CASP’s Initial Response to Camden's Housing Management Improvement Plan November 26th 2007

Camden Association of Street Properties

camdenstreetproperties@yahoo.co.uk





November 26th 2007

Dear Camden Council and Councillors,

Housing Management Improvement Project – CASP’s Response to Consultation.

Please find below Camden Association of Street Properties views to the recent HMIP report on which you are consulting.

This has been broken down into 5 headings for ease of reference, although it is recognised that some areas overlap.

    Rents

    Voids

    Housing Management

    Estate Management

    Patch Management

Rents

•    Tenants may find it difficult to deal with a central team that is unlikely to be aware of difficult individual circumstances such as tenants facing financial hardship, or a family / couple dealing with a domestic violence issue.

•    There is a general concern that these tasks will be performed by staff employed in call centres. Members have already raised concerns about the general performance of call centres.

•    In terms of local knowledge the Council relies heavily on information held in officers’ heads and they are moving towards electronic records so all the information is available to anyone in the council needing it.

•    Dangers around confidentiality when information is recorded electronically. How can Camden safeguard itself and its customers against such dangers?

•    Protocols will be needed as the Council is moving fast towards e-information.

•    The possibility of IT system failures and is Camden going to continue using its present system, or is it planning to install a new system similar to other organisations like the NHS which has encountered numerous problems and failures?

•    Effective customer contact is one area that urgently needs to improve.  When someone calls he/she has to get through to the right person who can solve / pass on the relevant query. The situation could become worse as tenants need to increasingly rely on services provided by call centres.

Voids

•    There appears to be different definitions of voids. One tenant has described how they were moved out to allow for refurbishment and the property was declared void while in fact it was still tenanted. It needs to be made clear that tenants will still have security of tenure in such cases and this factor needs to be reflected in any terminology used by Camden.

•    Tenants in the above situation need to know who to contact when making enquiries, as the role of DHO’s & Renewals in the process is currently unclear.

•    During the process of refurbishment a tenant described how a property was declared void and left inadequately secured for 6 months. In fact, squatters gained access to the property on two separate occasions. The tenant also described serious problems around communication between the DHO and Renewals and how this exacerbated the problem further, especially when keys to the property were mislaid.

•    When a void property is shown to a prospective tenant it seems sensible to inform other tenants of the date the property is being viewed, especially where tenants share the same front door. Tenants have reported feeling intimidated when seeing groups of strangers congregating in communal hallways.

•    A member stressed that a void property can be situated in the middle of a community. If a tenant leaves he is under an obligation to clear the premises. One member had inspected a property after it had been squatted and found it full of debris. It is now dangerous to repair and it is having an effect on the community. Why isn’t this flagged up?

Housing Management

•    Housing Management can have different focuses: the needs of vulnerable people, community engagement /TP/ employment advice, enforcing tenancy conditions.

•    The spirit of the time is to ‘localise’, but Camden seems to be going against this trend and is looking to centralise most services. This will dramatically change the function of a Housing Manager and there is a need to be clear about their exact role.

•    How does Camden define ‘vulnerable’?

•    Many tenants have been allocated ‘street property’ accommodation because Camden considers them to be ‘vulnerable’. It is crucial that this factor is taken into account during any discussions and that any changes in its housing management structure reflect this important factor.

•    The different ‘dynamics’ of each district has been highlighted. For example, Kentish Town has a very high concentration of LBC street properties. These properties may provide accommodation for many vulnerable residents. The majority of LBC street property tenants do not receive a caretaking / patch management service and this can impact negatively on elderly / disabled and other vulnerable residents. This can provide different challenges in terms of housing management and this should be reflected in any review.

•    Over the years many tenants have developed a good and trusting relationship with DHO officers (EO’s, Area Managers, etc). There is now a risk that information ‘shared’ during this time will be lost, especially as Camden moves towards centralising its services.

•    Effective customer contact / service is one area that really needs to improve. When somebody calls he/she has to be put through to the right person who can solve / pass on the relevant query. It is also crucial that all queries are dealt with in a sensitive and fair manner.

•    It was noted that some DHO staff are more capable than others, especially when dealing with issues around ASB and the issue of some staff needing additional training was raised. It is also acknowledged that this can lead to different levels of service.

•    It is also acknowledged that some issues such as ASB are best tackled at a local level, often in partnership with other agencies, although it was acknowledged that communication between these groups could be more effective.

•    Some members highlighted the previous role of Neighbourhood Managers and this was seen as a positive contribution.

•    It is important to try and address the issue of too much officer time being spent on dealing with similar issues being raised by the same tenants – any service provided needs to be a fair one and this needs to be reflected in how officer time is utilised.

Estate Management

Please also refer to Housing Management as there appears to be some overlap.

It was noted that the majority of LBC street property tenants do not receive a caretaking service unlike estate based residents.

Whilst this appears to be the case, the Association recognises the important role played by caretakers, especially when supporting vulnerable tenants.

Patch Management

Patch Mangers rarely get involved with LBC street properties and this was seen as negative.

The role of the role of a Patch Manager can be difficult to interpret; sometimes they get involved with ASB, community involvement, etc, but their successes are never advertised.

The role of any Patch Manager might also include trying to raise morale / awareness within a diverse community and this might include increasing their role within TP in Camden.

Again, it was noted that the majority of LBC street property tenants do not receive a caretaking or patch management service and this was seen as detrimental to some tenants who may require practical assistance with some daily tasks – Camden needs to much clearer about what alternative services tenants can access in order to support them to carry out these tasks.

Yours sincerely,



Mike Cookson Taylor
(Secretary, Camden Association of Street Properties)