Tag: unsafe accommodation

Taxpayer cash protected as crackdown on rogue landlords expands

Hundreds of thousands of people will benefit from an expansion of a trial to tackle poor housing and protect taxpayers’ cash from rogue landlords in England

  • Around 400,000 households receiving housing support to be better protected from rogue landlords thanks to an expanded crackdown scheme.
  • After a successful trial, 41 local authorities across England will now be empowered to better protect their local communities against non-compliance.
  • Comes as local authorities will be able to recover up to 24 months of rent from landlords who flout the rules – double the previous limit thanks to the Renters’ Right Act.

The scheme – successfully trialled in three council areas – protects public money by stopping it being wasted on unsafe housing through Rent Repayment Orders.

These legal orders clamp down on landlords who operate properties without the required licence, ignore improvement notices, or leave their houses in mouldy, dire conditions, and will now be expanded to a further 38 local authorities in England – helping to drive up living standards across the country. The scheme gives councils streamlined access to Universal Credit data which is crucial for completing Rent Repayment Order applications.

One of the trial areas – Camden, North London – is using the data sharing to recover nearly £100,000 in housing support and make a fraud referral, taking taxpayer cash out of the pockets of rogue landlords and back into the public purse.

Following successful results, the scheme – led by the Department for Work and Pensions and supported by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government – is now being expanded. This includes areas such as Enfield, where nearly 30,000 households receiving housing support are set to be better protected for the future.

This comes alongside expanded provisions under the Renters’ Rights Act allowing local authorities to seek Rent Repayment Orders for up to 24 months of rent – double the previous 12-month limit.

Minister for Social Security and Disability Sir Stephen Timms said: Thanks to this pilot, private renters in receipt of housing support will have stronger protections against landlords who fail to meet public standards.

!No one should live in unsafe or unsuitable housing. We are giving local authorities the tools they need to deter bad housing practice, and ensuring better value for money by upholding safe standards.”

Councillor Richard Olszewksi, Leader of Camden Council, said: “Everyone deserves a safe place to call home. With more than a third of households in Camden privately renting, it’s vital that we ensure landlords are meeting important safety and management standards for residents.

“This pilot helps us take further action against rogue landlords and regain the public money they wrongly pocketed. We’re investing this into more enforcement action and improving private sector housing conditions for everyone across the borough.”

Living in a decent, safe home is fundamental to health and work, and vulnerable renters who live in unsuitable accommodation are limited in their ability to take on work.

Enforcing better standards will drive up living standards through incentivising better practice in the future, as well as protecting taxpayer cash.

Justice for Tenants said: “This pilot has shown that we can deter criminality in the private rented sector and help fund housing enforcement services by making those who break the law shoulder more of the cost.

“This pilot is a massive win for all law-abiding landlords, tenants receiving public funds, the NHS, and every taxpayer in the country.”

Our pandemic accommodation was unsafe, asylum seekers tell research team

Study suggests relocations took place with little consideration of people’s needs and adversely affected their health and wellbeing

Asylum seekers who were moved to temporary accommodation during the Covid-19 pandemic have faced unsafe conditions, mobility restrictions and a lack of communication from service providers, according to a new study.

Edinburgh Napier researchers said the asylum seekers’ accounts – in which they likened their hotel-type accommodation to detention centres – “pointed to a provision that was inattentive towards their needs, vulnerability and wellbeing.”

The study, which focuses on accommodation in Glasgow, is particularly critical of a “mothers and baby” unit in the south of the city, which was opened last October.  Mothers, who were moved there by Home Office accommodation contractor Mears Group who run the facilities, criticised the cramped and noisy living conditions, unsuitable furniture and inadequate washing facilities.

The report authors call for an independent assessment of the facility to be carried out as a matter of urgency, and say no more families should be moved there until this has taken place.

Other recommendations in the interim report include calls for risk assessments for individuals in advance of any relocation, the minimising of stays in hotel-type accommodation, a review of limits on travel luggage, and the lifting of restrictions requiring residents to stay ‘on-site overnight’.

Edinburgh Napier researchers carried out the study, funded by the Economic and Social Research Council, as part of UK Research and Innovation’s response to Covid-19. They worked with migrant-led grassroots organisation Migrants Organising for Rights and Empowerment (MORE) to explore the impact of the pandemic on those placed in temporary accommodation in Glasgow.

Around 350 asylum seekers were moved from their settled flats into various hotels in the city centre following the outbreak of Covid-19 in March last year, which Mears Group claimed was an attempt to curb the spread of the virus. 

Researchers spoke to more than 50 asylum seekers and followed closely the lives of 14 participants of varied ages and backgrounds from December 2020 to June 2021, during the ‘second wave’ of the virus in the UK, through weekly online meetings. 

Accommodation for asylum seekers during the pandemic has long been a controversial topic. A mass outbreak of Covid at the repurposed Napier military barracks in Kent last winter and a mass stabbing at the Park Inn Hotel in Glasgow the previous June sparked debate and criticism of the government’s handling of asylum housing from parliamentary select committees.

The interim findings of the new Edinburgh Napier study suggest relocating asylum seekers to hotel-type accommodation had a negative impact on their health and wellbeing, and that they found social distancing almost impossible in their new environment.

Individuals living in hotels also faced a number of restrictions. They were unable to cook their own food or have visitors, had their weekly allowance withdrawn, and were told they could not spend nights away from the accommodation. The food served was said to be of poor quality, and it did not reflect their religious or cultural backgrounds.

The Glasgow-based mother and baby unit, the only such facility in the whole of Scotland, was reportedly noisy – with doors frequently banging and staff knocking, and had small beds, insufficient room ventilation and furniture which was unsuitable for breastfeeding. One mum told of her humiliation when the driver taking her to the unit told her she had too many belongings for a “destitute” asylum seeker.

The report said relocations to temporary accommodation took place with little consideration of people’s needs and with no consultation with asylum seekers themselves. There were cases of people being given less than 15 minutes to get ready for their move, and of individuals being threatened with deportation if they resisted.

Dr Taulant Guma, Principal Investigator and lecturer in Edinburgh Napier’s School of Applied Sciences, said: “While issues around asylum accommodation have received a significant amount of media and public attention since the start of the Covid-19 outbreak, little attention has been paid to the experiences and perspectives of asylum seekers themselves, who are directly and mostly affected by these housing arrangements.

“As a collaboration with a grassroots organisation, our study offers a unique and in-depth insight and understanding into the day-to-day realities of asylum seekers’ housing experiences during the pandemic.

“In the context of the current Afghan crisis and discourses of ‘warm welcome’, our findings offer a timely reminder of the cold realities that may await Afghan asylum seekers and refugees once they are relocated to their accommodation across the country.”

Robert Makutsa, Community Researcher with MORE, said: “The asylum accommodation system is broken because the level of duty of care that is required does not need to be met. Think about it; what legal action can an asylum seeker raise against Mears or the Home Office in their failure to adhere to the accommodation provision? None. 

“Their lives are defined and controlled by their agents and often it is us, migrant led organisations and grassroots groups, who put pressure on Mears when asylum seekers make complaints.”