Agenda item

Committee received evidence from Fiona Mogre and Serdar Celebi of the Islington Law Centre highlighting a number of cases to demonstrate the severity of overcrowding which the Centre supports. The following points were raised:

·       Islington Law Centre provides a range of advice and assistance to Islington residents regarding their housing needs and runs two outreach projects in partnership with Islington Council to provide accessible housing advice to residents.

·       A significant number of enquiries relate to residents seeking to be moved to more appropriate accommodation due to overcrowding.

·       Islington Council uses a choice based letting scheme, with points awarded to residents based upon their circumstances which is in line with the Council’s Housing Allocation Scheme.

·       Most Islington residents do not meet the average threshold of points to successfully bid for a larger property and experience shows that residents living in severally overcrowded conditions are highly unlikely to successfully bid for size appropriate accommodation

·       Allocation schemes are required under the Housing Act 1996 to be framed to secure that reasonable preference is given to overcrowded households.

·       Members were advised that households that experience opposite sex type of overcrowding only acquire 10points.

·       Evidence shows that overcrowding alone is unlikely to result in the tenant having sufficient points to be able to bid for and move to larger accommodation.

·       At present Council literature states that to bid for 2 bedroom a tenant will require 226 points, 252 points for a 3 bedroom and 289 points for a 4 bedroom.

·       In the 2 typical overcrowding cases shared with Committee, it was noted the difficulty for tenants bidding for a suitably sized property, given that more points were required, for instance in the case of a secure tenant living with his wife and 3 children in a 1 bedroom property with 190 points, they would require 252 points.

·       Meeting was advised that additional points would be required to improve the chances of bidding by tenants like medical problem, a welfare/social issue/a disrepair /decant issues, harassment/ASB from a neighbour.

·       In most cases handled by the Law centre, tenants rarely have additional issues that will attract additional points besides overcrowding concerns, so little prospect of them moving on to bigger and suitable accommodation.

·       It was noted that lack of available larger properties especially 4 plus bedrooms remains a big issue, that there is a recognition the need for more joined up working between Housing Options, Social services and the Disrepair team. Members were advised that even if medical and welfare points are awarded, larger households with disabled members seeking to move to more size appropriate accommodation it is virtually impossible to obtain rehousing through the Housing Allocation Scheme.

·       The availability of larger properties is very much limited and highly sought after leaving families stuck in unsuitable and severally overcrowded conditions indefinitely.

·       Condensation in severally overcrowded accommodation is common, however recognised with an award of welfare points only after the Centre intervenes on behalf of their clients as most times when tenants complain about condensation they are sometimes wrongly informed that this is not something for which rehousing points could be awarded but a disrepair issue.

Committee received a presentation from Godwin Omogbehin, Islington’s Environmental Health Manager on overcrowding enforcement in the private rented sector and the following points were highlighted such as:

•       Relatively few households are assessed as statutorily overcrowded as the legislation in existence does not meet the criteria for overcrowding as standards are very low and prescriptive, outdated and does not reflect modern day standards, that space and room standards are not used by Residential Teams to enforce overcrowding.

•       Local Authority’s regulatory teams have been advised to use their powers under Part 1 of the Housing Act 2004 and follow the Enforcement Guidance rather than Part 10 of Housing Act 1985.

•       Meeting was advised of local authority’s need to consider meeting its statutory duties versus it’s duty to rehouse occupiers, an understanding of homelessness implications and compensation, clarifying enforcement options under Housing Act via the Most Appropriate Course of Action (MACA)

•       Manager advised that due to lack of housing stock, it is difficult to serve notices as reasons would need to be provided.

•       The Manager reiterated the powers available under Part 1 Housing Act 2004 and notices served include issuing landlords Hazard Awareness Notice, Improvement Notice, Prohibition Orders, Suspension of Prohibition Order’s which is most commonly used power for crowding and space hazard), Emergency Action.

•       Meeting was advised that although HHSRS can be used, there are more specific regulations under HMO Licence conditionswhich limits occupation levels, the HMO standards which regulatesHMO space standards

•       In addition to the above, specific powers exist for overcrowding in non-licensable HMO’s, that notices can be issued where a non –licensable HMO is likely to be overcrowded and that maximum levels of occupancy can be set for overcrowding and authorities can impose a civil penalty as an alternative to prosecution for offences (in both dwellings and HMO’s):

•       In instances where there is failure to comply with HMO licence conditions (over occupation for example), offences can attract an unlimited fine or penalty of up to £30k

•       Meeting was informed that 5 x overcrowding notices (non-licensable HMO’s), 5x PO’s for overcrowding in SFO’s,2x Hazard Awareness Notices in SFO’s have been issued and in terms Selective Licensing Schemes (SFO’s),952 applications were received while 2647 applications have been received for HMO Licensing.

•       Meeting was advised that the serving of a SPO will not entitle the tenants to any additional points under the council’s system and is not likely to speed up any re-housing claim.

•       The Housing Department assess applications according to their housing allocation policy.

•       On the issue of extending the Licensing scheme beyond the Finsbury ward into other wards, meeting was advised that although public consultation closed in March 2022, the second phase which is the designation stage is yet to be finalised.

•       On whether the Council’s Planning Department has powers in addressing the increasing demand for 3/4/5 bedroom, meeting was advised that this is being handled via the Council’s new build programme. In addition to above Council officers continue to liaise with GLA to access funds to purchase 3 and 4 bedroom dwellings.

•       On what role, the planning department plays in terms of addressing overcrowding in the borough, Committee requested an invitation be extended to an officer in the department to give evidence to committee.

•       With regards to the Council’s Allocation Scheme, meeting was advised that the item will be scheduled for members input at the November meeting.

•       Concerns that tinkering with the Allocation scheme will not address the overcrowding but that the main issue lies with the lack of suitable type of housing, that the Council should be looking at other solutions was noted

•       In response to a suggestion by a member, that issues of overcrowding should be considered in parallel with residents that want to downsize, the Director informed the meeting that in the last 12 months over 200 households have downsized, noting its success. Issues around downsizing will be considered at a future meeting.

•       On the suggestion of finding suitable accommodation for overcrowded households outside the borough, meeting was advised that most are secure tenants and have the right to remain due to family ties, schools and medical reasons, that the refreshing of the Allocation Scheme aims to address this issue.

•       In response to a question raised by the Community Plan for Holloway, the Director advised that in terms of the local letting scheme for the Holloway site, organisations will be involved reminding the meeting of Councillor Ward’s commitment.

•       With regards the type of housing being built, the Director acknowledged that the Council builds the right type of housing noting that Islington is a dense urban area with limited land that makes it difficult. In addition, issues of the funding mechanism from central government worsens the housing crisis. Meeting was advised that Islington Council like other authorities are awaiting an autumn announcement which may address the funding gap.

•       The suggestion that Council should not be averse to building more tower blocks instead of its preference of demolishing estates and building on such sites single dwellings, town houses and apartments was noted.

•       Meeting was advised that Islington’s initiative in addressing the issue of under occupiers was a lot successful in comparison to the neighbouring authority of Hackney.

•       In summary, Islington’s Director of Housing Needs acknowledged that the housing crisis is not unique to Islington but a national issue and factors such as lack of funding from both central and local government over many years have worsened the housing crisis.

•       The Chair thanked Fiona Mogre and Serdar Celebi of Islington Law Centre for their contribution and the presentation from the Godwin Omogbehin, Environmental Health Manager.

RESOLVED:

·       That update and the presentation be noted

·       That Committee receive an officer report regarding the Housing Allocation Scheme at the December meeting.