How much does Lambeth spend on housing repairs and how much on management?

According to Lambeth BCs published accounts for 2012/13 they spent £75.3million on supervision and management and £26.7million on repairs and maintenance. See http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/ec-statement-of-accounts-2012-13.pdf

The self-financing settlement was based on expenditure on management of £32.9million and expenditure on maintenance of £45.7million. See https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-housing-revenue-account-self-financing-determinations--2

In terms of maintenance expenditure per dwelling, the self-financing settlement was based on £1,793 whereas actual spend in 2012/13 was £1,047.

Actual spend in the neighbouring inner London boroughs was:

·         Southwark £57.0million (£1,470 a dwelling)

·         Wandsworth £24.0million (£1,406 a dwelling)

So they are spending nearly £750 per dwelling less than they and the government assumed on maintenance, and more than twice as much on management. 

You might say it's no wonder they are going around demolishing rather than refurbishing, if they are leaving their homes to rot like that!

Lambeth Council to evict tenants who fall into arrears as a result of Bedroom Tax

Leader of Lambeth Council Lib Peck has now responded to the open letter we sent, asking Lambeth Council not to evict tenants who fall foul of the new 'Bedroom Tax' which comes into force in April. (From April, the country’s poorest working age adults in social housing who are deemed to have a spare bedroom, are having their housing benefit cut. Of the 660,000 people affected, around 100,000 live in homes specially adapted for disability according to the National Housing Federation. It also estimates 230,000 people in receipt of disability living allowance will be affected).

Since the letter was sent, Brighton council have become the first council in England to commit to fighting the Bedroom Tax by not evicting tenants who foul of the tax. This is the path that we think Lambeth should also follow.

The response from Lambeth however is disappointing. Lambeth has said that it will pursue evictions of those who fall into arrears as a result of the Bedroom Tax. This is perhaps not unexpected given Labour's recent confirmation that it would not get rid of the Bedroom Tax if elected. Indeed, in her letter council leader Lib Peck reaffirms Labour's support for the principle of the Bedroom Tax:

"...as a council we have a responsibility to all our tenants to collect rent and there should be no difference in how we treat arrears coming from the bedroom tax to those that accrue as a result of other Government policies. To do so would send a message to residents that they do not need to work with us to tackle the problem caused by the bedroom tax and that they can continue to under-occupy with the council meeting the shortfall."

The Council, however, has already stated elsewhere that that there aren't enough properties in the borough to downsize to, and that many will fall into arrears. This is in no small part down to the fact that it has sold off so much social housing (and left a lot more to fall apart).

Instead, Lambeth's council leader recommends options such as 'get a decent job' (of course many people affected by the Bedroom Tax already have jobs) 'move to a smaller property' (when there aren't enough available) 'swop with someone else' (which passes the problem onto others) 'get someone else to pay more' (but many of these households are already on the breadline and have a disabled family member) or take in a lodger (which has other financial penalties).

We have suggested other measures which Lambeth could explore to protect local people, but it seems Lambeth will not be taking these up either. Together this reaffirms that despite its advertising campaigns, Lambeth is quite happy to implement the cuts on the most vulnerable and not doing what it can to protect them.

The full text of the letter is as follows:

Dear Mr Bartley,

Thank you for your email.

As a Labour Council we are very proud of our diverse, mixed and vibrant communities across Lambeth and so we are very concerned about the large number of benefit changes that the coalition government are introducing and the negative impact that this may have on many of our residents. We have contacted the government a number of times to make our views clear and to ask them to reconsider, but the coalition government have pushed these changes through to become law and as you’re aware many of them will come into effect from April 2013. As a local authority we are now powerless to stop these changes but we will continue to make sure this coalition government knows how these changes are affecting local people in Lambeth.

What we can also do is make sure all affected residents are aware of the changes and to work with them to support them to find the best solution to cope with these changes: the sooner people are aware of the benefit changes, the sooner they can seek advice and help.

As you state in your email, we expect about 4,000 affected households in Lambeth. The council has provided additional funding to Lambeth Living – who manage the majority of our housing stock - to engage additional staff to make contact with these families and discuss their options for making up the shortfall in Housing Benefit that they will experience because they are under-occupying their property according to the new size criteria. The options for affected households include finding sustainable employment, moving to a smaller property (assuming one is available), moving to a cheaper area, mutually exchanging their property, taking in a lodger, asking a non-dependent member of the household to pay more towards the rent or otherwise making up the shortfall themselves. To assist the process, we are funding Broadway – a voluntary organisation - to establish a pilot lodgings scheme which aims to match under-occupied households subject to the Housing Benefit cut with people needing single room accommodation. The pilot started 1st Jan 2013 and runs to the end of June.

On your specific point re. rent arrears, as a council we have a responsibility to all our tenants to collect rent and there should be no difference in how we treat arrears coming from the bedroom tax to those that accrue as a result of other Government policies. To do so would send a message to residents that they do not need to work with us to tackle the problem caused by the bedroom tax and that they can continue to under-occupy with the council meeting the shortfall. We can't afford to do this and nor is it desirable. However, we are working with our ALMO, Lambeth Living to review arrears current policy to consider whether any changes are necessary.

We also recognise that there may well be problems for some households and we have arrangements in place to support them – as detailed above. We are also taking steps to protect those who have a genuine need for the extra room via Discretionary Housing Payments (DHP) (eg: foster carers, those in adapted properties) and can consider other situations on a case by case basis. We are committed to spending every penny of the DHP we've been given by Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) to support those affected by the welfare cuts.

I hope this information is helpful.

Yours sincerely

Cllr Lib Peck
Leader, Lambeth Council

How Lambeth Council is selling off its co-operative housing

The Lambeth United Housing Co-op are seeking to highlight a massive inconsistency between Lambeth Council's desire to become a "Co-operative Council" and the fact they are selling off Housing Co-ops.

Supporting people to build, refurbish and manage their own homes through co-ops can ensure homes meet the needs of existing local residents and build stronger communities. Self-help groups support people in need to bring empty homes back into use for themselves. They also provide a route into training and employment for volunteers.

However, in Lambeth, despite paying lip service to co-ops the council now appears to be turning its back on co-operative housing, seeing an opportunity instead to sell off property, as part of its programme of cuts. Concerns have been growing steadily over the last few years. Now the sell-off appears to be part of a wider programme in which the council is liquidating the community’s assets in order get cash. The council has form for selling off social housing when it overspends.

In this particular case, Lambeth used “Shortlife” (hard to let or run down property) to secure vulnerable housing stock without having to provide legal tenancies. This was invested in by residents. It is now being sold off, with the interests of those residents being disregarded. The action comes at a huge price to the people in the local community who have invested heavily in the co-operative schemes.

Below are some excerpts from a short briefing that Lambeth United Housing Co-op have produced tracing the history, and to highlight what Lambeth is doing now:


Late 1970s & early 1980s

Housing Co-ops established between Lambeth and people who had begun to maintain housing abandoned by the borough, people who were homeless and on the council's housing waiting list.

Lambeth recognises that Co-ops substantially reduce reliance on undesirable lodgings and house many “vulnerable” members of the community.


Early - Mid 1990s

Co-ops encouraged to become permanent; the promise of which disappears abruptly when Lambeth attempts transfer of its ‘Shortlife’ stock to Housing Associations. “Deals” evaporate due to Lambeth's frequent policy changes.


1997 onwards

Housing Co-operatives receive renewed threats of “recall” and eviction.

Consultations between Lambeth and Housing Co-ops a stated aim but none occur; suggestions that residents could remain in-situ, if their houses were not “under-occupied”, are not pursued.

Occupants are offered the “opportunity” to buy their homes based on vacant possession, at inflated and unrealistic prices.


2011 – present

Lambeth’s cabinet decrees all decisions regarding “Shortlife” will be private, made by a small group of council officers.

Despite interest from other social housing providers to manage stock, Lambeth deal exclusively with Notting Hill Housing Group (NHHG).

By end of 2011 the NHHG deal collapses but it takes months for Lambeth to acknowledge this. Lambeth continue to use this “deal” as reason for possession in the court cases they are bringing against “Shortlifers”.

Lambeth state NHHG deal was refused because too many houses would be sold off but, ironically, Sale By Auction is now their only disposal tool.

Vacated properties are deliberately damaged by council workers or by “vacant property managers” Camelot. Some ex-Coop homes are re-occupied, due to Camelot’s bizarre operation. In some cases serious anti-social behaviour occurs in buildings soon after stable Co-op communities have been vacated.

Meanwhile, in its legal proceedings, Lambeth engages in intimidation and coercion, threatening unreasonably high “unauthorised occupation” charges, removal of the offer to re-house, and imposition of full legal costs.

Offers to re-house residents (after first making them homeless) involve joining “Choice-Based Lettings”, a system already failing most people on Lambeth's waiting list. “Shortlife” residents report the lettings team is acting especially vindictively in their cases.


Analysis

Those who brought empty properties back into use in the 1980s, on a budget and using labour from within the community, were completely in line with current government thinking as influenced by The Great British Property Scandal that is highlighting the current housing crisis.

Housing Co-ops have been praised by international management consultants Price Waterhouse as a housing model that offers the best value for money and "are a flexible model capable of delivering housing services which compare with the best of mainstream providers.”

However, Lambeth used “Shortlife” to secure their vulnerable housing stock without having to provide legal tenancies.

"Shortlife” residents invested time, effort and money on their houses, including carrying out major repairs. Their efforts have increased the value of housing stock originally bought via a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) for a couple of thousand pounds and then scheduled for demolition. These houses are now selling at auction for upwards of £575,000.

Housing Co-operative residents are largely low-waged, with little or no savings or outside financial support. Many are of pensionable age, others are disabled and housebound, dependent on their immediate neighbours.

These are the vulnerable people suffering whilst Lambeth uses “Shortlife” as a “piggy bank”, raiding it to offset the deficit accrued through mismanagement and internal fraud. This comes in the context of Lambeth spending £25m on new council offices.

Despite councillors declaring that Housing Coop communities have brought “a welcome permanence and continuity to the area”, Lambeth has instituted a de facto social and economic purge.


In Conclusion

The difference between the policy and attitude of the Lambeth c.1980 and the Lambeth of today is shocking in its disparity.

Lambeth recently published “The Co-operative Council” White Paper, trumpeting support of community and co-operative led housing. Yet Lambeth is simultaneously destabilising and destroying community led co-operative housing that has existed for the best part of half a century and was previously supported by them.

You can email lambethunitedhousingcoop (at) gmail.com for more information.

Lambeth and Southwark housing 'extremely unaffordable'

An interesting report out today from Shelter looking at the affordability of the private rented sector around England.

It found Southwark and Lambeth to have the 9th and 11th most expensive rental prices (for two bedroom homes) in England, with average monthly rental prices of £1,407 and £1,321 respectively.

The most interesting findings come though in terms of affordability. Average London
rents for two bedroom homes take up 60% of a Londoner’s median take-home pay, a rate
which is close to double that seen in most other regions. Southwark comes in at number 10 in the most unaffordable places with 63% of average take-home pay spent on rent, and Lambeth at number 12 with 59%. This earned them a classification of 'extremely unaffordable'.

Given yesterday's unemployment figures, the ongoing rise in rental prices lack of social and other housing alternatives the picture looks very bleak indeed. There was a good report on the human cost on Radio 4 this morning.

London's Housing Crisis - a lively evening of discussion

Housing used to be one of the three pillars of the welfare state but is now viewed as a personal issue, not a collective one.

Last Thursday I attended a very interesting meeting on housing policy, hosted by the London Federation of Green Parties as part of the campaign to make Jenny Jones London’s next mayor.

On the panel were speakers from housing charity Shelter, the East London Community Land Trust, and the Camden Federation of Private Tenants whose speeches were followed by an hour of lively questions.

Hundreds protest council budget

On Wednesday night around 300 protesters lobbied Lambeth councillors to vote against the Labour-led budget. The demonstration was organised by a wide coalition of groups in the borough, including public service and voluntary sector workers facing redundancy, disabled people, youth workers, pensioners and others who rely on the continuation of vital services.

As the scale of the protest became clear, the councillors retreated to an adjoining room to vote through the cuts while demonstrators occupied the council chamber and held our own People’s Assembly.

It was an impressive example of people power. The scale of the demonstration and the enormous support from people passing by will have sent a potent message to the council, and perhaps also to Parliament.

But the draconian budget was passed all the same and now we face a long, hard struggle to protect vital services in the face of massively reduced budgets.

What is getting cut?

• More than 800 of the council's 3,500 jobs
• The entire park ranger service
• The school crossing patrol service, serving 24 schools
• Durning, Waterloo, Carnegie and Minet libraries, plus two mobile libraries
• Youth clubs, adventure playgrounds and the Young and Safe programme, which combats youth crime
• All but one public toilet facility
• Regeneration, management and repair on housing estates
• Adult social care and discretionary freedom passes for adults with mental health problems
• Street cleaning and repairs
• The noise nuisance service
• The Faith Engagement Programme

What is the alternative?

• Bring the failing Lambeth Living ALMO (the external housing management firm) back in house, saving millions
  
• Cut all senior management pay – the chief executive earns £270k a year, enough to staff an entire library!
• Reduce council fuel bills by making our schools, libraries and other buildings more energy efficient
• Reduce the millions spent on expensive private-sector consultants
  
• Use council reserves to reduce the impact of the front-loading of the cuts and allow time to make improvements
• Cut down on glossy PR and council spin
• Work more closely with other public sector bodies to cut admin costs

Lambeth's housing scandal

Lambeth’s Labour-run council is failing some of the most vulnerable people in the borough. Tenants are facing another rent hike - possibly 5%, but the final amount is to be confirmed - just one year after stomaching the biggest rent rise in the UK (an amazing 17%).

Sure, we all have to tighten our belts in the recession, but there's something more important going on here. This isn't the first time that the current Council administration (a Labour administration, in case that means anything these days) has leaned on the borough's poorest people to make cost savings - last time it was the social care budget that took a battering, driving up costs for people who are already living at the very margins, scraping to get by.

And then there's the bigger picture in housing. Labour promised to get all local authority housing up to the so-called Decent Homes standard by 2010. Well they're clearly failing to meet this pledge. In fact, in Lambeth we're seeing cutbacks in repairs and I understand that the programme to provide homes with proper insulation has been put on hold.

I've been helping our one Green councillor, Becca Thackray, with some of her casework. The stories from some tenants - often with young children - who are having to live in squalid, damp and mouldy conditions are really shocking. This sort of thing should not be acceptable in a modern and still enormously wealthy city.

To add insult to injury, around 1,500 homes are sitting empty, costing the council £8 million in lost rental income. And don't even get me started on the enormous sums that have been spent on consultants and the shambles that is Lambeth Living, the so-called Arms-Length Management Organisation that was supposed to fix the mess that was, and sadly very much still is, Lambeth's housing.