Communities and Local Government CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by the Brent Private Tenants’ Rights Group
1. Executive Summary
1.1 Brent Private Tenants’ Rights Group (BPTRG) welcomes this opportunity to make a submission to the Select Committee on the Private Rented Sector. We have contributed to the submission by the National Private Tenants’ Organisation (NPTO), which is comprehensive in its coverage. In this submission we wish to focus on the state of and need for advice and support for tenants, especially the most vulnerable in the private rented sector.
1.2 According to research by the Pro-Housing Alliance in 2012 there has been an estimated increase of 167% in enquiries to CABs about (tenure) insecurity over the past four years. The BPTRG’s case load is large but artificially constrained by the way that advice is funded. Over the past ten years the decrease in funding and the rules under which the Legal Services Commission prescribes advice is leading to a progressive loss of experienced advisers, an uncertain existence for specialist voluntary sector advice services and frustration for individual advisers unable to spend sufficient time on the growing number of complex cases, resulting from the state of the private rented sector and the vulnerability of the clients.
1.3 We are facing a situation in housing where renting in the private sector in London is the only option for the young, working people and increasing numbers of households in housing need and the homeless who are placed in the sector temporarily or as a permanent solution, because there is very limited social rented housing. A very recent report Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion by New Policy Institute 2012 and funded by JRF states that households in poverty have doubled in the private rented sector over the past decade.
1.4 In 2013 growing numbers of the poorest and most vulnerable households have no option but to live in a sector where the Government’s survey of private landlords 2010 shows that the majority of landlords are private individuals with one property, we would argue amateurs letting one or a few properties. The relative cheap end of the sector is characterised by short-term lettings and therefore insecurity for tenants, poor physical housing conditions, overcrowding [even low rents are too high and without benefit help the rent gap will mean crowding into smaller dwellings] and rogue landlords (as evidenced by Shelter research “Sustain” in 2010–11 and the constant stream of tenants approaching local authorities and advice agencies). Many tenants are likely to be forced to move to parts of the country where they have no social support networks and their need for timely housing advice and support will be acute.
1.5 Our submission therefore emphasises the need for independent, specialist advice for private tenants in the short to medium term, while measures to improve the disadvantages of private renting, about which the Select Committee will receive many recommendations, are resolved.
Given the foreseeable expansion of private renting as the only housing option for all sections of our working and vulnerable communities, BPTRG urges the Select Committee to raise with other relevant Government departments the need for adequately funded advice services.
2. Brent Private Tenants’ Rights Group (BPTRG)
2.1 BPTRG was established in the mid-nineteen eighties when a group of private tenants came together to campaign for improved living conditions and better laws to protect them. Tenants have always been at the heart of everything we do.
2.2 Although BPTRG’s services are delivered locally in West London, its reputation is recognised and valued regionally and nationally. As one of the leading organisations in the development of policies for the private rented sector, firmly based on the experiences of our service users, we are invited to participate in a range of policy forums, including the London Mayor’s Housing Forum chaired by the Deputy Mayor responsible for housing and the PRS Policy Forum, a “Chatham House” rules group chaired by Lord (Richard) Best. We have been members of a number of Government Task Groups and have addressed relevant parliamentary Select Committees.
2.3 The Centre operates as a Housing Advice Centre offering specialist legal advice and representation on housing matters. This work is delivered under a contract with the Legal Services Commission to provide Legal Help and Help at Court and Legal Aid.
2.4 It is also a resource centre and meeting place for private tenants and other community groups. Service users are encouraged to become members of BPTRG and to participate in the development of policies. Among our active campaigns are “Warming Up” which calls for more energy efficient PRS homes and a reduction in fuel poverty; and our work with partners to highlight the impact of the restrictions on housing benefit.
2.5 Throughout most of BPTRG’s existence it has complemented its core advice work with funding for time-limited projects. These have included intensive advice and support as part of regeneration areas (Kilburn and Harlesden); outreach advice services funded through the Big Lottery Fund; and a three and a half year programme called “HomePlan” (2009–11), generously funded by The Tudor Trust. This project aimed to raise clients’ aspirations and support them in a journey towards their goals by focusing on money management and financial inclusion; training and employment; community engagement; health; accessing support services; and housing.
2.6 We were also able to develop financial inclusion services through a one-year grant in 2010–11 from the Department of Work and Pensions. The legacy of this work is that we now run Brent Mutual, a branch of Hillingdon Credit Union, so we can encourage small savings and facilitate small loans for our clients.
2.7 During this period of austerity we see limited prospects of gaining development funding—funding bodies have decreasing resources and huge competition for the money available. Local authorities are also limiting or withdrawing funding from the voluntary sector and, while voluntary agencies will look at exploiting market opportunities for cross-funding advice services such activity also requires time and resources.
2.8 Over the 25 years that we have been working with tenants in insecure housing we have built an unparalleled expertise which is widely recognised. We have a Community Legal Services specialist Quality Mark for housing.
3. Funding for Voluntary Sector Advice Agencies
3.1 Changes in 2010–11 included the ending of our “Unified Contract” with the Legal Services Commission, replaced by a “Standard Contract” from November 2010, which we successfully bid for as a Consortium with the other two main advice providers in Brent, Brent CAB and Brent Community Law Centre. Although the Consortium was driven by the contract requirement to bid for contracts covering housing, welfare benefits and debt advice, we used this opportunity to explore how the users of all three organisations could benefit from more co-ordinated services.
3.2 The organisation has been in a vulnerable position since the onset of the recession with higher overheads and a lower income as the Legal Services Commission implements a series of cuts. All fees to all providers were reduced by 10% from October 2011 and further reductions are expected. The annual grant from Brent Council was reduced by 12% from April 2011.
3.3 Every year our Housing Advice Centre assists hundreds of vulnerable people who are financially eligible for legal help. Over the last two years our Housing Advice Centre has seen a marked increase in the number of very vulnerable clients, including an increase in those with mental health problems. Austerity is hitting the poorest very hard and families are becoming more stressed as they try to cope with reduced incomes, increased unemployment and poorer living conditions. At the same time, support services are being reduced and we are finding it harder to refer people on to agencies better placed to provide the type of support which falls outside our remit and for which we have no funding.
3.4 Legal aid contracts are set to be severely restricted in both volume and scope from April 2013. The number of housing matters in each Legal Service Commission procurement area will be dramatically reduced in 2013–14. For Brent the reduction is from 1,520 to 638. In addition, the advice previously available for Debt and Welfare Benefit matters will be reduced to nil. In Brent there was funding available for 2,300 such cases. This is inexplicable given the savage reduction in benefits due to the change in the method of calculating the Local Housing Allowance and the housing benefit caps which are forcing thousands of vulnerable families into debt and homelessness. We cannot understand how the Government has been able to reconcile this with their stated wish to reduce homelessness.
3.5 The reduction in the scope for legal help is of equal concern. The restriction to only the most urgent housing problems denies the opportunity for early intervention which in almost all cases is more effective and more cost effective. This is particularly true in the area of homelessness prevention. From April next year, we will not be able to intervene in a landlord and tenant dispute until the landlord starts possession proceedings. If we are approached, as we frequently are, by tenants who are concerned about the initial signs of damp, or the cracks appearing in the ceiling, we will have to say that we cannot help at this time, but they will be eligible for help when the ceiling has collapsed or when their home is riddled with dry rot and their health is suffering as a result. While this may result in a saving to the legal aid budget, costs will certainly mount for the NHS and for local authority homeless services.
3.6 Unless these issues are addressed urgently we foresee a number of specialist housing advice services being forced to close. We are aware of many, including our own, whose future is uncertain. Some, such as Brent CAB, have decided to cease specialist housing advice as the climate in which we are now expected to operate is simply too difficult. Those that remain will be forced to spend an increasing amount of (unpaid) time explaining to potential clients why they are unable to help them.
4. Context of Submission
4.1 The Committee will receive many submissions citing key very recent research on the private rented sector from prominent sources including the Government’s own evidence from the 2011 Census and the 2010 CLG research on private landlords, various Shelter reports including the interim report “Sustain 2012” and the Pro-Housing Alliance report “Poor Homes, poor health—to heat or eat? Private sector tenant choices in 2012”.
4.2 From all these sources the key messages and context within which BPTRG works are:
Private renting in London is growing
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3
Is private renting for all?
4.2.4
Worklessness.
Poverty/material disadvantage/financial stress.
Lack of social support.
Poor physical or mental health.
Poor housing or physical environment.
Low or no qualifications.
4.2.5
Contributing to homelessness not preventing it
4.2.6
4.2.7
A Shelter survey in November 2012 found that Brent had 5,957 children in temporary accommodation, the highest number of the 29 boroughs to provide information.
Poor physical conditions in private renting
4.2.8
4.2.9
4.2.10
4.2.11
Changes in the welfare system
4.2.12
4.2.13
Official Government figures show that more households in Brent will be affected by this change than anywhere else in the country.
4.2.14
It is estimated that in 2012, 65% of tenants in the private rented sector have less than £600 income per week [about £30,000 a year]. After housing costs are taken into account, around 50% of private tenants fall under the national poverty line.
4.2.15
4.2.16
Switching to monthly single payments to households is a significant challenge to low-income families and likely to affect women disproportionately;
The scope and scale of financial support and advice to help people through the transition needs urgent clarification;
Payments of UC need to be explained clearly and regularly, with the elements intended to support children identified separately; and
Service users must be informed about how schemes are changing at a local level.
4.2.17
January 2013