The Head of Housing Services introduced the report.  He said that the rough sleeping figure for the end of June (HP003) should read 180.  Progress was being made to improve the rents performance (BV066a).

The Panel expressed concern that there was insufficient resource in the team dealing with rent collection.  The Head of Housing Services explained the nature of the resourcing issues in that area and the challenges created by the introduction of Universal Credit.  He said that progress had been made since June.

The Panel noted that Universal Credit recipients could only elect for their rent to be paid directly to their landlord once they had got into arrears.

The Landlord Services manager introduced the report.  He said that most measures were on track and commented on the following:

• NI156: use of temporary accommodation – this target had been breached and there were big concerns about homelessness in the City.
• DS012: gas and responsive repairs completed on time – there was a marginal dip in performance.
• BV066a: percentage of rent collected – performance was good, particularly as the 1% annual reduction in rents made this target harder to achieve.
• HC004: homelessness cases prevented – there were big pressures due to high rent levels and landlords reducing the availability of accommodation, which resulted in some customers having to leave the private rented sector.

In response to a question about mitigating the impacts of the buoyant private rented sector on homelessness, the Allocations Manager explained that the Council had lobbied Government for a higher Local Housing Allowance rate that better reflected the market in Oxford.  The Council used some general needs stock as temporary accommodation, was decommissioning sheltered accommodation blocks as demand was low and could provide Discretionary Housing Payments but not for the life of a tenancy.  It was not uncommon for the Council to have to place people outside the County due to the lack of available and affordable accommodation.

The Panel questioned whether people in temporary accommodation were typically singles or families.  The Panel heard that the majority of cases involved dependent children or pregnancy.  Most were housed within a year but those with a need for 5 or 6 beds could have to wait years. Single cases didn’t tent to have the same level of vulnerability and the Council’s duty in those cases was to provide advice rather than accommodation.  From April 2018 singles under the age of 35 would only receive a room-based rate, which was likely to be at least £20 per week short of what would be required to rent a room in Oxford.  One future option the Council could explore was possibility of providing Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMO) accommodation. 

The Panel noted the distinction between single homeless cases and rough sleepers, who were very visible in the City.  The Panel heard that some rough sleepers were not classed as street homeless because they had accommodation and noted concern about the impacts of cuts to complex needs services for these groups.