Proposed changes to the allocation process - Blackpool Council

2011. The My Home Choice Fylde Coast choice based lettings system went live with its first biddinground from 6 th June 2012, so while the existing policies are nearly two years old, they have only beenin use for five months to date.When the CAP and ALPs were approved, there was a commitment to regularly review the policies toensure that they continue to be appropriate.Within their Area Lettings Plans each authority stressed certain issues that they felt were specific tothem in framing their ALP and where they had a strategic imperative.Blackpool’s key issues were:(i)(ii)(iii)Local ConnectionTransienceThe number of people on the housing waiting list for Blackpool with no chance of everbeing housed in social housingFylde emphasised:(i) Management of expectations of the shortage of available social housing(ii) Rural communities(iii) Large and growing proportion of older people in its area(iv) Opportunities for people to access supported housing(v) Low demand for sheltered housing(vi) Access to social housing for the under 25’s(vii) Accommodation for single peopleWyre’s issues were:(i)(ii)(iii)(iv)Shortage of social rented accommodationRural communitiesLarge and growing proportion of older people and the specialist accommodation neededThe need to tackle the issues of worklessness and regeneration in Fleetwood2. Key legislative changesThe Localism Act 2011As the title of the act infers the intention of it is to give power back to local authorities andcommunities. It is a wide ranging piece of legislation, but the key housing issues that will affect thereview of the CAP and ALPs are summarised below.(i) HomelessnessThis is one of the key changes and allows local authorities to meet their homeless duty by offeringsuitable accommodation in the private sector (a consultation period on what “suitable”accommodation should be has just expired), provided that the tenancy is for a fixed term of at least12 months and that if the applicant becomes unintentionally homeless and reapplies foraccommodation within two years, the local authority still has a duty to them irrespective of whetherthe applicant still has a priority need.If we tie in to this a strategic aim to make better use of the private rented sector then this will help toreduce the number of people in need of housing and help to free up social homes.(ii) Allocations/Qualifying PersonsHere the Act amends the definitions of “eligible and qualifying persons” and in particular enables alocal authority to decide what classes of persons are or are not ‘qualifying persons’ for the purpose of2

allocations. The Localism Act has given local authorities the opportunity to define qualifying personsas those with a local connection and crucially to define the period of entitlement to when a localconnection is achieved beyond that of the previous legal definition in section 199 of the 1996 HousingAct.In doing this however councils must ensure that classes of people excluded are not done so onunreasonable grounds and that policies must be proportional to their stated goals in their allocationsand tenancy strategies.Another big change is that the Act gives local authorities and Registered Providers (RPs) theopportunity to exclude non-priority transfer applicants from their allocation schemes. An offer ofaccommodation to an existing tenant seeking a transfer will not be classified as an allocationmeaning that if they so wish authorities can separate and deal separately with transfer applicants.(iii) Flexible tenanciesAs mentioned above the Act also introduces the ability to offer flexible tenancies. These areessentially the same as a secure tenancy but for a fixed term of which the minimum period is 2 years,but it is anticipated that those using them will adopt a period of at least 5 years.This is intended to remove the concept of a tenancy for life and to target tenants who may now be inwell paid jobs and who no longer have the need for this subsidised form of housing. This option linksinto the “Pay to Stay” proposals which give authorities the power to let such highly paid tenants tostay in properties as long as they are willing to pay market rent for the privilege.In summary then the Act gives local authorities greater freedom to set their own policies about whoshould qualify to go on the housing waiting list in their area whilst still having to keep the “reasonablepreference” and “additional preference” categories to safeguard the most vulnerable local people.Additional Guidance – Allocation of accommodation: Guidance for local housing authorities inEngland (effective from 29 June 2012)As mentioned above the Government has issued new statutory guidance in conjunction with theLocalism Act in June 2012. Authorities are obliged to have regard to this guidance when devising,implementing and modifying their schemes.The guidance stresses the need for local authorities to have regard to their homeless and tenancystrategies when preparing or modifying their schemes.The following are key elements of the guidance;• Unacceptable behaviourPreviously in order to treat someone as ineligible for housing because of previous unacceptablebehaviour or to reduce the priority of these applicants, local authorities had to define the type ofbehaviour as specified in legislation and to abide by a specified test.The Localism Act removed these provisions and now leaves it to local authorities and RPs to definefor themselves what unacceptable behaviour is.• Local connectionUnder the previous rules authorities were unable to refuse to consider applications for housing frompeople without a local connection, but in determining relative priorities for an allocation, authoritieswere able to have regard to whether or not applicants had a local connection with the district.The Localism Act has given authorities the power to define qualifying persons as those with a localconnection and in turn that period of local connection is not prescribed as previously.3

• Local Connection and armed forces personnelHere the guidance initially given was expanded on by the specific guidance which came into effect on24 August 2012 and more details of this are set out below.• Working/community contributionAlthough many think that it was the Localism Act that gave local authorities the discretion to givepriority to people in work, or who are making a “community contribution”, councils already had thesepowers given to them by the former government in 2009.The Localism Act merely expanded on that and says:“Local authorities are urged to consider how they can use their allocation policies to supportthose households who want to work, as well as those who – while unable to engage in paidemployment – are contributing to their community in other ways, for example, through voluntarywork…..this might involve for example, framing an allocation scheme to give some preference tohouseholds who are in low paid work or employment related training, even where they are not in thereasonable preference categories, or to give greater preference to those households in thereasonable preference categories who are also in work or who can demonstrate that they are activelyseeking work.”Finally on this subject authorities are urged to consider how best they can make use of the newpower to offer flexible tenancies to support households in low paid work and incentivise others to takeup employment opportunities.• Foster carers and adoptersOn the subject of foster carers and adopters the guidance says that they may be given “reasonablepreference” for a housing allocation on welfare grounds. For clarity this group is defined as:“Foster carers or adopters who would require an extra bedroom to accommodate a foster or adoptivechild, authorities will wish to weigh up the risk that the application to foster or adopt may beunsuccessful…against the wider benefits which would be realised if the placement was successful.”• Under occupiersThe statutory guidance also makes specific reference to authorities framing their allocation schemeson this subject in relation to the Housing Benefit changes occurring in April 2013 and gives councilsthe opportunity to frame their proposals as they wish as long as they aren’t breaching statutoryovercrowding legislation specifically to factor in the effects of the Welfare reform Act 2012. It goes onto say that:“Social tenants affected by the under occupation measure may choose to move to more suitablysized accommodation in the private rented sector…one way to encourage tenants to consider thisoption might be to ensure they are given some degree of preference for an allocation if they apply fora new social tenancy at a later date.”The practicalities of carrying out such a suggestion would possibly be hard to do.The Allocation of Housing (Qualification Criteria for Armed Forces Personnel) (England) Regulations2012 (SI 2012/1869) (effective from 24 August 2012)This guidance supplemented that in the general guidance above and is a consequence of the “ArmedForces Covenant” that was published by the Government on 16 May 2011. That document described:“…an expression that of the moral obligation that the Government and the nation owe to those whoserve or have served in the armed forces and their families.”4

These regulations strengthen the position of some armed forces personnel in seeking access tosocial housing. Specifically the guidance says that local authorities should give additional preferenceto the following categories of people who fall within one or more of the reasonable preferencecategories and who have urgent housing needs:a) former members of the armed servicesb) serving members of the armed forces who need to move because of a serious injury, medicalcondition or disability sustained as a result of their servicec) bereaved spouses and civil partners of members of the armed forces leaving services familyaccommodation following the death of their spouse or partnerd) serving or former members of the reserve forces who need to move because of a seriousinjury, medical condition or disability sustained as a result of their serviceThe guidance further goes on to say that even where there is no local connection to an area, localauthorities must not disqualify certain current or former members of the armed forces from applyingfor social housing if they are:a) members of the armed forces and former service personnel where the application is madewithin five years of dischargeb) bereaved spouses and civil partners of members of the armed forces leaving services familyaccommodation following the death of their spouse or partnerc) serving or former members of the reserve forces who need to move because of a seriousinjury, medical condition or disability sustained as a result of their serviceThe obligation to consider current and former armed forces personnel and their families for a periodof up to 5 years after their discharge is the key point here.“High Income Social Tenants Pay to Stay Consultation paper”On 12 June 2012 the Government started consulting on the above and this consultation period endedon 12 September 2012. In essence the proposals suggest that above a certain income threshold highincome tenants should be asked to pay a market rent for their social sector housing, although it wouldnot be compulsory for social landlords to do this.The Government’s logic for this proposal is based on the fact that across England there are between1,000 to 6,000 persons where the household has a combined income of over £100,000 per annumand 12,000 to 34,000 who earn £60,000 or more. The Government has estimated that there is aneffective subsidy provided by sub market rents in social housing of approximately £3,600 and it feelsthat this is unfair to provide this subsidy to people on such high incomes. Of course should socialproviders wish to adopt this policy then they could only do so if they can access tenant income dataand that would require change in law.The background of a number of legal changes made as well as a local commitment to keep underreview our regional priorities lead to meetings involving the housing providers and local authoritieswhich lead us to address a series of key issues which in turn helped to form the basis of jointproposals which are set out below.3. The Role of Social Housing in the Fylde Coast Housing MarketThe key features of social rented housing in the Fylde Coast area are:1. The total number of social rented homes in the Fylde Coast area is very low and most peoplereceiving Housing Benefit are housed in the private rented sector:5

Existing homes by tenure – latest available figures:OwnerOccupied %SocialRented%PrivateRented %Total Number ofHomesBlackpool (HCS67 11 22 68,2502008)Fylde (HCS 2008) 80 6 14 35,700Wyre (2006) 84 7 9 48,511England (EHCS2005)71 18 11 N/AThe numbers of households in receipt of assistance with their housing costs through Housing Benefitare set out below, with a breakdown in the numbers housed in social rented homes and the privaterented sector in each area:Number of HBRecipients% of allhouseholdsreceiving HBNumber ofSocial RentedHomesNumber (and%) of HBrecipientshoused insocial rentedhomesNumber (and%) of HBrecipientshoused inPrivate RentedSectorBlackpool 20,110 30.01 7,257 5,900 (29%) 14,210 (71%)Fylde 4,490 12.47 2,271 1,720 (38%) 2,770 (62%)Wyre 6,880 13.23 3,483 2,850 (41%) 4,030 (59%)Fylde Coast 31,480 20.31 13,011 10,470 (33%) 21,010 (67%)Much of the demand for social rented homes comes from households who are living in the largerprivate rented sector. Social rented housing provides homes that are more secure, at lower rents, andoften in better condition than many of the homes that are rented in the private sector. This means thatthere is strong overall demand for social housing across the Fylde Coast.2. The level of social rented housing stock varies by location and sizeThe social rented housing stock is concentrated in Fleetwood in Wyre, in pockets of St Anne’s,Kirkham and Freckleton in Fylde, and in the large estates of Grange Park and Mereside in Blackpool.There is very little social rented housing in most rural areas. It can be difficult to find appropriateprivate rented accommodation in rural areas because of competition from tenants not reliant onHousing Benefit and because rents are higher than Housing Benefit will cover. In these areas, socialrented housing can be the only option for people on low incomes.The table below shows how the size of the social rented housing stock compares with needs.Comparison of Size Requirements of Households in Need with Profile of Social Rented Housing ReletsBlackpool Fylde WyreSizeHouseholds Profile of Households Profile of Households Profile ofin Need Re-lets in Need Re-lets in Need Re-letsBedsit / 1 Bed 50% 73% 56% 19% 49% 41%2 Bed 33% 17% 19% 58% 33% 31%3 Bed 12% 10% 15% 23% 17% 27%> 3 Bed 6%

There is a mismatch in Blackpool, with a high proportion of re-lets that are bedsits or 1 bed flats, andvery few large family houses. In Fylde, by contrast, there is a lack of 1 bedroom accommodation,although also very few large family houses, while in Wyre the sizes are more in balance.It is especially important that effective use is made of those properties in shortest supply comparedwith demand.3. There are more small households in the Fylde Coast, and more older and disabled householdsthan the average for the North WestThe proportion of people aged over 65 years in each of the Fylde Coast authorities is above the NorthWest average of 16%, with Blackpool at 19% and both Fylde and Wyre at 23%. The proportion ofhouseholds headed by people aged over 65 is as set out below, with ONS projected increases.% of households with head aged 65 years orolder2008 2033Blackpool 28.57% 35.21%Fylde 36.11% 43.90%Wyre 36.73% 47.54%Partly as a result of increasing numbers of older people, ONS projections also predict significant risesin the number of smaller households in each borough.A significant proportion of social rented homes are let to people with disabilities or limiting long termillnesses. For example, in Blackpool, 38% of Council house lettings in 2009/10 were to people unableto work because of long term illness, and in Fylde, over a third of the social rented housing stock issheltered housing only let to older people.In summary, the social rented housing stock in the Fylde Coast is in short supply compared withdemand and fulfils a critical role in providing secure and decent quality accommodation for those whocan’t access accommodation that meets their needs in the private rented sector. There are acuteshortages of social rented housing in many locations, especially in rural areas, and shortages ofparticular types of housing, such as larger family houses.4. Evidence from myhomechoicefyldecoast 4 th June to 30 th September 20121. Applicant ProfileThe first reports from myhomechoicefyldecoast help to give us a profile of applicants to the scheme tothe end of September 2012. The reports tell us that: -• There are currently 3715 active applicants (10,000 applicants haven’t re registered)• 86% of applicants are applicants not currently living in social rented housing, 13% are transferapplicants from existing providers and 1% are homeless applicants with a statutory duty torehouse• 73% of applicants want general needs housing with 13% wanting sheltered and noinformation on the other 14%• Overall 40% of applicants are male and 60% are female, although in Fylde and Wyre a higherpercentage of applicants are women• 20% of applicants are aged 19-25, 28% are 26-40, 30% 41-59 and 22% 60+• 1% of applicants are in band A, 9% in B, 1% in C, 22% in D, 5% in E and 62% in F• All 3 local authority areas are broadly reflective of the overall picture, but in Fylde the figure forF is much higher at 71% (compared to around 60% in Blackpool and Wyre)• 14% of applicants currently live with family or friends, 18% are a tenant of a social housinglandlord and 36% are living in the private rented sector• 47% of applicant households have 1 member, 28% 2, 12% 3, 7% 4 and 6% more than 4. InBlackpool 51% are single person households• Finally here, 86% of applicants are not in paid employment and 14% employed7

2. Bid InformationThe following is the breakdown of how bids have been made for properties so far: -• Online bids 86%• Call Centre 12%• Auto bids 1%• SMS 1%The section below illustrates the relationship between total number of bids made and how successfulthey were.3. Properties let by type and banda) BlackpoolPropertyTypeBand A% & No.Band B% & NoBand C% & NoBand D% & NoBand E% & NoBand F% & No% & No.of totalletsBedsit/studio 1% 2 2% 3 1% 1 4% 61 bed flat 1% 2 28% 56 1% 2 19% 37 1% 2 8% 17 58% 1162 bed flat 4% 8 1% 1 3% 6 2% 4 10% 191 bed1% 2 1% 2bungalow2 bed1% 1 1% 1bungalow2 bed house 2% 3 6% 12 1% 2 2% 4 11% 213 bed house 1% 1 6% 13 1% 1 5% 9 13% 244 bed house 1% 1 1% 12 bedmaisonetteTotal % ineach band1% 1 1% 14% 6 48% 95 4% 6 32% 60 1% 2 11% 22 100%191b) FyldePropertyTypeBand A% & No.Band B% & NoBand C% & NoBand D% & NoBand E% & NoBand F% & No% & No.of totalletsBedsit/studio 2% 1 2% 11 bed flat 2% 1 9% 5 12% 7 5% 3 28% 162 bed flat 5% 3 5% 3 2% 1 14% 8 26% 151 bed5% 3 2% 1 2% 1 9% 5bungalow2 bedbungalow2 bed house 9% 5 2% 1 11% 6 4% 2 26% 143 bed house 4% 2 5% 3 2% 1 11% 64 bed house2 bedmaisonetteTotal % ineach band2% 1 27% 15 7% 4 35% 20 6% 3 25% 14 100% 578

c) WyrePropertyTypeBand A% & No.Band B% & NoBand C% & NoBand D% & NoBand E% & NoBand F% & No% & No.of totalletsBedsit/studio 1% 1 3% 3 4% 41 bed flat 2% 2 6% 6 16% 15 20% 19 45% 422 bed flat 3% 3 7% 7 10% 8 20% 181 bed1% 1 1% 1 1% 1 3% 3 1% 1 7% 7bungalow2 bed2% 2 2% 2bungalow2 bed house 5% 5 1% 1 6% 63 bed house 2% 2 1% 1 5% 5 7% 7 15% 154 bed house 1% 1 1% 12 bedmaisonetteTotal % ineach bandd) Overall average figures4% 4 17% 17 2% 2 32% 31 3% 3 42% 38 100% 95PropertyTypeBand A% & No.Band B% & NoBand C% & NoBand D% & NoBand E% & NoBand F% & No% & No.of totalletsBedsit/studio 0.3% 1 0.3% 2 0.6% 3 2% 5 3.2% 111 bed flat 1.6% 5 14.6% 67 0.3% 2 11.6% 59 0.3% 2 11.3% 39 43.7%1742 bed flat 2.3% 7 2% 4 5% 16 0.6% 1 9% 20 19.2% 481 bed2.3% 6 0.3% 1 1% 2 1% 3 1% 2 5.6% 14bungalow2 bed1% 2 1% 2bungalow2 bed house 0.6% 3 6% 22 1% 3 4.6% 11 1.3% 2 13.5% 413 bed house 0.6% 1 4% 17 0.6% 2 5% 17 3% 8 13.2% 454 bed house 0.3% 1 0.3% 1 0.6% 22 bedmaisonetteTotal % ineach band0.3% 1 0.3% 13.4% 11 30.1% 123 8.2% 12 28.8% 110 3.2% 8 26.3% 74 100%338The headlines from the overall lettings to date figures then tell us that:• 70.5% of lettings go to people in bands A – D who have both an identified housing need and alocal connection. 3.2% of lettings go to band E with a local connection and in paid or voluntarywork but no identified housing need, and 26.3% of lettings go to band F, either with no localconnection or no housing need.• Unsurprisingly the majority of lets (66.1%) are for bedsits, one and two bedroomed flats• The majority of houses are let to people in bands B and D and there was only 1 4 bedroomedhouse in the period, which presents little hope of rehousing in the social sector for largerhouseholds• Blackpool lets far more properties to band B than Fylde and Wyre, whereas Wyre lets farmore properties to band F than the other areasOf the bids made the following gives the percentage of bids for each band against the percentage ofsuccessful bids for the period June – September 2012: -9

Band Total Bids & %of totalSuccessful bidsno. & %Ratio of bids tosuccessful bidA 100 1% 11 3.4% 11.0%B 1454 11% 123 31.1% 8.5%C 164 1% 12 8.2% 7.3%D 4156 32% 110 28.8% 2.6%E 572 4% 8 3.2% 1.4%F 6651 51% 74 26.3% 1.1%This illustrates that the lower the banding the lesser the chance that a bid will be successful. Thusthose in bands E and F have only a 1.4% and 1.1% chance respectively that their bids will besuccessful. It shows then that housing need is reflected in this ratio of success, although even atband A only 11% of bidders are successful.Unfortunately the reports available from the myhomechoicefyldecoast system don’t evidence howlong applicants have lived within the area in order to help with the local connection issue.5. Proposals for changeFollowing on from changes to legislation that allow more flexibility to respond to local conditions andpriorities, the potential areas for change to the Fylde Coast allocations policies are:• Strengthening the local connection requirement• Giving increased priority to current and former members of the armed forces and their families• Enabling the under occupation of social housing to be addressed effectively• Ensuring that the suspension arrangements for people found to have committed ASB or whohave rent arrears from a former home are appropriate• Reviewing the level of additional priority given to people who are in paid or voluntaryemployment• Consider filtering the waiting list so that those with no realistic chance of obtaining socialhousing are not put on the waiting list at allThe new legislation allows for existing tenants seeking a transfer to another home to be housedoutside of general allocations policies, but it is proposed that the current arrangement where existingtenants seeking a transfer to another home are treated in the same way as new applicants isretained.The new legislation also allows for housing registers (waiting lists) to be closed to people who stand alow chance of getting social rented housing because of their low level of priority. It is proposed not toclose the list for this reason.The “Pay to Stay” consultation has not yet resulted in any changes to legislation, but given the lowincomes of social housing tenants in the Fylde Coast it is highly unlikely than any local tenants orpotential tenants on the Fylde Coast would be affected.The Fylde Coast local authorities also need to determine:• How to respond to the ability to discharge the homelessness duty into the private rentedsector.• What to include in their Tenancy Strategy, giving guidance to local social landlords on the useof flexible tenancies.The proposed approach to each of these issues is as follows:a) Local connectionThe current position in the Fylde Coast CAP is that local connection is achieved if they candemonstrate one of the following:10

• They have lived in the area for 6 out of the last 12 months or 3 out of the last 5 years• They have permanent employment in the area• They have a parent, adult child, adult brother or sister who is living in the area and has doneso for the last 5 years• Applicants living in the armed forces and who are either employed or are resident in the area• Former armed forces personnel who had a previous residence in the area as a result of aformer posting in the areaN.B. for cases being assessed as being owed a duty to rehouse then the legal local connection rulestill applies. After being resident in a local authority area for 6 out of the last 12 months or for 3 yearsout of the last 5 as defined by the Housing Act 1996 (part vii) and the Homelessness Act 2002.Section 147 of the Localism Act allows local authorities to define local connection for other categoriesof applicants and therefore the local connection period can be extended (the Act does not define whatthis should be). This is seen as desirable by all the local authorities because:• The social housing stock is in very short supply and it is right to focus on letting it tothose who have a strong local connection.• It is too easy to get a local connection currently, through a single 6 month privaterented tenancy or by staying with friends.• There are a lot of people who move into the Fylde Coast, especially from the rest ofthe North West and elsewhere in the UK, because of the attractions of the coastalresorts. We do not wish to encourage the in-migration of people who require housingassistance through relatively easy access to a social housing tenancy.Following the recent changes in legislation and guidance, local connection can now be used either todetermine whether an applicant gets increased priority for social rented housing (as currently), or as anecessary requirement to get onto the housing register (waiting list) in the first place.It is proposed that we extend the time required to get a local connection and continue to giveincreased priority to people with a local connection. It is also proposed that we exclude from thehousing register entirely those applicants who do not have a local connection.In suggesting a longer period of time for a person to gain a local connection, the authorities must notonly consider their strategic aims of satisfying housing demand from vulnerable applicants, but from apractical standpoint also not to have such a lengthy period that it will hinder Registered Providers(RPs) when looking to fill their vacant properties.To assess the affect of introducing a 3 year local connection period a sample of 483 currentapplications from Blackpool, Fylde and Wyre were looked at, of which 49 (10%) did not meet theproposed 3 year qualifying time.Of these however 10 applicants can be discounted as they are being moved from the Queens Parkestate due to the major works being carried out there. A further 35 have been on the register for lessthan the proposed 3 year qualifying period, but of these 25 have established a local connectionthrough having both a local relative and a permanent job, whilst 5 have a local relative and another 5had a permanent job. This leaves 4 cases that have lived within the local area for less then 3 years(0.8%) and who don’t have any other qualifying criteria.It is also interesting to note that if the local connection criteria were extended to 5 years then onlyanother 41 (8%) who also don’t qualify through not having either a local relative or permanent job,would be affected.There is little other evidence available, although figures show that of the total number of Blackpoolapplicants, 58% are in band F of which 24% have no local connection.11

From assessing the affect of the proposed change to 3 years on this sample, then the overall trenddoes not suggest that there would be a major impact on registered providers.In considering this proposal on increasing the qualification period for gaining a local connection forsocial housing, we also need to agree whether this proposal would retrospectively include all currentapplicants who have had a local residency period of less than the newly agreed time, or whether itjust applies to new applicants.For sheltered housing it is also proposed that a 3 year local connection qualifying period should beestablished.Similarly we may wish to exclude sheltered properties from this extended local connection rule whereit is deemed that this would present an RP with difficulties in filling their empty properties. Given thechanging concept of accommodation for the elderly or those with a need for this type ofaccommodation then a clear definition of what would be included in this criteria needs to be agreed toavoid any possible future ambiguities.Finally in this section it should be stressed that existing local lettings policies will be unaffected bythese changes.b) Current or former members of the armed forces and/or their families.The latest legislation requires that local allocation policies have to automatically include formermembers of the armed forces/ families (as defined above) on the MyHomeChoiceFyldeCoast housingregister. There must also be no loss of local connection because members of the armed forces havebeen required to serve away from the area. The CAP currently meets these minimum requirements.The options for change are:• Whether to give additional priority to those who do not have any particular housing needs,just because they’ve served in the armed forces.• Whether to give additional priority to former members of the armed forces and their familieswho do have demonstrable housing needs, so that they end up with a higher priority thanother applicants with similar housing needs because of their record of service.For those qualifying groups as detailed above without any specific needs and who do not meet thelocal connection criteria then it is proposed that they continue to be put in band F as per the currentpractice.Currently serving members of the armed forces with a local connection are placed in band D. Thiscategory of people firstly needs to be expanded to also include former members of the armed forcesand reserves as well as their families.The new guidance on treatment of members and families of the armed forces, see above,recommends that anyone within this group who has both a local connection and a reasonablepreference should be considered as having an additional preference and that the Governmentintends to legislate to ensure this happens.In order to reflect this priority it is proposed that applicants with these circumstances be placed inband B in order to reflect the Government’s views on this. This may make Blackpool a more attractiveplace to live for armed forces members and their families, but the potential numbers of people thisaffects is not a significant one.c) Approach to under occupation of social housing stockAs mentioned above, the welfare changes being made to social housing tenants mean that as fromApril 2013 they will have housing benefit deductions if they are under occupying their homes. This willof course have great implications for landlords who may face large potential increases in rent arrears.12

There are at least 1,400 tenants of social rented housing who will be affected by these changes inBlackpool, 300 in Fylde, and 750 in Wyre, and some of them will have no alternative but to move tosmaller accommodation.Under the CAP people under occupying houses are put into band B – a relatively high priority thathelps them to find another property and recently the Fylde Coast Housing Providers agreed to givethe same priority to people under occupying flats. It is not proposed to give this group of people anyfurther priority because band A is reserved for a small number of households who have both thehighest priority and an urgent need to move very quickly.There is also a need to review the definition of under-occupancy in the Fylde Coast CAP so that it isconsistent with the definition used by DWP. Firstly the DWP rules define a household as being underoccupied even if they only have one spare bedroom.In terms of rooms the definition says that children under 10 should be required to share a bedroomirrespective of gender. It then says that children of the same sex between the ages of 10 – 16 shouldalso share a bedroom.Otherwise, households in the Fylde Coast may be allocated accommodation that makes them liableto benefit deductions, or existing tenants may be liable for benefit deductions but may not be givenpriority to find a smaller home.It is proposed therefore that the DWP 2012 definition of under occupation be adopted.d) Suspension and exclusion arrangementsAs noted in Section 2 above, the Localism Act gives local authorities more discretion to determinewhat behaviour is considered unacceptable by taking away the statutory test which says that RP’scould only make an applicant ineligible if they could consider that the behaviour perpetrated by theapplicant would have entitled the organisation to seek a Possession Order.The CAP currently details examples of behaviour that “in some circumstances lead to a customerbeing considered ineligible”. It further says that this will apply where “The applicant or any member ofhis household has been guilty of unacceptable behaviour serious enough to make him/her unsuitableto be a tenant and at the time of the application the applicant is still unsuitable to be a tenant becauseof that behaviour” (As per Part 6 of the Housing Act 1996).From 13/7/12 to 31/8/12 a total of 58 cases were referred to the Senior Officers group consideringpotential exclusions and suspensions. Of these 29 (50%) were for rent arrears, 9 (16%) for anti socialbehaviour (ASB) and 3 (5%) for a combination of the two.As of 5/10/12, of the current cases being considered, 10 were deemed to have a risk of which 6 weresuspended because they were current or ex prisoners who were either released or being releasedimminently and where it was deemed that a sufficient amount of time was needed to see how theyconducted themselves following their release. The group has considered 14 cases where a potentialrisk had been identified.Following a review 5 cases were not suspended or excluded and 3 needed more information before adecision could be taken on them.34 applications (58% of total cases under consideration) were suspended for a period of time, with 11(19%) suspended for 12 weeks, 17 (29%) for 26 weeks and 6 (10%) for 52 weeks.It is proposed that a clear time period be adopted during which an application is suspended and thatthis time period is of a sufficient time for the applicant to evidence that their behaviour has shown aconsistent improvement.13

Based on the evidence of current suspensions a period of 1 year is therefore recommended as aminimum period of suspension for applicants who are known to have committed unacceptablebehaviour, after which the applicant will be given the opportunity to demonstrate that their behaviourhas satisfactorily improved.Where however an applicant or a member of the applicant’s household has been evicted from atenancy for anti social behaviour, whether from a social housing tenancy or a private rented sectorproperty (where they have been evicted using section 8 of the Housing Act 1988, then they will beexcluded from the housing register for a period of 5 years.The CAP gives clear definitions of behaviour that can lead to someone being considered ineligible aspart of a clear and transparent procedure and stresses that there is then an onus on this person toclearly show that their behaviour has improved.It is therefore felt to be not necessary to amend this in the CAP, although some further examples ofbehaviour likely to lead to a suspension may be helpful.Finally here the CAP says that:“MyHomeChoiceFyldeCoast Partner Organisations must also consider whether at the time of theapplication the application is still unsuitable to be a tenant.”It is proposed that this be modified to be a “here and now” test to make it clear that behaviour fromthe application to offer stage is just as important.For those suspended due to rent arrears it is proposed that the current arrangements still applywhereby the applicant agrees a payment plan for arrears and this is reviewed at agreed intervals.As at present if an applicant is proven to have given false information or has failed to disclose amaterial fact when applying for housing then they will be excluded from being on the register, or ifthey have been allocated a tenancy based on this false information then they can be evicted from it.e) Giving preference to those making a positive contribution to their communitiesThe Localism Act gives local authorities the ability to recognise those making a positive contributionto their communities either through being in permanent paid employment, a training course with aview to gaining employment, or through voluntary work that benefits the community.In the CAP document the definition in paragraph 3.15 for full time employment needs a clearerdefinition. The revised definition therefore is “those in permanent full time employment of at least 16hours per week.The CAP currently puts these categories of people into band E if they have a local connection and nohousing needs that would put them in a higher priority band. We need to decide whether or not togive them a higher priority than band E, or to give additional priority to people in higher priority bandsover others in those same bands if they are making this positive contribution.Alternatively a higher proportion of lettings could be given for people in band E to recognise thesefactors. The three ALPs currently take different approaches with the Wyre ALP providing a specifictarget that 30% of lettings in Wyre should be made to people in bands E and F, with priority for bandE over band F.As there is little evidence available to suggest that this needs changing or that there is the will tochange it, then it is recommended that these categories of applicants continue to be in band E witheach area having the ability should they wish to house more of these applicants through the rotas andquotas mechanisms in the ALPs.14

f) Existing tenants wishing to transferThe Localism Act gives providers the opportunity to separate out people who want to internallytransfer from an existing tenancy from other allocations. The consensus of opinion is that theintegrated list allows us to consider the social housing picture as a whole and the separation oftransfers from other lets wouldn’t achieve anything unless the RPs felt that it would help them to moreclearly analyse what is happening to their stock.However, it is proposed to make a change so that transfer applications from either the tenant or newapplications from any member of the tenant’s household generally won’t be accepted until after thefirst 12 months of a tenancy. This is because there is evidence that some people move in with otherfamily members and then immediately apply for their own home on the grounds of overcrowding.g) Closing the waiting list to those on higher incomes or owning their own homeThe review also gives us an opportunity to review other possible exclusions and to make sure that thehousing stock is used for those in most need of it. It is therefore proposed that those households witha gross income of £60,000 or more be excluded from the list. This figure is consistent with theGovernment’s “Pay to Stay” proposals. Those with savings of over £30,000 would also not be allowedon to the register.There are currently some examples of owner occupiers who have moved in to social housingretaining their property and renting it out. It is therefore proposed that applicants in thesecircumstances should not be allowed on to the waiting list unless they have a specific need that canonly be satisfied by moving into social housing.h) Lettings policies for particular local authorities or parts of local authoritiesEach individual local authority may also wish to review its Area Lettings Plan; for example Blackpoolmay want to consider giving a proportion of lettings through affordable rent in its inner areas focussedon people in work and as mentioned earlier Fylde and Wyre have particular concerns about ruralcommunities in their areas.This will obviously need some more detailed work from the 3 LA’s before progressing and currentpractice needs to be more clearly stated in writing than at present so that any amendments to theALP’s form a part of the consultation process.The next points are recommendations for change, but are operational issues rather than directchanges to the allocations policy.i) Use of the private rented sector to meet the homelessness dutyIt is up to each local authority to decide if and how they wish to use the private rented sector to housepeople who have been found to be homeless and to whom the “statutory duty” to re-house applies. Inthe past these households have had to be housed in social housing unless they have voluntarilyagreed to be rehoused in the PRS.Use of the new freedom to house them in the private rented sector would reduce pressure on thesocial housing stock. It would also reflect the situation in every part of the Fylde Coast that themajority of people who are in housing need but not owed the “statutory duty” find a home in theprivate rented sector.Each local authority on the Fylde Coast intends to house some households to whom the “statutoryduty” is owed in the private rented sector. The legislation requires that a minimum 12 month tenancyis initially granted, that the accommodation must be of a reasonable standard, and that if the tenancybreaks down, the placing local authority again assists the household.15

As a part of the consultation process consultation should be used to flag up this change and torecommend its use.j) Tenancy Strategy and use of Flexible tenanciesThe Localism Act allows for social housing providers to move away from the “home for life” concept tolook at providing flexible tenancies that could mean that if a review of the tenant’s circumstancesdetermine that they no longer need subsidised social housing then the provider can serve notice onthem in order to free up that housing for someone who does.Local authorities are required by the Localism Act to publish a Tenancy Strategy that providesguidance to local social housing providers on when it may or may not be appropriate to use flexibletenancies. A Fylde Coast Tenancy Strategy has been drafted that provides some principles. Theseare that:• Normally, social housing landlords should continue to offer lifetime tenancies for older peopleand specialist supported housing that provides long term care.• Flexible tenancies may be appropriate for homes that are in the shortest supply, and mayinclude large family homes, properties with significant adaptations for disabled people, andaffordable housing in rural areas. Flexible tenancies should be renewed where these homescontinue to be needed by the current tenants.• Social housing landlords should only convert existing social rented homes to affordable rentswhere the new rents are within LHA rates, and where they are developing some newaffordable housing in the area.• Social housing landlords should only dispose of existing social rented homes where they arenot meeting local demand, require major investment, and receipts will be re-invested in thearea.In addition to the Fylde Coast Tenancy Strategy, Blackpool Council will also publish a Tenancy Policythat sets out its approach to the use of flexible tenancies for homes owned by Blackpool Council. Thisis because Blackpool Council is itself a social housing provider.It is proposed that the Tenancy Policy for Blackpool Council homes does not initially pursue the useof flexible tenancies for any homes, although this can be reviewed in future.16