Written evidence submitted by Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council [EXA 035]

Ref: Exempt Accommodation Inquiry

Thank you for the opportunity to take part in this inquiry. 

We believe that the following should be considered:

  1. The funding model needs to be revised as it is based on old regulations that are not fit for purpose. As a local authority, we can lose significant amounts of housing benefit subsidy on exempt accommodation that has high rent levels. We believe that tenants should not be charged for support costs. Unreasonable rents which we are unable to negotiate set a precedent for other tenancies and this is more so now as landlords are entering into agreements with companies that are buying the properties and then leasing them at a very high cost. The lease costs are then the majority of the rental costs and passed onto the tenant. The landlords are in some cases registered providers and in other cases private companies

 

  1. We support the need for a government national accreditation requirement – we would support the setting up of a national accreditation scheme which is robust. If a provider has achieved Registered Provider status the Regulator should be able to take action where there is poor quality provision or unreasonably high rents. In practice, we realise that an investigation can be a lengthy process and action cannot always be taken, but we are aware of some RPs that lease properties from private operators and then pass on the cost to tenants in the form of high rents. We would welcome a review of enforcement powers in this respect to ensure that RPs can be challenged more effectively when provision is poor quality and/or rents are unreasonably high.

 

  1. Local authorities should have greater tools/powers. At the moment, investigations in to the support that tenants actually receive in exempt accommodation can be lengthy and difficult to undertake as tenants can be afraid to speak directly to the local authority.

 

  1. We would support the alignment of existing planning and HMO licensing powers – in Sandwell we have good connectivity between our Housing Benefit and Housing Standards Teams and could therefore pick up if exempt accommodation is an HMO and needs to be licenced. We would like to see the NPPF revised to give greater clarity around the factors that should be taken in to account when making decisions about HMOs and the concentration of HMOs in a particular area.

 

  1. We would support a strengthening of definitions within current regs for care, support and supervision (CSS). We believe the current regulations are vague and Housing Benefit Teams have to look at several commissioner’s decisions which can be contradictory, making it very difficult for the Team to refuse cases due to insufficient CSS. Within exempt accommodation there is a wide range of tenants with differing needs and it is clear some need more support than others. We request that exempt accommodation be broken down in to categories with clearer definitions to reflect differing needs e.g. a person with 24/7 care funded by adult social care does need help to maintain their tenancy, as they need help with everyday tasks. However, the support given by the provider in that accommodation is very different to that needed by tenants who have experienced homeless and drug/alcohol addition, for example.

 

  1. We believe on closing gaps that allow not for profit and for profit providers to contract with each other – we have found several for profit organisations that set up a not for profit arm of the business in order to be eligible for HB. This is an unhelpful ‘loophole’ that can allow some unscrupulous providers in to the market.

 

  1. We support putting protocols in place for statutory referrals. As a local authority we have the knowledge of vulnerable people who have a need for and could benefit from exempt accommodation. We would like to be able to nominate people, even where the support has not been directly commissioned by us.

 

  1. We support greater enforcement powers to tackle ASB. Specific for us, the loss of a magistrate’s court in Sandwell has also impacted our ability to progress ASB cases quickly and effectively.

 

  1. Re Tribunal hearings – decisions are based on old commissioner decisions and the local authority has no support or guidance for these cases from the DWP. We lose all the cases as the tribunal makes their own judgement based on their opinion of case law and other regulations. Case law can be interpreted in different ways and decisions are not consistent with each other. Guidance for tribunals and local authorities is needed.

 

  1. There is clearly a need to capture the voice of tenants who live in exempt accommodation. Many providers have good mechanisms for consulting and seeking the views of their tenants. However, we are concerned that in some settings tenants do not have the support they need to understand their rights or where to go to seek redress/raise concerns.

 

 

January 2022