Agenda item

The report of the Head of Housing

The Head of Housing presented the report, with assistance from the Housing Management Team Manager and the Housing Strategy and Systems Team Manager.

A discussion was had about the changes to the Anti-Social Behaviour Policy. Members asked about how hate crimes were tracked, whether they were distinguished from anti-social behaviour, whether there was a specific hate crime officer, and how performance in this area was benchmarked.

Officers advised that there was no specific hate crime officer and accepted that work needed to be undertaken to prevent underreporting, although they did note that resources were stretched in this area. They also set out the range of benchmarking which was undertaken, and added that ONS data did not suggest that the data presented was an outlier for comparable, not overly diverse districts, with regards to the prevalence of hate crimes.

Members then discussed the Repairs and Decants policies. They asked for clarification on the proposed administration fee and where it had been derived from, and how debts were recovered in the context of the national ‘cost-of-living’ crisis.

Officers advised that the envisaged update to the fees and charges schedule aimed to make the policy as equitable as possible, this necessarily involved striking a balance between different types of tenants and also must include consideration of budgetary exigencies. The policy was written to fit most cases, with the expectation that exceptional issues could be subject to the complaints process and would be seen to by the Head of Service. With regards to debts, officers tried to be reasonable and were aware that using external agencies to chase debts risked being overly punitive.

With regards to Decants policy, Members asked for greater clarity, asked whether there was any possibility of ward Member involvement in the process, and what legal options were available to Officers in extreme cases. Officers advised that the Decant strategy depended on the time necessary for relocation. Officers tried hard to move tenant to preferred location, but this was dependent on what was available. The reason for decanting, especially when related to safety, played a part in where they moved. When people wanted to downsize permanently this could be facilitated through the allocations policy. The Team tried to work consensually with tenants but in extreme circumstances an injunction could be applied for to ensure work was carried out.

After this discussion Members were of the opinion that the aspect of the Decant policy pertaining to permanent and voluntary downsizing could be made clearer, and Officers concurred.

A discussion was then had about the Compensation Policy. The Chair was concerned that in some circumstances tenants were unaware that they could claim compensation. The Head of Housing advised that discussions around compensation should commence as soon as things began to go wrong. The new proposal that compensation be proactively paid without being requested, in certain circumstances, came directly from the Ombudsman’s recommendations.

Members asked about communication with tenants more generally. Officers advised that the Repairs handbook was produced in close conjunction with tenants, the Tenants handbook less so, but both documents were anyhow scheduled for review. There was also a quarterly newsletter.

A discussion was had about adding a recommendation with regards to the issue of recording hate crimes.

It was moved by Councillor A Morley, seconded by Councillor S Lambeth, and 

RECOMMENDED THAT:

Cabinet consider the following wording to be added to the Anti-Social Behaviour Policy: NWLDC will ensure it has a mechanism in place to identify hate crimes as a specific category, and that it will respond, advise and signpost those identified accordingly.

The Chair thanked Members for their comments, which would be presented to the Cabinet on 23 April.