Agenda item

(Report of the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness and Planning)

The Chair welcomed the Assistant Director Assets, Paul Weston, and the Disabled Adaptation Manager, Lucy Mitchell, and the Leader of the Council who was there in the absence of the Portfolio Holder for the report of the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness and Planning to review and consider the proposed draft Housing Assistance Policy (Appendix A) for the delivery of mandatory and discretionary Disabled Facilities Grants (DFGs), prior to submission to Cabinet for full approval and adoption for private sector delivery, and in the interim period of not having a Council Adaptations Policy, consider the policy foundations within this Policy for Council delivery.

In addition, review and consider the Interim Policy Position Statement (IPPS) for Council adaptations in scenarios where the Council can reject, refuse of pend permission, for example where tenants are intending to purchase their property, are in arrears or facing eviction action, or are looking to move home and the exceptional circumstances for applying discretion (Appendix B).

The Leader of the Council introduced the report before handing over to the Assistant Director who thanked the team for their work on the reports. They highlighted that there are applications for discretionary fundings for adaptations which cannot move forward until the policy is in place as well as providing transparency in this area.

The Committee made the following comments/observations and asked the following questions:

1.     What expert advice did Officers receive when they were writing point 3.9 C of the policy, how many tariff levels there are and whether the Officer was aware of how many conditions that this would exclude?

The Officer confirmed that no specific advice had been taken but this part of the policy was written in line with is the Government recommendations, the wording contained with the policy allows the Council to claim back money from the Government for DFG purposes.

With regards to the number of tariffs this is something that they could come back to the Committee on and the Officer agreed to provide a copy of the data that was used for points 3.9 C and D.

In terms of those excluded by this there is a policy foundation and a discretionary element. If there are additional factors that need to be considered then they would be.

A motion was proposed that Cabinet removes lines C and D from section 2.9 in the draft, this was not carried.

2.     The Committee acknowledged the work that had gone into the policy and that the Council are providing a much-needed service and that massive efforts have neem made since the changeover of the service.

3.     As this is the policy, how we are going to do this, what are we currently implementing and what are the challenges?

The Officer confirmed that the service is being delivered within the statutory framework, but the policy outlines the terms and conditions around that and allows the Council to offer the four discretionary grants. It was confirmed that all mandatory grants are going through as legislation requires. The discretionary schemes would be relatively easy to set up as they sit on the back on the mandatory grants and the applicants are already known to them.

4.     What are the challenges for delivering on the ground and are we doing this?

The Officer confirmed that we are now delivering grants and have a foundation in place to deliver a safe grant adaptation service.

5.     How do we effectively prioritise a moving list? Do we have a contingency where if someone urgent comes to us that we won’t have to say we have run out of money?

It was confirmed that all new enquiries are triaged within 6 weeks, to check if they are eligible and can move forward. We are also operating a triage plus process, whilst they are waiting for caseworker resource work is being undertaken to get landlord permissions, OT assessments etc to work smarter and save time.

6.     It has been reported that some local authorities do not have the money to meet their legal requirements.

The Officer confirmed that as they currently have a backlog of cases they do have a surplus of funds but it is expected based on historical data that the Council will run out of funding, and if that is the case a budgetary proposal will be put forward for Members to make a strategic decision. Tamworth receives a far lower settlement than other area’s and has been this way since 2008. The formula to set this looks at population density and disability data from 2008 which is outdated. Tamworth also has a difficult to adapt housing stock and bill costs have risen but the grant rise has not matched this.

The Leader of the Council confirmed that the Portfolio holder has written to Government to request that the Borough’s grant allocation be review and that they would be lobbying the Leaders board and other Committees they sit on.

7.     Clarification over whether County Council set’s the limit that each area get?

The Assistant Director confirmed that that budgets are set by Central Government but paid through the Bettercare fund and therefore goes through the County Council, but the County has no say over the allocation.

8.     How many people are on the waiting list.

The Officer confirmed that across Council adaptions and DFG that there were 300 people on the waiting list, at various stages, some are at triage stage, some have work on site and some are at tying up stages.