Agenda item

6.1

The Head of Housing Commissioning, Communities Portfolio, submitted a report containing details on the findings of the third and final phase of consultation on the draft Allocations Policy. 

6.2

Sharon Schonborn, Allocations Policy Review Manager, Communities Portfolio, gave a presentation on the findings of the final phase of consultation, and referred to a number of officer recommendations. Reference was also made to additional documentation, sent out prior to the meeting, which included Version 15 of the draft Allocations Policy, together with details of the changes made to that version, and details of the proposed action in response to the receipt of a petition on 5^th December, 2012, requesting the Council to give priority to households with young people for ground floor accommodation.  

6.3

Members of the Committee raised questions and the following responses were provided:-

·               Whilst it was very difficult for officers to predict how many people would be affected by the restrictions in bedroom eligibility, it was envisaged that families with more children were more likely to be affected.  Officers would only be able to assess precisely how many people would be affected following implementation of the Policy.

·               In terms of the recommendation to specifically include in the Policy, the ability to award an extra bedroom to applicants who have a disability and are assessed as having the need for an additional room (subject to affordability of a larger property award), the current legal position on this indicates that where applicants with a disability required an additional bedroom for a family member or their carer, such applicants would not attract an additional bedroom tax.  However, the Department for Work and Pension (DWP) were presently appealing this, so the position regarding this was not clear at the present time. 

·               Pregnant women were deemed as a priority need for homelessness, but would only be entitled to benefit for a one-bedroom property until the birth of the child.  This could mean multiple moves in a short space of time.

·               Applicants who were forced to pay the bedroom tax would be able to apply for discretionary housing benefit payments and successful applicants would receive such payments for a limited period.  However, each application would be determined on their individual merits, based on criteria provided by the DWP, as there would be limited funds available. 

·               On the basis that there were no major problems at the present time, there were no plans to introduce a priority for children at height. When accommodation was advertised, there was no reference to what level it was on but if requested, this was something that could be included in future adverts.  It was accepted that it would be helpful for families if they had all the relevant information, including the level of the accommodation, so that they could be fully informed when making their choice.  Under the Council’s Homelessness Policy, tenants had the right of a review in terms of the suitability of the offer of accommodation made to them.

·               The age limit in terms of determining whether young people who had been continually registered on their parents/guardians’ application should have applications considered in their own right, was set at 25 as this was considered to be the age when the majority of such people had made the decision as to where they wanted to live.

6.5

RESOLVED: That the Committee:-

(a)

notes the contents of the report now submitted, the information contained in the additional papers circulated prior to the meeting, and the responses to the questions now raised; and

(b)

approves the draft Allocations Policy, as set out in Version 15 of the draft circulated prior to the meeting, for submission to the Cabinet, subject to the additional recommendations as follows:-

(i)

that the Policy allows applicants to re-apply within two years if their bedroom eligibility is going to be affected during that time;

(ii)

that the Policy specifically includes the ability to award an extra bedroom to applicants who have a disability and are assessed as having the need for an additional room (subject to affordability of a larger property award);

(iii)

that an applicant who is pregnant be considered for additional bedroom eligibility three months prior to their due date subject to affordability;

(iv)

that the Policy be amended to be compliant with the new regulations, meaning that Armed Forces applicants would be given additional priority if they fall within one or more of the statutory priority groups, with such priority being backdated to the date they joined up;

(v)

that a priority for children at height be not introduced, but (A) adverts for properties should contain information as to what floor any high rise accommodation is located on, (B) consideration must be given to the individual circumstances of applicants to ensure that any high rise offer is appropriate and (C) applicants given offers of high rise accommodation as their final offer be informed of their right to review the suitability of the offer; and

(vi)

that an exception to the one application rule per applicant, for young people who have been continually registered on their parents/guardians’ application, and who had still not left the family home, be written into the Policy.