Grenfell Tower Disaster: Homeless tenants allegedly moved away from London.

Martin B from Southampton homeless section is the person to answer this in detail as regards the duties of authorities to provide temporary accommodation, where it is situated and how much it costs, as well as the manner in which the final discharge of a rehousing duty is accomplished these days (again, location and cost being crucial issues).  But I think this disaster might have one positive outcome in that it will lift the lid on what is going on with homelessness and social housing at the moment.  Affordable social housing (really affordable in the way you or I would understand that term, rather than the way in which it is used in the housing sector: like, a rent you can afford to pay comfortably and still have enough income left to live your life) is being rapidly phased out.  It looks as if strings will be pulled to ensure that all or most of the displaced Grenfell Tower tenants end up with comparable accommodation in the same area, but this will stand in embarrassing contrast with what happens to homeless people in London generally, and just what an impossible position London authorities especially are in - I think that will become a big political story over the summer.

Yes, I agree.

See our facteheet Homelessness sections 4, 6, 8 and 9 in particular which details the current arrangements. There is a lot of evidence about out of London placements, let alone out of borough. Given the known housing shortages in RBKC, it’s very difficult to think about where families affected are going to end up.

My understanding is that out of area placements by London authorities are pretty common due to lack of availability and high prices locally.

The Housing Act specifies which LA must “secure” the accommodation but doesn’t specifically require it to be secured within the LA area.

Housing duty accommodation must be “suitable”  which may in practice require a placement within the local area in some cases (e.g. kids sitting exams, disabled peoples support networks) but my understanding is that it isn’t a requirement in “normal” cases.

Elliot Kent - 19 June 2017 09:15 AM

My understanding is that out of area placements by London authorities are pretty common due to lack of availability and high prices locally.

The Housing Act specifies which LA must “secure” the accommodation but doesn’t specifically require it to be secured within the LA area.

Housing duty accommodation must be “suitable”  which may in practice require a placement within the local area in some cases (e.g. kids sitting exams, disabled peoples support networks) but my understanding is that it isn’t a requirement in “normal” cases.

I tend to agree with those points, EK. I wonder if there is some other legislation that would offer some protection for survivors of the fire who are removed from their family and other support networks at a time when that support is most needed. Outside of HA 1996 I can’t think of any other legislation that would compel RBKC to comply with say, a duty of care.

I find it interesting how the ‘local connection test’ can qualify a claimant for full duty in the local area but at the same time does not prevent the LA from dumping the claimant in another area where the local connection test is not satisfied.

It’s the rather ironically named Localism Act 2011 that seems to have exacerbated the problem of out-of-area placements greatly.

Shelter warned at the time the Act was passed that this was a possible outcome Location, location: how localism is shunting homeless families out and obviously, with the advent of the benefit cap, legal aid cuts to housing and welfare benefits advice, and so on, their predictions have been proven well founded.

The attached HoC Library briefing paper on households in temporary accommodation from March 2017 notes that:

At the end of December 2016, 21,910 (29%) households in temporary accommodation were placed in another local authority’s area, representing an increase of 17% on December 2015. This is primarily a London phenomenon: 37% of households accepted as homeless by a London borough were housed in a different borough, compared to 10% in the rest of England

On a different issue, here’s the gov.uk press release from yesterday re the Grenfell Tower Residents’ Discretionary Fund -

Every household whose home has been destroyed as a result of the fire will receive a guaranteed £5,500 minimum down payment from the fund. This will be made up of a £500 cash payment and £5,000 delivered through the Department of Work and Pensions into bank accounts or similar in a single payment

More: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/details-of-grenfell-tower-residents-discretionary-fund

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK - 19 June 2017 10:19 AM

It’s the rather ironically named Localism Act 2011 that seems to have exacerbated the problem of out-of-area placements greatly.

Shelter warned at the time the Act was passed that this was a possible outcome Location, location: how localism is shunting homeless families out and obviously, with the advent of the benefit cap, legal aid cuts to housing and welfare benefits advice, and so on, their predictions have been proven well founded.

The attached HoC Library briefing paper on households in temporary accommodation from March 2017 notes that:

At the end of December 2016, 21,910 (29%) households in temporary accommodation were placed in another local authority’s area, representing an increase of 17% on December 2015. This is primarily a London phenomenon: 37% of households accepted as homeless by a London borough were housed in a different borough, compared to 10% in the rest of England

Some excellent links there, thanks, Paul

Its becoming a string of disasters, first the fire, then bereavement followed by displacement and isloation followed by the strong posibility of LA tenants being pushed into private rented accommodation and for some, loss of ‘secure tenant’ status. But what can they do!

shawn - 19 June 2017 10:26 AM

On a different issue, here’s the gov.uk press release from yesterday re the Grenfell Tower Residents’ Discretionary Fund -

Every household whose home has been destroyed as a result of the fire will receive a guaranteed £5,500 minimum down payment from the fund. This will be made up of a £500 cash payment and £5,000 delivered through the Department of Work and Pensions into bank accounts or similar in a single payment

More: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/details-of-grenfell-tower-residents-discretionary-fund

Next up…

We cannot pay you income related benefit because ......!

Another Volunteer - 19 June 2017 11:09 AM

Next up…

We cannot pay you income related benefit because ......!

This came out last week in relation to payments from the London Emergencies Trust and the We Love Manchester Emergency Fund ... so assume we might expect something similar?

Disregard of emergency funds for the purposes of social security benefits:  New statutory instrument

shawn - 19 June 2017 11:31 AM

This came out last week in relation to payments from the London Emergencies Trust and the We Love Manchester Emergency Fund ... so assume we might expect something similar?

Disregard of emergency funds for the purposes of social security benefits:  New statutory instrument

Good find,Shawn. Thanks

This was a recent case on suitability re temp ......  https://nearlylegal.co.uk/2016/10/time-distance-suitability/

I would think that in this case the LA would, given the tragic circumstances, be wanting to rehouse locally.  I imagine they might also be putting out requests for neighbouring authorities to help provide decants, that is if they are pushed to rehouse locally themselves.

Latest data @PovertyLondon @npi_research shows temporary accommodation placements by Kensington&Chelsea; out of the borough is very high: 74%

https://twitter.com/Mubin_Haq/status/877196640851038208

National Housing Federation is (loosely) coordinating local social housing providers with provision of local temporary accommodation.  For example the association I work under the umbrella of were able to offer 2 very recent voids in a neighbouring borough by Wednesday lunchtime.  This doesn’t mean that all will be assisted in this way as the number of displaced households is/was significant but at least goes some way to relieving the immediate pressure face by RBKC from their own stock.

That’s really good Alice. Shows with imagination and compassion things can be done locally. 

Via gov.uk:

Communities Secretary Sajid Javid today (21 June 2017) announced that the government has acquired the first tranche of permanent new homes to rehouse local residents affected by the fire at Grenfell Tower.

The 68 flats are all newly built social housing and form part of the Kensington Row development in Kensington and Chelsea.

Work is ongoing to identify the needs of those affected who have lost their homes and match them to suitable housing. The expectation is that these new properties will be offered as one of the options to permanently rehouse residents from Grenfell Tower.

The increase to local social housing is a significant step towards meeting the government’s commitment that every family from Grenfell Tower will be rehoused in the local area ...

More than 110 housing needs assessments have been completed to date and offers will then be made to families and this process will continue until every family has been housed ...

The new permanent housing is expected to be completed by the end of July. The Department for Communities and Local Government has also already committed to finding suitable accommodation in the local area for victims who lost their homes within a maximum of 3 weeks.

More: First new homes secured for victims of the Grenfell Tower disaster

The following is well worth a read, it starts off with the lessons of the Great Fire of London 1666 and explains using plain common sense….. exactly how you keep people and buildings safe in cities, all in a non sensational, not overly technical, matter of fact way….... 

https://colinwiles.com/2017/06/29/reflections-on-the-grenfell-tower-catastrophe/

Powerful.

Good piece by Jon Robins on the work of North Kensington Law Centre in the wake of the fire.

Underfunded and overstretched: the lawyers seeking justice for Grenfell