Staff should be trained to detect and tackle abuse-related issues.

2.       The Homes Sub-Committee recommends that the following areas should be explored for inclusion in the Housing Strategy and accompanying delivery plan: (i) a simplified downsizing process; (ii) how to utilise underused garages; (iii) green energy grants; (iv) tackling licencing problems with houses in multiple occupations; (v) overcrowding; (vi) cooperation with Education division to ensure that children placed in temporary accommodations are not excluded from education.

3.       The Homes Sub-Committee recommends that the Housing Strategy should include more detail on the following areas: (i) energy efficiency; (ii) actions to tackle antisocial behaviour, (iii) mental health.

4.       The Homes Sub-Committee recommends that, given the shortage of available housing in the borough, the Housing Strategy needs to provide strategic direction on how the supply of available housing in the Borough will be increased, and supported by a delivery plan providing tangible outcomes.

5.       The Homes Sub-Committee recommends that the Residents’ Complaint Process is reviewed to ensure it provides efficient resolutions to resident complaints.

6.       The Homes Sub-Committee recommends that the delivery plan being developed to accompany the Housing Strategy must include clear time lines for delivery and SMART objectives, outline any interdependencies and indicate the key risks to deliver and how they will be mitigated.