The Governor – Winter 2020

HQN’S MAGAZINE FOR BOARDS, EXECUTIVES AND LEADERS WINTER 2020

EVIDENCE special: taking a forensic approach to the key housing issues

In this edition: Millennials aren’t the only ones struggling to find decent housing Kim McKee

Will Welsh housing ambitions be frustrated by poor data?

Bob Smith and Peter Williams

Tenant participation research: key findings Professor Paul Hickman and Dr Jenny Preece

Time for a review of service charges Mike Owen

Whatever happened to value for money?

Alistair McIntosh

Listening not telling Keith Edwards The end of the world as we know it?

Colin Wiles

Contents Winter 2020 Evidence Issue 25

Published by: HQN Rockingham House St Maurice’s Road York YO31 7JA

Editorial: Alistair McIntosh Jon Land Janis Bright Colin Wiles Email: evidence@hqnetwork.co.uk Advertising: All enquires to: hqn@hqnetwork.co.uk Tel: 01904 557150 Design: Sam Wiggle

– Millennials 5 aren’t the only ones struggling to find decent housing

4 – Time for a 1 review of service charges Mike Owen

Kim McKee Printed by The Reliable Print Company, York

Published four times a year. All rights reserved.

Reproduction in whole or in part without written permission is strictly prohibited.

Printed on FSC ® certified paper.

– Tenant 7 participation research: key findings Professor Paul Hickman and Dr Jenny Preece

| WINTER 2020

Keith Edwards

8 – Whatever 1 happened to value for money?

Alistair McIntosh

0 – Will Welsh 1 housing ambitions be frustrated by poor data?

Bob Smith and Peter Williams

2

6 – Listening not 1 telling

19 – The last word Colin Wiles

Welcome!

“In the North of England and the Midlands we have been focusing on developing a shared vision and narrative for housing and placebased investment”

Hello and welcome to this special Evidence edition of The Governor.

It’s particularly gratifying to be writing this introduction because it was HQN’s recognition of the need to find ways of connecting policymaker, practitioner and provider communities with academic research that led to the establishment – with ESRC’s support – of Evidence in 2013. In many ways, the Evidence model provided a blueprint for what CaCHE needed to do, and since 2018 CaCHE has established itself as the go-to place for robust and authoritative independent research and evidence into all aspects of housing.

But CaCHE is not first and foremost a funder of research (although it does have a modest research programme of its own). It’s primarily a way of helping research users navigate the evidence that’s already out there; to access it and makes sense of it; and to help work with sector stakeholders and residents to co-produce the questions that we need the evidence to help to answer. That’s where the Knowledge Exchange hubs come in – their main task is to bring lots of different voices together (and, hopefully, not always the same voices) to agree on what

the key issues at a regional level are, recognising that whilst housing is a concern everywhere in the UK, the precise nature of the housing crisis and of the policy priorities does vary from place to place.

In the North of England and the Midlands we’ve been focusing on developing a shared vision and narrative for housing and placebased investment which recognises the nature of the housing challenge and what we believe needs to be done about it.

The evidence that is summarised in this issue speaks to all of these concerns and highlights issues that apply in various ways across the country, but is also nuanced by different regional contexts. Bob Smith and Peter Williams look at the prospects for affordable housing and draw attention to gaps in the data and evidence base that they believe will hinder policy change. Paul Hickman and Jenny Preece consider the various ways that landlords approach tenant participation. And Kim McKee’s work studies the struggles faced by older renters in trying to find decent housing.

There’s also news of research which speaks to some very locally specific issues that nonetheless provide insight that can inform

practice and policy elsewhere: the phenomenon of the emptying of estates in London; the role played by social workers in helping vulnerable people to sustain tenancies; and the way that standards within Ireland’s rented housing are changing.

So, lots of fascinating and, more importantly tractable research findings. And for more of the same, it’s worth recalling that this year’s Housing Studies Association conference will be on 6-8 April in Sheffield. The HSA conference is that rare thing: an academic conference with lots of interesting debate which is also well attended by those not from academia. It’s a truly energising and welcoming environment, and in my experience all the research discussed at HSA is of direct interest to people working to make housing better for people everywhere. I commend it to you!

Ed Ferrari North and Midlands of England Knowledge Exchange lead UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence (CaCHE)

WINTER 2020 |

3

Ready for your in-depth assessment?

Be on standby with HQN – choose the support that works for you Have a practice run Our team of experts will take you through your paces.

Training session for boards and SMTs One of HQN’s experts will deliver a tailored session explaining the IDA process – what to look out for and how to prepare.

Had the call? Need practical support?

We can mobilise quickly.

If you’re tight on time or resources it’s never too late.

Please contact Anna Pattison on 01904 557197 or anna.pattison@hqnetwork.co.uk to find out more.

Millennials aren’t the only ones struggling – older renters share their challenges finding decent housing There are now more than 4.5m households living in the private rented sector across the UK – that’s more than doubled since the previous decade, writes Kim McKee. The challenges of navigating this expensive and insecure housing market have fallen mainly on young people.

In 2017, 35% of renters in the private sector were aged between 25 and 34.

Much attention has been given to the plight of millennials – aka “generation rent” – who research indicates are much less likely to own their own home than previous generations. Yet the number of older renters is also increasing – and much less is known about their experiences.

That’s why, as part of recent research for the UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence (CaCHE), my colleagues and I investigated the experiences of older private renters – aged 35 to 54 years – from different parts of the UK, as they aim to find a decent home.

Our research highlights not only the need for reform within the private rented sector, but also opportunities for other housing providers – such as housing associations and local authorities – to play a vital role.

Shared experiences Many of our research participants recounted their experiences of shared accommodation, forced moves, poor landlord practices and periods of homelessness.

Many of their stories echoed those of “generation rent”; from reports of unaffordable rents, insecurity and poor quality housing, to difficulties in putting down roots and making a home.

Our research emphasised that these experiences are not restricted to young people. In fact, they are more common among low-income renters than any particular age group.

Even in middle-age, some of the tenants we spoke to still relied on the “bank of mum and dad”. Family support was vital in allowing them to pay their rent or save for a mortgage deposit. Some needed a relative to act as a guarantor on their rental contract. But not everyone has this resource to draw on, nor do they always want to ask their family for help.

Young people experiencing difficult living conditions

often think that things will get better. By contrast, our research found that middle-aged renters had much less hope for the future. Some felt embarrassed and experienced a sense of “failure” because they could not realise their dream of home ownership.

Others had now aged themselves out of a mortgage.

Lenders can be reluctant to approve loans that extend beyond retirement age when incomes drop. This is challenging for low-income households in particular, who, without the cushion of a private pension, may be unable to cover the repayments once retired.

Like younger renters in previous studies, the middleaged renters we spoke to were frustrated at paying “someone else’s mortgage” – not least because it limited their ability to transform their own situation.

For some, the only way they could manage their budgets was to choose less desirable properties (often in poorer condition), which had lower rents, or to share with others. As other research has noted, such financial pressure can have negative effects on people’s mental health and well-being.

A different story Older renters also face some different issues to their younger counterparts. Parents worried about how forced and unplanned moves would disrupt their children’s friendships and schooling. Being able to personalise a property and keep pets are also vital to making children feel settled and secure, yet not all landlords allow this.

Indeed, some landlords would not even allow children to live at their properties. Other parents (typically divorced dads) found themselves in shared accommodation that was not always appropriate for children to visit or stay in.

The practice of house sharing and renting a single room in a property is becoming more widespread. While for younger adults it has often been understood as a lifestyle choice, for the older renters in our study it was driven by economic constraint: they simply could not afford to live on their own.

Older age can also bring poor health, which may not be as prevalent among younger people. Yet the sector is not geared up to deal with the extra needs of ageing bodies. One participant who had a long-term health issue described the challenges of sharing when mobility aids are needed and flatmates are not always understanding.

While there may be an opportunity for more socially minded private landlords to provide the support these

WINTER 2020 |

5

tenants need, research suggests they are few and far between. Local authorities have a key role to play here in offering advice to private landlords who want to support their tenants to age in place, thereby helping spread good practice at a local level.

A deepening crisis?

The UK’s growing population of older private renters face distinct challenges, which could worsen the nation’s housing crisis. Accessing social housing remains challenging, while home ownership remains out of reach for many. Welfare reform, such as the housing benefit freeze, has excluded low-income renters from all but the cheapest properties.

Tenants of all ages want safe, secure and affordable homes. But without government action, that aspiration will remain unfulfilled. Reform of the private rented sector is important and is beginning to happen in different ways, in different parts of the UK. But legislation can only go so far.

Tenants must be made aware of their rights through public education campaigns. The government must fund local authorities to adequately resource enforcement action and tackle rogue landlords. In turn, local authorities need to take the action to stamp out poor and illegal practice.

But above all else, the private rented sector must not be seen in isolation. To fix the broken housing market, there must be continued investment in affordable housing, and this must be matched by a political will to tackle the wider inequalities that are the root cause of poor housing. Here social landlords have a continued vital role to play in meeting the housing needs of older renters, ensuring they can access the homes they aspire to, and that people can enter older age in a warm, safe and secure affordable home.

This article is republished and adapted from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article here https://bit.ly/30ySQrA Dr Kim McKee is a Co-Investigator at the UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence.

Housing, devolution and localities: Inventing a future or more of the same?

Join us for the Housing Studies Association Conference 2020, 6-8 April, Sheffield Confirmed plenary speakers include: • Paul Dennett (Mayor of Salford City Council and Lead for Housing, Planning and Infrastructure in the Greater Manchester Combined Authority) • Quintin Bradley (Leeds Beckett University) • Tamsin Stirling (Independent researcher) • Prof. Peter Roberts (Chair of the Northern Ireland Housing Executive) • Jess Perera (Institute of Race Relations) • Andrea Gibbons (University of Salford) The challenges facing housing appear to be becoming more complex. This complexity has increased in terms of where the capacity for decision-making lies; within national governments, within devolved governments, at a regional level, or with local communities.

6

| WINTER 2020

Many housing organisations now undertake a range of support roles, as well as diversifying business interests. There is pressure on housing associations to remain viable whilst at the same time ensuring access to secure and affordable housing for those who require it. The private sector remains the key actor.

This conference will provide the space for academic researchers, practitioners, and those working in housing policy and related areas to reflect and debate on these issues.

Full conference details: https://bit.ly/2NBcwFJ

Understanding landlords’ approaches to tenant participation CaCHE researchers, Professor Paul Hickman and Dr Jenny Preece, provide an overview of the key findings from the CaCHE scoping study, Understanding social housing landlords’ approaches to tenant participation.

Tenant participation was an important policy priority for government in the late 1990s/early 2000s, but in recent years it has slipped down the agenda. The Grenfell fire tragedy has changed this, with tenant participation now firmly back as a feature of the policy landscape.

A recently completed CaCHE study which explored landlords’ approaches to tenant participation is timely.

This blog highlights some of its key findings.

The study builds on a review of existing research on social housing landlords’ approaches to tenant participation which was published earlier this year. The study involved in-depth interviews with representatives of social housing landlords and ‘stakeholder’ organisations in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland; and a focus group comprising 17 representatives from ‘stakeholder’ organisations.

While, reflecting the aims of the research, most participants were officers of social housing landlords and stakeholder organisations, the study also captured the views of eight tenant representatives.

priority, particularly linked to devolved government agendas and the focus of regulatory guidance.

• Landlords were asked what they thought the purpose of tenant participation was. ‘Improving the housing service’ was the most common response. Ensuring that tenants had ‘voice’, agency and influence was also identified by many landlords as being a key purpose of tenant participation.

• The approaches taken by landlords to tenant participation varied. Notwithstanding this, many employed mechanisms that were concerned with empowering their tenants, such as participatory budgeting. And one of the organisations in the study is a tenant and employee mutual housing association. Across the sector as a whole, there are many other examples, such as community-based (and sometimes community-controlled) housing associations, which are prevalent in Scotland and a key feature of the Scottish housing system. However, it was reported that – when viewed nationally –

The key findings of the research are: • The terms commonly used to describe the ways in which tenants are involved in decision-making, performance management, scrutiny, governance and service improvement issues differ. However, whilst there was an acknowledgement that language matters, there was no agreement around the ‘correct’ terminology to use, and some participants argued that the focus should remain on what was achieved rather than the label used to describe it.

• Most participants viewed tenant participation as crucial, but the extent to which it was perceived as being prioritised by organisations varied – particularly between England and Scotland. There was a view that in England tenant participation had become less of an organisational priority in recent years. By contrast, in Scotland and Wales the general view of participants was that it had become more of a

WINTER 2020 |

7

tenants’ powers in relation to ‘mainstream’ tenant participation were relatively limited in England.

Wales-based respondents felt that to a lesser extent the same could be said of the situation in Wales.

However, there was also belief that practice was evolving (in a positive way) across the nation as a result of its regulatory framework and the work of its devolved government (and partner agencies).

• While they continued to play an important role, there was a belief that the importance of TRAs and tenants’ federations had declined in the last decade. One of the key reasons for this has been the growth in ‘new’ engagement mechanisms such as digital engagement. The research found that many landlords are engaging with their tenants digitally.

However, there was a belief that the importance of digital engagement has been overstated.

• Approaches to tenant participation have shifted in recent years. There are a number of drivers that have contributed to this including: the broad political and regulatory context beyond specific policy frameworks; organisational culture; and changes in the demographic profile of tenants.

The emptying of London estates: tenants’ experiences Meticulous research by Loretta Lees and Hannah White examines the process of ‘social cleansing’ of inner London council estates. They chart the history of redevelopment of estates under successive governments, with secure tenants and leaseholders forced out.

The researchers interviewed some of those displaced, and mapped the destinations of populations forced to leave. They also attended court cases of people threatened with eviction, either through redevelopment or through problems with their housing benefit.

They argue that the process carried out by councils and supported by government policies amounts to a ‘new accumulative form of (state-led) gentrification’ in which council tenants are replaced by private buyers of the new housing that replaces the estates. They note that often the tenants forced to leave may move multiple times before settling in a new area, prolonging the upheaval.

More details: https://bit.ly/3am0ObK

8

| WINTER 2020

A number of challenges were highlighted by participants, largely falling into four areas: • Embedding tenant participation within organisations, to ensure that the responsibility for involving tenants in decision-making was not seen as restricted to a specific person or team (even where such teams were present in organisations).

• Growing participation, and in doing so ensuring that the engaged group of tenants were more representative of the broader tenant base.

• Removing barriers to engagement; for example, by providing skills training.

• Evaluating the impact of tenant participation activities was noted by many respondents, who highlighted how difficult it was to measure outcomes, particularly around value for money and ‘what worked, when, where, and for whom’.

Read the full report at https://bit.ly/37eQ1OA Professor Paul Hickman is a Co-Investigator at the UK Collaborative Centre for Housing Evidence and Professor of Housing and Social Policy at Sheffield Hallam.

JOIN NOW! The Housing Studies Association (HSA) is a UK-wide membership organisation which brings together researchers, practitioners and professionals to promote the study of housing. HSA runs a programme of events including our annual conference and our public lecture on housingrelated themes. The Association also offers: • Events grant scheme enabling members to disseminate and discuss their work • Seminar Series grant competition • Conference bursaries to early career and/or nonwaged housing researchers and practitioners • The prestigious annual Valerie Karn prize for best paper by an early career housing researcher.

Become a member from just £25 a year and access these benefits plus reduced rates to our events.

See www.housing-studies-association.org Follow us on twitter @HSA_UK

The world can be an unfair and harsh place. As society becomes more diverse, so it seems hate crime and xenophobia is on the rise.

Let’s make this decade the one to change all this; and we have just the thing to help. Our Equality and Diversity Network is specially designed to help landlords, both small and large, ensure that their equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) policy works for the benefit of all in the organisation.

The network covers the following key areas: • • • • • • •

Gender equality Sexual orientation Race and religion Transgender and intersex Sexual harassment Board representation Recruitment

• Champions of EDI and influencing others • Tenant profiling • Hate crime • Supporting tenants from different and diverse communities

• Changing learned and ingrained behaviour and cultures • Challenging constructively.

The cost of the network is £820+VAT a year with a discount for packages.

For more information about the network and how to join, please email networks@hqnetwork.co.uk WINTER 2020 |

9

Will Welsh housing ambitions be frustrated by poor data and inadequate resources?

Bob Smith and Peter Williams

Ambitions and weaknesses

During 2018 CaCHE ran a series of research prioritisation events across the UK to help shape the Centre’s priorities. In Wales CaCHE Hub Members identified the multi-dimensional issues of the affordability, quality and delivery of housing, as well as tackling homelessness and examining the role of planning and communities in shaping housing policy as the top five priorities. A similar event with tenants echoed the case for more affordable housing and for putting tenants at the heart of housing policy (as well as addressing issues of welfare reform – inextricably linked to affordability – and raising standards and the accountability of housing services).

In April 2018 the then Minister for Housing and Regeneration in Wales set up an independent review to (a) examine the current arrangements for the development of affordable housing in Wales and (b) make recommendations for changes designed to increase supply and improve delivery. An independent panel was established in May 2018 and reported at the end of April 2019. The current Welsh Minister, Julie James AM (now designated Minister for Housing and Local Government), has accepted all bar one of the report’s recommendations (one is pending) and the Welsh Government is now engaging further with the housing sector in Wales in responding and prioritising the recommendations and seeking to implement significant housing policy change.

The overlap between the focus of Welsh Government ministers on an increased supply of affordable housing and the research priorities identified by the wider housing sector in Wales is hardly surprising. There is a high degree of shared ambition in Wales on a range of housing issues. However, as the review progresses through its implementation phase it is worth reflecting upon some of the risks which might threaten their ultimate delivery.

10

| WINTER 2020

The Independent Review of Affordable Housing Supply set out an ambitious programme of housing policy reform with numerous interdependencies across the eight sets of recommendations (for example, between developing a better understanding of local housing needs and a revised model for grant funding, or between a new grant funding framework and a five-year affordable social rents policy). However, the Affordable Housing Supply Report has also highlighted areas where there are significant weaknesses in the information base and the levels of analysis needed to inform and subsequently evaluate housing policy change.

First, some of these risks relate to issues of resources, staffing and programme management, skills and capacity, and the effectiveness (or otherwise) of collaborative working. It was evident that these had impacted on successful outcomes of previous reviews.

With Brexit planning dominating staffing and resource issues in governments across the UK, there was a real danger here that the review could fall at the first hurdle.

However, pleasingly, more capacity has been created.

Second, there are issues of evidence gaps and a lack of robust information and analysis which could also undermine effective housing policy change in Wales.

In 2019 the Welsh Government published estimates of housing need at national and regional levels and by tenure, showing housing needs – particularly for affordable housing – are not being met. However, the position in terms of local housing market assessments is much patchier; many are over three years old and the quality of the underlying data is not always robust. Such information is key to informing a new model for (variable) grant funding.

Similarly, though an announcement on future rent policy has been delayed by the general election, the expectation is that social rents (and service charges) will be set at levels which are affordable to current and future tenants. However, the profile of those living in the social housing sector in Wales is limited; for example, the continuous recording of housing association lettings pioneered in Wales (CORE data) was abandoned many years ago, and it was never extended to the local authority sector anyway. Information on value for money in the social housing sector, whether in terms of development costs or services provided, is also limited

as is data on the wider context of inequality across the geography of Wales.

Contextual data Whilst considerable housing information is collected and published (particularly through the Welsh Government), and initiatives such as the Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research, Data and Methods (WISERD) data portal and the recent CaCHE Data Navigator have raised awareness of some existing housing data (and the potential for its use) less attention has been given to plugging gaps in data and building links between data sets; for example on housing, inequality, incomes and wealth or the need for the skills and capacity for data analysis and interpretation to move these agendas forward. As was evident from the review housing cannot be viewed in isolation, and in taking forward the policy agenda that contextual data is crucial to effective policy making.

The data sets available elsewhere (notably England and Scotland) tend to be richer and allow for more in-depth understanding and analysis at a more localised level, and these are often boosted by work from entities such as the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the Resolution Foundation. Coverage for Wales, and not least on a regional and local basis, is poor by comparison. The primary onus for identifying the gaps and filling them must sit with institutions in Wales, whether in government, other bodies or research institutes. There is an urgent need to engage in this agenda if this housing review and others like it are ultimately to find expression in effective policy and delivery.

Bob Smith is the CaCHE Knowledge Exchange Broker for Wales. Peter Williams is attached to the Department of Land Economy at the University of Cambridge and was a member of the panel for the Independent Review of Affordable Housing Supply.

Estimates of Housing Need in Wales by Tenure (2018-based) Chart 1: Average annual estimates of additional housing need (Wales)

https://bit.ly/38eEleV

WINTER 2020 |

11

Social workers key to sustaining tenancies A survey of professionals such as social workers and nurses working in the community has produced valuable insights into the problems of vulnerable people in the private rented sector.

Researchers Trish Hafford-Letchfield, Helen Gleeson and Rahaman Mohammed, from Middlesex University, looked at the issue in the light of growing use of the PRS to house those who are homeless or threatened with homelessness. They noted that nearly half of PRS homes are substandard, according to Shelter, with consequences for tenants’ health.

Most of the survey respondents said they are regularly dealing with housing crises despite not having specialist housing training. Many reported service users having problems with the benefits system.

Half of those in the survey said vulnerable service users faced challenges in being able to maintain a tenancy because of mental health problems, or not

always understanding their responsibilities as tenants.

One issue was the difficulties service users faced when their problems with hoarding, anti-social behaviour or problematic substance use became known to the landlord.

Although social workers are key to supporting vulnerable service users to sustain a tenancy, those in the survey often cited difficulties with fragmented local services. Getting partner organisations to understand service users’ problems and work flexibly to find solutions took a great deal of time and energy. Some felt they were ‘firefighting’ from one crisis to the next.

Flexible support, including housing advice, easily available locally, could help prevent and tackle the problems, they felt.

More details: https://bit.ly/2TE7j45

Ireland’s rented stock shows improvements A study of housing quality in Ireland over a dozen years finds a welcome improvement in standards.

The research by Dorothy Watson and Eoin Corrigan notes that increasing government use of personal subsidies, rather than building more council housing, has brought more low income households into the private rented sector. But the study found this sector experienced improved conditions from 2004 to 2015, as did the social rented housing sector.

The improvement – measured as the percentage of homes having at least two out of five key indicators (dampness, darkness, noise, lack of central heating, single glazing) – was seen in homes rented by households

across the income scale. But fewer problems were reported in the homes of higher income households, as would be expected.

Local authority housing had the greatest percentage of poor quality, though the gap between this and private renting narrowed over time. An Energy Efficiency Retrofitting Programme from 2013 has improved the picture in local authority housing. Both rented tenures lag behind the owner occupier sector in terms of quality but again the gap has narrowed.

More details: https://www.esr.ie/article/view/1123

Coalfields still suffering deprivation The former coalfield areas of England, Scotland and Wales still lag badly behind in terms of economic and social disadvantage and the incidence of ill-health, finds a new report. That is despite physical regeneration progressing well.

The report from Sheffield Hallam University’s Centre for Regional, Economic and Social Research details the ‘vast’ numbers of people out of work on incapacity benefits, masking the true rate of unemployment. Health problems are widespread – more than a third of residents aged 16+ report health problems lasting more than 12 months.

12

| WINTER 2020

However, cuts in entitlement to welfare benefits are estimated to bring losses to the areas amounting to £2.4bn a year by 2021. That equates to £680 a year per working age adult, with greater losses in the poorest areas.

Some 42% of former coalfield areas remain in the most deprived 30% of the whole of Britain. Researchers say: ‘The coalfields occupy a place in the economy that in many respects is at the opposite end of the spectrum to metropolitan Britain.’

Full report: https://bit.ly/2utzh7U

Your people are your most important asset – make sure you’re investing in them HQN has an outstanding track record of helping organisations achieve real and lasting performance improvements. Ensuring your staff have access to relevant, timely training is vital in the ever-changing landscape of the sector. With over 200 different topics covered, we have you and your organisation’s interests at heart.

Our outstanding team of training professionals deliver the highest quality training sessions: • Sign up to our public training covering a range of key issues, from technical ones to soft skills • Looking for a more tailored approach for a number of your staff? Book an in-house session and get real value for money • Want something longer term?

We’ve a range of qualified coaches and mentors.

For more information, please contact hqn@hqnetwork.co.uk, call 01904 557150 or visit www.hqnetwork.co.uk WINTER 2020 |

13

Time for a review of service charges Mike Owen, former chief executive of Merthyr Valleys Homes, delves into the divisive world of service charges and calls for more transparency and common sense.

Firstly, a declaration of interest. Years ago, as a tenant of a high rise block of flats, I lost an appeal on service charges. My case was that as a rate payer I paid for street lighting across the borough, why then as a rent payer should I pay for a service charge to light the vertical street I lived in? Have a search on YouTube for ‘streets in the sky’ and see the glorious documentaries from the 1950s on the history of high rise.

In reviewing service charges, it goes without saying that tenants need a strong voice and, if they want it, independent advice. When Carrick Housing reviewed charges in the mid 2000s they appointed an independent tenant advisor – and believe me what was charged for, how it was defined as a service and the actual amount charged changed radically.

Many tenants are paying rents that are well over the Joseph Rowntree definition of living rent (ie 28% of the average wage in that area). If you add service charges, the rent becomes even harder to pay and less ‘living’.

One South Wales housing association looking at their rents found that on average service charges added 5% and in some cases as much as 15%. Some charges can be very high and I helped a former colleague appeal his service charge for an adapted bungalow where it took the payable rent over £700 a month and the LHA was £350.

Most housing associations historically took the view that anything that could be charged for was pushed into a service charge. This was treated as additional income on the balance sheet and, with housing benefit taking the strain, most tenants did not feel the real cost of paying. In local authorities and stock transfers, the regulators pressured landlords to de-pool charges as a way of increasing income.

14

| WINTER 2020

Most reviews of service charges go in two directions; they are very narrow and focus mainly on the quality of the service, or the review is instigated by the landlord to charge for a new service.

Grass cutting Dissatisfaction with grass cutting often leads to a review of the actual contract and a debate about the provision of in-house teams and VAT savings. In discussing the contract, tenants nearly always want the cuttings picked up; the landlord responds to this specification change with ‘that will add £1,000s to the contract and leaving them is better for the environment’. The review generally concludes with a new contract with more cuts to negate the clippings issue and more charges to the tenant.

In two reviews I have been involved in, the two questions were ‘do we own what we are paying to get cut?’ and ‘which tenants should be paying to cut it?’

After the first question and a detailed GSI mapping exercise, over 20% of land was returned to the actual land owner to look after - in this case a mix of the local council and other bodies. This, of course, was fair and allowed for a reduction in charges to our tenants, but it wrecked the council’s grass cutting budgets.

Open space The second was more about policy. Tenants on open plan estates frequently get charged for the cutting of all the grass in their local area. A similar cost calculation

is often undertaken for playgrounds and parks. So, somebody at the landlord defines a geographical area and decides everybody in that area pays the same charges.

One review took a different tack. If the land was a self-contained garden exclusive to a block or group of houses and it was maintained, it was reasonable to charge just those tenants. The broad definition used by the tenants to construe whether an area was defined as open plan was ‘could any child play football on it and could anybody pitch up and sit on it?’

However, most tenants on large open plan estates are now expected to pay for its maintenance via a service charge regardless of the fact that anyone can use it.

In a separate review, a tenant was paying a weekly service charge for the upkeep of a couple of parks in their defined area. It just so happened the parks were miles away and not on a bus route. So, they paid for a service they could take no benefit from. And if tenants do pay for a play area or small park, should it be exclusive to the people who pay a service charge for it?

Interestingly, in affluent parts of London there is occasionally a square in the middle that residents pay a maintenance and upkeep charge for. Access to these areas is frequently restricted to the residents.

Transparent There was another situation where tenants of a group of houses were paying a very high maintenance charge for their lovely front gardens. After much digging (no pun intended), it transpired that the association had a very large market sale scheme adjacent and did not want the risk of untidy gardens putting off potential buyers. A more transparent solution would have been a dialogue with the tenants and the gardening being paid for from sales income.

I cannot remember the number of meetings I have been to where somebody proposes a recharge cost for a no access visit. I have even been to meetings where tenants seek compensation for failing to keep an appointment, but I have only been to one meeting where a tenant asked for a refund for a missed grass cutting.

The contracts are frequently for 15 cuts a year, often specifying the depth of grass. But a rainy day here and a missed cycle there and suddenly those 15 cuts become 13 cuts. But do the tenants get a 13% discount?

Instead of cuts per square metre, one community contractor in Merthyr Tydfil had a compact with the local community around the total value of the contract.

If the grass needed cutting, they cut it. If it was dry and the grass wasn’t growing they would do other things, such as clean down pavements in front of shops and pick up litter across the estate.

As the cost of fire safety increases in flats, the cost of the provision is frequently being pushed to service charges as a way of recouping some of these new costs. But, similar to my ‘streets in the sky’ argument, only a small number of tenants, given a free choice, would choose a high rise flat.

Therefore, to build high is a landlord decision based

on land availability, resources and costs per unit calculations.

No tenant asks to live in a high rise with inadequate fire protection. We therefore need a transparent debate on what fire services tenants pay for. One of the most frequent benefits of social housing is the collective insurance and pooling of risks. If you live in a house that is structurally unsound or the old chimney stack is loose, you do not have to pay many £1,000s to get it repaired.

When we find asbestos in properties, we do not say ‘you live in an older property so you must pay a service charge for an annual asbestos inspection survey and maybe the cost of removing it’.

However, if you live in a high rise block landlords frequently look to a service charge for the annual service of fire safety alarms and equipment like sprinklers.

If a new service is required for safety reasons, perhaps it is the landlord’s duty to pay that cost for the collective good. If a service is voted for by tenants as an enhanced service that only they benefit from, it seems reasonable to charge.

A wider and more considered service review might be about the volume of services that tenants want, not just the quality of those services. The housing sector is world class at reviewing those services for the elderly, particularly the expensive ones like residential wardens.

For most one and two schemes, this is almost now an opt in, paid for service for those who need it.

If only we applied the same rigour to grass cutting and cleaning contracts, things might be different. One block of flats I visited had loads of glass on the ground floor. It looked lovely. But to keep it looking lovely it was window cleaned every fortnight.

Honest debate Tenants might choose to collectively upkeep the common parts of buildings and estates themselves if there was a more honest debate. They might even choose to let nature takes its course and have unmaintained grass areas that are better for the environment and would save them money. Tenants on open plan estates could be encouraged to enclose their front gardens and reduce the amount of open space that is cut and service charged.

As more tenants than ever are now in work or on partial benefits, the rent level is becoming more important. Additional service charges are increasingly an issue. So, why not carry out a review which looks at the following: • Some broad charging principles from ‘streets in the sky’ to who benefits • Think about what services are provided, the volume and frequency of those services and, if it is really transparent, would tenants choose to buy that service?

• Are the actual costs charged in different areas for similar services broken down? Are they fair and transparent?

• Do the costs charged bench mark well with other providers?

WINTER 2020 |

15

Listening not telling Working with residents and Kensington and Chelsea council post-Grenfell has been the most humbling and inspiring experience, says HQN associate Keith Edwards. Here he reflects on the slow, steady path to rebuilding relationships.

The loss of life in Grenfell was period of time before drawing conclusions and coming horrendous; the impact on up with a plan to set things right. Trust was completely survivors and their families broken. The only way to move forward was by really devastating.

There were listening – ears pinned back – and keeping your mouth other victims, too, including shut until you had something to say. And that felt like it residents from neighbouring could be a long time. communities, many of whom The forum established for resident engagement was witnessed the horror of 14 the Tenant Consultative Committee (TCC), drawn from June 2017 as it unfolded, groups across the borough. The first meetings in late 2017 and the workers: firefighters, were very tense. It was clear that whilst Grenfell had paramedics, police officers, thrown the lack of proper listening and engagement as well as housing staff and into sharp focus, this was not a new issue. Resident after local councillors. The trauma spread out in waves resident made it clear that they felt ignored and often and nobody involved was unaffected. And the wave disrespected by the Kensington and Chelsea TMO, reached residents across the royal borough. Indeed, it and this went back years. The council was ultimately impacted on communities across the UK and beyond. blamed for allowing this to happen and not dealing All changed. Changed utterly. with persistent and widespread dissatisfaction with the I first met Doug Goldring, who had been appointed organisation managing homes on its behalf. No one Director of Housing Management at Kensington expected things to be turned around quickly. and Chelsea, in November 2017. HQN’s CEO, Alistair But there was progress. The council was clear that McIntosh, had suggested we meet to see if I could help they had no right to regain trust other than through as an ‘independent’ facilitator with council and resident their actions. It became obvious that change had to be representatives. fundamental, genuine and permanent. The council had Doug is a straightto give up its monopoly on talking, no-nonsense bloke. power and residents would He built his reputation “It’s going to take at least the next ten years co-produce the services on getting things done, to suture the wounds of our community – we they received from that turning poor-performing point forward. The first step services around in several need to wield fewer words – more carefully was to bring the services local authorities. But he – and do a whole lot more listening” back in house from the is no hard-nosed hitman, Amelia Mustapha director of the SMART mental TMO on 1 March 2018 with drafted in to kick a few the overwhelming support tables over. From that first health charity of residents. Then began meeting it became clear the process of bit-by-bit that his driving priority was to make sure residents got service reviews and setting new standards. Over the the service they deserved. His starting point was zero next 12 months the number and range of reviews was tolerance of disrespect for tenants and poor services. impressive, each one done jointly with volunteers from Everything else followed from this. the TCC. From the outset I realised this experience of working with the council and residents was going to be unlike Service reviews and related activities: any other in my working life. I’d spent 30 years in the housing sector, much of it focussing on resident • Local consultation arrangements engagement. This included ten years as Director of • Customer service standards TPAS Cymru, and 14 as Director of CIH Cymru where we • Estate improvements were responsible for the Tenant Empowerment Grant • The council’s leaseholder offer programme and the i2i project, set up to involve tenants • Community centre policy in delivering the Welsh Housing Quality Standard. I had • Procurement of major works started my ‘career’ as a trade union convenor in West • A new residents’ charter Wales in the 1980s, before becoming co-ordinator of a • Resident satisfaction survey workers’ co-operative, and, following that, a community • The HRA business plan development worker in former mining communities • Compensation policy in the Valleys. Participation and co-production have • Repairs policy always been in my blood.

• Renewable energy On day one of my work in Kensington and Chelsea, • Residents’ disability forum I realised that this would not be about allowing a short • Street properties representation

16

| WINTER 2020

“Surely now the one lesson we have learnt from this tragedy is that decisions that affect the lives of residents so drastically cannot be made for, but with people. When complaints are made, view them first as a necessary part of active participation not something to fear or to learn from after the fact.

“It may not be an easy process. True resident participation is not supposed to be easy but that is what makes it so valuable and trustworthy and can reap benefits for all in the longer term” Angela Spence, Kensington and Chelsea Social Council

• • • • • • • • • • •

Community Wi-Fi Estate management policy Workforce development Community heating systems Tree pruning and removals Commercial properties policy Lifetime tenancies Environmental sustainability Resident conference planning CCTV operation Anti-social behaviour.

The TCC also drove a parallel process to review future management options, design a brief and appoint consultants. The outcome of that work was a desire to stay with the council, at least for the foreseeable future, although exploring local management arrangements that were resident led was not ruled out. Most of all, residents were clear that although the council was the best option, there had to be lasting improvements to the quality of services and a permanent commitment to partnership working.

So, what are the main lessons for me after 20 months working with the council and residents?

Re-building trust takes time What I witnessed was a steady, often painstaking rebuilding of a relationship. It would be too strong to say that trust has been fully restored – that will take longer.

But the levels of understanding, mutual respect and even common purpose have grown significantly. Not that there have not been many tense moments, and even now the TCC is very blunt and forthright about what still needs to be done. But we have come a long way from the distrust of the council widely felt in 2017.

Co-production is not a fluffy bolt-on The council will continue to be judged on what it does in two basic ways. Firstly, it must significantly improve services; secondly, it needs to embed genuine and sustainable co-production with the TCC in all it does.

The bottom line for residents, based on the bitter past experience of being ignored, is now simply ‘nothing about us without us’.

It is always about the people I came to know and respect so many of those involved, including residents from across the borough, officers and councillors. Each have made a huge commitment to making sure that never again could the voices of the people go unheard. Personal relationships matter too. The skills and experiences that individuals bring with them have been a key factor in making progress.

And it may be a cliché but it is still true: everyone brings something to the table.

Do not start with a blueprint Not even one with lots of consultation built in with a wide range of options. People know the difference between genuine engagement and ‘consultation’ as a cynical exercise to get support for decisions already made. This is especially true when trust has broken down, although many landlords are in a bubble of their own PR and may not be as far away from that fundamental fracture in relationships as they think they are.

Cast the net wide Active residents have been the lifeblood of the process in Kensington and Chelsea. But never forget that you must reach people whose voices are not usually heard.

This has been a constant challenge, but the impetus to make sure that people from all backgrounds and with different characteristics are involved has come from the residents themselves. Being fully inclusive needs to be a permanent focus of the co-productive process.

Listening not telling I always come back to the fundamental point: if you do not listen, you will not only miss out on people’s experiences and skills but also be open to the possibility of repeating past mistakes. Kensington and Chelsea TMO stopped listening a long time ago. The extent to which this was a factor in the Grenfell tragedy is yet to be fully understood. But residents and the council know that ignoring people went on far too long and this must never happen again.

WINTER 2020 |

17

Whatever happened to value for money?

By Alistair McIntosh, Chief Executive, HQN It’s a depressing time of the year, isn’t it? All the big bills thump onto the doormat at the same time. Wait till you see the Manila envelopes coming in from our housing associations. According to the latest global accounts from the RSH, the costs of running your homes have gone up by a whacking 8.8%. And this was while the rent cut was meant to be driving down costs. What’s going on?

The RSH prefers to zoom in on the median rather than the average for the headline cost per unit. That figure went up for groups from £3,397 in 2017/18 to £3,695 in 2018/19. Why? One obvious explanation is the costs of making homes safe after Grenfell. This is essential spending, so no one will quibble with it - unless you’re sorting out jerry-built new blocks that no one in their right mind would have bought in the first place. And we’ve seen some of that.

Support costs also skew the figures. There are 60 or so associations with fewer than 2,500 homes and many of these smaller outfits provide much-needed intensive support to people. Amongst this group, 11 have headline costs of over £10,000 per home while four come in at more than £20,000 per home. Keep an eye on this as new associations target this market. It’s a growing sector.

There are all sorts of factors that drive the national costs up, down and sideways. What you’ve got to do is look at a peer group that makes sense to you. It could be that you need different peers for different bits of the operation. But don’t try and cherry pick the ones that make you seem good, as the RSH knows this data inside out.

Whenever the figures come out, a few questions pop up. One of these is always whether bigger is better: surely with scale we get savings? That’s why we had the push for mergers. What’s the truth of the matter? Well, the biggest associations are also the most expensive (if you leave out the smalls due to the support effect). Will we ever see the benefits of those new-fangled IT systems that were supposed to be the answer to everything?

Here’s the league table: Size of association (homes)

Median headline cost per unit at group level

2,500-5,000

£3,869

5,000-10,000

£3,522

10,000-20,000

£3,534

20,000-30,000

£3,367

>30,000

£3,881

So, where are the biggies winning? They do enjoy the highest operating margin when it comes to social housing. But they are back down to bang average in line with the pack when you look across all their activities.

18

| WINTER 2020

You have to question whether those burgeoning development departments are pulling their weight.

Some of the costs you see there do seem chunky.

OK, so that’s a few of the highlights out of the way.

What should you do with the global accounts?

1. Be clear about why your own costs have risen or fallen: make sure that maintenance spending is in line with a credible stock survey; don’t stint on safety 2. Compare yourself to peer groups: pick those that share similarities to you; examine why you’re behind any high performers; say what you’ll do to close any gaps 3. Prepare a report to board on all of this with recommendations for any improvements; keep this in your back pocket for when the RSH comes to call 4. Explain your costs and trends versus peers in plain terms in the annual report to tenants: don’t hide behind infographics Please don’t forget that these are old figures. They go all the way back to March of last year. A lot has changed since then.

Boris is in and he wants all new homes to be low carbon by 2025; he wants the same to apply to all your homes by 2050. Where’s the money coming from for that? Have you put this into your business planning and stress testing?

While we’re still carrying on with the silly idea of tracking associations costs but not those for councils, this will change. They’re doing the exact same job after all. What will it mean for the VfM league tables when the councils join the fray? Could it drive the median down?

How will you react?

If your costs look sick then sort them out or explain them properly. But if you shape up well don’t rest on your laurels. The global accounts contain a tremendous amount of useful data. Get to grips with it today before someone sharper gets in first. The new breed of super civil servants that Dominic Cummings is recruiting will cast their beady eyes on your figures at some point.

Now, that’ll be a stress test!

Dominic is saying he wants to bring in “data scientists”.

They’re bound to alight on the fertile ground of the global accounts. And he wants us to work at “the frontiers of the science of prediction”. Can you show that you’ve called it right in the past? Will you get better at this in the future? Saying you’ve been surprised by the rent cut or falling sales will be like putting a nail in your own coffin.

And heaven help you if you didn’t see Brexit coming!

Use the data in the global accounts to get ready for the new world. But remember that these static past tense numbers will soon be Betamax.

Real time benchmarking and regulatory interventions based on it are not far away. Be quick or be dead.

The last word The end of the world as we know it?

By Colin Wiles It’s been quite a year in the climate change debate: Greta Thunberg lecturing world leaders; Europe’s hottest ever temperature; flooding across much of the continent. Most people know that urgent action is needed if we’re to limit the global increase in temperature to 1.5ºC, the figure set by the UN as a tipping point. But many people in the west are sceptical.

They ask: what about China and India? They produce much more greenhouse gas than we do.

Well, the UK was the first country to industrialise and we’ve over two centuries of carbon emissions to make up for. We’ve a moral duty to lead the way. That’s why the government’s set a net zero carbon target by 2050.

The main greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide, but methane, nitrous oxide and ozone also contribute to global warming.

This means our homes need to be carbon neutral by 2050, with none heated by gas, oil or coal, and instead connected to district heating schemes, solar panels, heat pumps and ‘green’ forms of energy – and no new properties connected to the gas grid after 2025.

Given that 80% of the homes that’ll exist in 2050 are already built it also means a huge programme of investment to retrofit existing homes, improving insulation, changing heating systems, and fitting low energy lighting. It’ll also involve much wider use of smart

technologies, like smart meters and movement sensors. Furthermore, we’ll need to better connect new and existing homes for cycling, walking and public transport.

By 2030, petrol and diesel cars are likely to be phased out, so we’ll need more charging points. And we must save water. The UK consumes about 150 litres per person per day, more than most European countries.

Why’s this important? Because it takes energy to deliver water to our homes, and water will become increasingly precious; meaning better use of grey water systems, and showers instead of baths.

We’re going to see hotter summers, stronger winds and heavier rainfall, so we’ll have to invest in robust fences, roofs and rainwater goods. All this amounts to a stonking shopping bill of £billions.

Are we up for this challenge?

Sadly, no, according to the government’s Committee on Climate Change, which concluded last year that UK housing is largely unprepared for dealing with climate change.

“We’re going to see hotter summers, stronger winds and heavier rainfall, so we’ll have to invest in robust fences, roofs and rainwater goods. All this amounts to a stonking shopping bill of £billions.”

HQN’s own member survey found a disappointing level of commitment to genuine action.

Many respondents felt their organisation wasn’t showing any leadership on the matter. Almost 75% felt their employer wasn’t doing enough to cut emissions, and only half of the organisations polled had an up to date strategy. This is worrying because heating and hot water for UK homes make up 25% of

total energy use and 15% of our total greenhouse gas emissions.

An additional 4% of greenhouse gases come from electricity used for appliances and lighting, with the average home emitting 2.7 tonnes of CO2 a year. Consequently, the housing sector has a massive part to play in tackling climate change.

To help you, HQN has published a toolkit. This isn’t just about building new homes and retrofitting existing ones. It covers every aspect of your organisation’s culture and activity, starting with the spread of your homes and whether a more compact structure would be beneficial. Perhaps stock disposals, swaps or mergers will help to reduce your carbon impact?

It also covers your role as an employer in reducing your staff’s carbon footprint, encouraging them to change their lifestyles; and your role in procurement, making sure contractors and suppliers are signed up to your ethos and targets.

Additionally, it covers your role as a landlord and how you can engage with your residents to see how they can help.

But, above all, this must start at the top with your board or committee.

They must show that they’re taking this seriously. Only then will the message spread across the whole organisation that the issue needs urgent attention.

Regrettably, only half of the respondents in our survey said that they had a lead or champion on climate change, and this is often delegated to a sustainability officer or similar post. So, if you’re reading this and feel passionately that your organisation isn’t doing enough, then we encourage you to give it a metaphorical kick up the backside.

You’ll have our full support in doing so.

Our climate change toolkit is available to HQN members through the climate change group. Go to http://bit.ly/2Sazmam to download it now.

WINTER 2020 |

19

Saving tomorrow today: Social landlords and climate change 16 April 2020 – London Climate change’s devastating effects are with us – and we need to learn how to deal with the implications very, very quickly.

With over four million homes, the social housing sector’s responsibility AND opportunity to reduce emissions is enormous.

We know you’re anxious to take action. We know that direction from government isn’t necessarily clear or consistent. Across the board, initiative is going to be key.

What can be done right now to reduce carbon production?

Featuring experts from a range of a fields, that’s exactly what HQN’s climate change event will aim to answer.

In the face of global warming’s dangers, this is probably the most important and pressing event we’ve ever held – and if you’re committed to addressing climate change in your organisation, essential to attend.

Visit hqnetwork.co.uk/events or call 01904 557150 for more information and to book your place.