Agenda item

Report of the Executive Director which provides an update on the work of the strategic housing service and an overview of the current key issues.

Members received a report from the Executive Director which provided an update on the work of the strategic housing service and an overview of the current key issues.

Members were advised that the Housing and Homelessness Strategy, which was published in 2013, had an action plan which was monitored on a quarterly basis.

The report identified the key priorities of the Housing and Homelessness Strategy and an update on each area.

Within the report were details of the number of Houses of Multiple Occupation which were compliant.  It was thought that the total of HMOs was approximately 2400 and of these 1000 had been risk rated and were compliant at the time of the inspection.

It was noted that legislation was likely to change whereby two-storey houses with 5+ occupiers would be included in the mandatory licensing scheme.  It was thought that if this was introduced most houses of multiple occupation locally would need to be licensed.

Members noted that Welwyn Hatfield had almost the lowest number of homeless families in the county in temporary accommodation and were working towards the Gold Standard in this area of work.

Members asked how many homes were classed as long term empty.  They were advised that the survey had found approximately 190 empty homes but that there were only perhaps 20 that could be considered long-term.

Members asked if rough sleeping was a problem locally.  Officers advised that the numbers of rough sleepers were increasing across the borough.  There was a protocol in place to deal with this issue.  Once identified, a rough sleeper would be visited within 24 hours so that they could be given support and advice. 

A lot of work was being undertaken with partners in order to tackle the problem and a funding bid will be submitted in partnership with other councils for money to support rough sleepers where required, although it was acknowledged that  the decision to sleep rough was entrenched in some people.

Members commented that this report and the earlier report on welfare reform, plus a lack of flats for young people and cuts in support for mental health and changes to housing benefit painted a bleak picture.  It was hoped that there would be budget made available for the additional duties required of the team.

The report detailed some of the work that was being done on buy back/rehousing.  It was noted that properties could be purchased at a discount with an agreement to rehouse the owner/occupier.  A survey into this option had received a favourable response.  Members were advised though that this area of work had not been started yet and further research was required in order to determine the level of discount, other options available, the needs of the community and details of the properties that might be included in the scheme.

Members asked whether properties that might be bought by the Council could become eligible as Right To Buy.  Officers agreed that they could.  However, the Council would be protected from making a loss on the property in the first 15 years due to the “cost floor”.  This was a system of making sure that RTB discount could not be claimed which would mean that the authority would lose money.

Members asked whether, when tenants were offered a home, financial checks were made as the report seemed to suggest that this was not the case.  However, it was noted that checks were undertaken, but that the results of these could become out of date very quickly as circumstances changed, hence the need to obtain information from tenants and benefits recipients in respect of Pay to Stay.