Agenda item

To consider an update on homelessness within the Borough, including ongoing measures to support individuals.

The Committee considered a report, set out in agenda pages 13 to 32, which gave an update on homelessness within the Borough and ongoing measures to support individuals.

The report outlined that reduction of homelessness remained a key priority for the Council, and homelessness levels had fluctuated over the past few years. The main reasons for homelessness continued to be the end od assured shorthold tenancies via section 21 notices, family and relationship breakdowns, with an increase in domestic abuse related cases. A number of achievements had been realised to date, including the adoption and delivery of the Council’s Rough Sleeping Strategy and new allocations policy, whilst it was planned to maximise funding opportunities via the Government’s Rough Sleeping Strategy and Homes England grant programmes.

Stephen Conway (Executive Member for Housing) and Zulfiqar Mulak (Interim Assistant Director Housing) attended the meeting to answer member queries.

During the ensuing discussions, members raised the following points and queries:

·         It was noted that additional refugees, including from Ukraine, was a situation to continue observing going forwards;

·         It was noted that there was fluctuating demand for homelessness service requests between quarters;

·         What were the key issues driving service demand? Office response – Private landlord evictions were on the increase, whilst domestic abuse and family and friends no longer willing to accommodate were also on the increase. Covid-19 had created the ‘perfect storm’ which had forced families together, whilst also creating tension within some households;

·         It was noted that officers were always searching for alternate and innovative solutions to deal with increased levels of service demand;

·         Was the target of 5 individuals living on the street a monthly, annual, or different timeframe target? Officer response – At any one time, the target was to have no more than 5 individuals on the street in the Borough. There were currently a couple of individuals who had been offered accommodation multiple times, with staff visiting them regularly each evening. In instances like these, individuals were choosing to remain on the street out of choice;

·         Who could members and the public contact to try and get support for individuals living on the street? Officer response – There was an out of office service, whilst the service could be contacted directly during office hours;

·         What local connection was required to be demonstrated for people to use the Borough’s homelessness service? Officer response – There was a 5-year local connection requirement for the housing register, with a 3-year statutory local connection for homelessness. It was confirmed that individuals would retain access to their GP whilst using the service;

·         Were homelessness service requests due to mortgage repossessions, currently at 0, a historic low? Officer response – Yes this was a historically low figure, and as these numbers were expected to increase officers were looking for solutions to help individuals and families in the future;

·         It was noted that many families required 2-3 bedroom or 4-5 bedroom properties, which were difficult to offer. Properties had to be suitable for the individuals and families concerned;

·         Was the family that had been in temporary accommodation since 2017 an exception rather than a norm? Officer response – Absolutely, this particular family had very specific needs that to date could not be addressed via a permanent housing placement;

·         What solutions were there to addressing homelessness within the Borough? Executive Member and Officer response – Solutions included providing more social housing within the Borough and creating initiatives within the private rented sector to try and agree rents which were closer to the social housing sector than the open market;

·         It was requested that data (a graph) be provided showing valid homelessness service requests within the Borough;

·         It was requested that the data be provided with the long-standing family who had been in temporary accommodation being omitted, to see how many weeks on average a family was placed in temporary accommodation with that exception;

·         What plans were in place to reduce homelessness numbers within the Borough? Officer response – The key was to prevent people becoming homeless I the first instance. Conversations were underway with the private rented sector to find alternative accommodation, whilst officers could also explore out of Borough placements;

·         What were the common circumstances where family were no longer willing to accommodate? Officer response – Typically this was where parents would have a child, potentially a partner of the child and grandchildren living with them. It may get to the stage where parents felt that they could no longer accommodate. Mediation services were offered with a relatively good level of success;

·         Was grant funding for the service fixed or demand driven? Executive Member and officer response - This was the first of a three-year settlement, which helped the service plan better. Funding had enabled the service to take on ambitious highly skilled staff;

·         Were there processes in place for Ukrainian refugees hosts to contact the Council if they were no longer able to be sponsors? Executive Member and Officer response – There was a lot of support in place in this area, and officers spoke to hosts regularly to identify any emerging issues. There was a dedicated hotline available to discuss any issues, and the Borough was in a fortunate position where it had additional hosts ready to accept guests. Longer term solutions were also being looked into;

·         Did the hostel for asylum seekers in Earley create demand on the Borough’s homelessness service? Officer response – This was the responsibility of the home office, and as such there was no demand on the placed-on Wokingham Borough Council (WBC);

·         Was the workload of 50 cases per officer a reasonable workload? Officer response – There were staff stresses within the service, and work was being done to look at some distribution of workload. There was some ongoing recruitment to ease pressure, and a caseload of 30 per officer was the target;

·         Were people who could not demonstrate a local connection signposted to the correct Local Authority? Officer response – Yes, all requests that were not the responsibility of WBC were directed to the correct Borough;

·         Were properties reviewed to ensure accommodation was kept to a proper standard? Officer response – A health and safety document was required to be completed for each property;

·         Were physical inspections carried out, as there was a recent example of a family being sent to temporary accommodation in Slough where the property had cockroaches, whilst the property had the correct certificates? Officer response – Every person had a named caseworker who could be contacted for any issues. Where problems did occur, inspections were organised and if issues were not resolved the accommodation and landlord would not be used again;

·         It was noted that proactive conversations and relationship building was key with landlords who provided emergency and temporary accommodation;

·         It was requested that the number of failures of landlords be recorded over a period of time;

·         Were communications planned for existing residents, such as at Grovelands, to help facilitate integration into that community? Executive Member and officer response - Absolutely, a community welcome event was planned and regular communication was in place with residents. A lot of work had gone into addressing the legitimate concerns of existing residents. The standard of accommodation being provided at Grovelands was really high, and it was a very impressive scheme.

RESOLVED That:

1)      Stephen Conway and Zulfiqar Mulak be thanked for attending the meeting;

2)      The data and trends for valid homelessness requests be circulated to the Committee;

3)      The data for the average time a family or individual spent in temporary accommodation, excluding major outliers, be circulated to the Committee;

4)      Data be recorded to see how many landlords were failing to provide adequate facilities.