Presentation by the Head of Housing and Housing Strategy Officer

The scrutiny committee received a presentation by the Head of Housing and Housing Strategy Officer on the council’s current homelessness and rough sleeping strategy.  Copies of the presentation had been circulated to members in advance of the meeting.

During discussions, members raised a number of issues and clarifications were provided by officers:

•           Members applauded the exemplary work being undertaken in Watford to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping.  The success of the multi-agency, multi-disciplinary team approach provided a best practice model that should be shared with other authorities across Hertfordshire.

•           Funding for the council’s rough sleeping programme came from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) and Hertfordshire County Council (HCC).  The cost of providing someone with a room and access to a complex needs support worker was approximately £400 per week.  Funding was due to end in March 2022 and officers were working now to secure continuity for the programme.

•           The number of families, including children, in temporary accommodation had been significantly reduced.  In November 2016, 233 families including 391 children had required accommodation.  Following extensive prevention and other intervention work by officers, this had been reduced to the current 95 families including 99 children and had resulted in a considerable cost saving to the council.

•           There was a distinction between non-engagers and those who relapsed and went back through the Pathway.  People needed to share information e.g., about benefits they were receiving and their immigration status, in order to receive assistance.  There were limits to what could be achieved where people refused to engage.

•           Immigration status proved an area of intensive and time-consuming work but was necessary, particularly for individuals with no recourse to public funds.  The New Hope charity currently funded seven people falling into this category. 

•           A small number of people had reverted back to the streets following the “Everyone In” campaign, however the vast majority remained in their accommodation.  This represented a significant success story for the council.  A small number struggled with issues such as substance abuse and mental health concerns which prevented them from engaging and put them back onto the streets.

•           Contrary to the approach taken by other authorities, Watford Borough Council had decided to minimise the time rough sleepers spent in hotels during lockdown, seeking instead to tackle the issues which kept them on the streets.  Availability of funding and the renewed incentive to tackle homelessness had enabled the council to reduce the number of rough sleepers from 80+ (in March 2020) to three individuals today.

•           Those discharged from hospital were able to go through the Single Homeless Pathway via The Sanctuary to ensure they were not on the streets. The same route was available to those leaving prison.

•           The council should be proud of what had been achieved over the past four to five years. Previously the council had been criticised for housing people in temporary accommodation outside the borough.  This was now no longer the case, unless they needed to be outside the borough for their own protection.  In addition, families and single people were not mixed.

•           A major piece of work was being undertaken to ensure that the Single Homeless Pathway was not blocked to new entrants.  One of the issues preventing this was the lack of affordable housing, particularly social rented, and the difficulties of accessing the private rental sector.  Private landlords wanted certainty of payment and there was potential for longer term arrangements to be put in place in the future.  Landlords would need to be incentivised to bridge the gap between market rates and housing benefit levels.

•           Void periods in temporary accommodation were very short, usually in larger properties.  It was important to be slick about changing over families, although the council was not always able to control the extenuating circumstances of tenants to expedite this.

•           Further figures were requested on the number of tenants who stayed within the Homelet scheme properties.

•           Housing benefit levels were set and were insufficient for the local housing market.  Capped benefits particularly impacted households with two children.  This was a particular concern in Watford.  Social rented properties provided the best solution in the town and work was on-going with Watford Community Housing to increase capacity.

•           The local connection period to be placed on the housing register in Watford was five years.  This would be reassessed during the forthcoming Nominations Policy review.  Longer term affordability of accommodation for residents was key.

•           Work had been undertaken to understand what was “affordable” in Watford based on average local salaries and benefit levels.  This information was shared with developers as part of negotiations.  The planning system was a crucial to providing a solution to housing shortages. 

•           Credit should be paid to the council’s successful partnership working with OneYMCA, New Hope, Grow and Emerging Futures.

•           Right to buy had had minimal impact in Watford.  Right to acquire was more relevant but less generous providing a discount of £16,000 on properties.  In a high cost area such as Watford this did not make a significant impact on the overall costs of buying.

•           A significant proportion of people seeking accommodation tended to be families, particularly female-led households.  An increase in single homelessness had also been seen within the town.  The current housing stock presented difficulties for those with mobility issues and for those seeking larger properties.

•           Councillors were frustrated by the planning system where developers were making a 20% profit on schemes, but stated that they would be unable to provide social housing. 

•           Pressure should be put on government to resolve the lack of parity between housing benefit and market rents locally.  This was a problem played out across the south east.

The Chair thanked the officers for their thorough presentation and commended them for their work in this crucial area.

RESOLVED –

that Overview and Scrutiny Committee notes the update on the council’s homelessness strategy.

Action: Head of Housing and Housing Strategy Officer