Agenda item

Resolved: that officers be asked to include additional context about the evidence on resident satisfaction with homes in the private rented sector, which highlights the limitations of the evidence base for the research. 

6.1      Genevieve Macklin (Head of Strategic Housing) and Jeff Endean (Housing Strategy and Programmes Manager) introduced the report. The following key points were noted:

• The housing strategy was part of the Council’s formal policy framework. It would put forward for consultation before consideration by Mayor and Cabinet and submission to Council.
• The report set out a framework with the essential elements of the proposed strategy.
• Officers would ensure that the new strategy built on the successes of the previous housing strategy whilst recognising that the approach was driven by different demographics and choices of tenure.
• There were increasing strains on housing across all tenures.
• The strategy had four key objectives: helping residents at times of housing need; building the homes residents need; improving resident’s homes; security and quality for private renters.

6.2      In response to questions from the Committee, Jeff Endean (Housing Strategy and Programmes Manager) and Genevieve Macklin (Head of Strategic Housing) the following key points were noted:

• Research was carried out on a regular basis to assess the numbers of people who were sleeping rough. The methodology for the research followed a standard pattern across London and involved a number of different agencies.
• Providing support to people with no recourse to public funds was putting pressure on services, there were a range of strategies in place to deal with this, including supporting people to return to their country of origin.
• The homelessness assessment process was rigorous and was only disregarded in exceptional circumstances.
• It was recognised that there were some limitations to the research carried out by the South East London Housing partnership about the quality of homes in the PRS.
• Whilst it was the case that many people were happy with their rented homes, it was also clear that there were people who were not.
• There were approximately 3700 private landlords in Lewisham
• Further information about the practicability of setting up a compulsory licensing scheme would be brought forward later in the year.
• Further information would be included in the strategy which set out information about the range of sustainable housing options available.
• Officers were considering mechanisms for the ownership of the new homes being built under the New Homes Better Places programme. The Council could not take any action as a sole means of avoiding right to buy.
• Other options for building and managing homes would be considered as the details of approaches in other boroughs were made available.
• Officers recognised that there were examples of poor practice by letting and selling agents.
• Estate agencies were unregulated businesses and the Council only had limited powers to deal with them under trading standards.
• There were very few long term void properties in the borough, on the whole, Lewisham Homes was good at returning void properties to use in a short amount of time.
• Where long term voids required extensive works to bring them back into use, there was an upper limit on what was considered reasonable expenditure.
• Where it was considered reasonable, Lewisham Homes would sell properties that were uneconomic to bring back into use, in the same way as other landlords.

Resolved: that officers be asked to include additional context about the evidence on resident satisfaction with homes in the private rented sector, which highlights the limitations of the evidence base for the research.