Homeless households in temporary
accommodation (England)
Standard Note:
SN/SP/2110
Last updated:
11 December 2013
Author:
Wendy Wilson
Section
Social Policy Section
The number of homeless households placed in bed and breakfast (B&B) accommodation by English
local authorities reached 13,550 in September 1991. This figure fell during the early to mid-1990s to
under 5,000 by the end of 1993. The numbers started rising again after 1996, prompting the Labour
Government to announce specific initiatives to try and tackle this issue. In particular, on 13 March
2002 the then Government gave a commitment to ensure that, by March 2004, no family with children
would have to live in a B&B except in an emergency and for no more than six weeks.
This note provides background to the increase in numbers in temporary accommodation and outlines
various initiatives to reduce those numbers. The Labour Government’s aim was to half the number of
homeless households living in temporary accommodation by 2010 (from a baseline of 101,000 set in
2004). For information on wider Government initiatives to tackle homelessness see Library standard
note SN/SP/1164, Homelessness in England.
Statistics published in December 2011 marked the end of the long-term downward trend in the
number of households in temporary accommodation; seasonally-adjusted figures had fallen in each
successive quarter since peaking in 2004.
The increased numbers placed in temporary
accommodation reflects an overall increase in homeless applications and acceptances. In addition,
the number of families with dependent children and/or pregnant women placed in B&B style
accommodation increased from 630 at the end of March 2010 to 2,100 at the end of September 2013.
For an overview of statistical indicators see Homelessness: Social Indicators (SN/SG/2646).
April/May 2012 saw media reports of local authorities in London seeking to place homeless families in
temporary housing some distance from the Capital. Following consultation the Government published
additional statutory guidance in November 2012.
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) took over responsibility for housing matters from the
Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions (DTLR) in 2002. On the disbandment
of the ODPM in 2006, housing matters became the responsibility of the Department for Communities
and Local Government (CLG).
This information is provided to Members of Parliament in support of their parliamentary duties
and is not intended to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. It should
not be relied upon as being up to date; the law or policies may have changed since it was last
updated; and it should not be relied upon as legal or professional advice or as a substitute for
it. A suitably qualified professional should be consulted if specific advice or information is
required.
This information is provided subject to our general terms and conditions which are available
online or may be provided on request in hard copy. Authors are available to discuss the
content of this briefing with Members and their staff, but not with the general public.
Contents
1
Local authorities’ duties and the use of temporary accommodation
2
2
The numbers in temporary accommodation
4
3
Initiatives to reduce the use of temporary accommodation
6
3.1
The B&B Unit (now closed)
6
3.2
The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003
7
3.3
Guidance on the use of B&B accommodation
8
3.4
The Gold Standard initiative
11
3.5
Using private rented tenancies
11
3.6
Private sector leasing
12
3.7
Out of borough temporary accommodation
18
3.8
Settled Homes Initiative (now ended)
19
3.9
The supply of affordable housing
20
Labour’s approach
20
The Government’s approach
22
4
Comment
25
5
Statistics on the numbers placed in temporary accommodation
26
1
Local authorities’ duties and the use of temporary accommodation
The Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977 placed a duty on local housing authorities to secure
permanent accommodation for unintentionally homeless people in priority need. Authorities’
duties towards homeless people are now contained in Part 7 of the 1996 Housing Act (as
amended).
Authorities do not have a duty to secure accommodation for all homeless people. If an applicant
has become homeless unintentionally the authority must assess whether they, or a member of
their household, falls into a ‘priority need’ category. These categories are set out in section 189
of the 1996 Act and include:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
People with dependent children who are residing with, or might reasonably be
expected to reside with them, for example, because the family is separated solely
because of the need for accommodation; or
People who are homeless or threatened with homelessness as a result of any
emergency such as flood, fire or any other disaster; or
Where any person who resides or who might reasonably be expected to reside with
them, is vulnerable because of old age, mental illness, handicap or physical disability
or other special reason; or
Pregnant women, or a person who resides or might reasonably be expected to reside
with a pregnant woman;
All 16 and 17 year olds;
2
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
18-20 year old care leavers;
Vulnerable care leavers;
Vulnerable former members of the armed forces;
Vulnerable former prisoners; and
People who are vulnerable because they are fleeing violence.
Categories (e)-(j) above were added by The Homelessness (Priority Need for
Accommodation) (England) Order 2002 which came into force on 31 July 2002.
When a household makes an application to a local authority for assistance with
homelessness the authority is under a duty to carry out inquiries in order to satisfy itself as to
what level of duty is owed to a homeless applicant. If an authority has reason to believe that
a homeless applicant has nowhere to stay and is in priority need, then there is an immediate
duty to make suitable temporary accommodation available pending further inquiries.
After the completion of inquiries local authorities must inform applicants of their decision.
The type of help that an authority might be under a duty to offer to a homeless household
under the 1996 Act ranges from a main duty to secure suitable accommodation (which may
be a private rented tenancy), to providing advice and assistance, for example through
housing advice or referrals to other housing providers. Authorities only have an absolute
duty to secure accommodation for households who are deemed to be unintentionally
homeless and in priority need.
Where an absolute duty to secure accommodation exists, a household may have to spend a
period of time in temporary accommodation before a final offer of accommodation is made. 1
The length of time spent in temporary accommodation will largely depend on the availability
of suitable accommodation in the authority’s area.
The Localism Act 2011 2 has enabled local authorities (since 9 November 2012) to discharge
their duty towards homeless households in priority need by using privately rented housing
irrespective of whether the household is in agreement with this. 3
Thus the people represented in the Department’s statistics on temporary accommodation
usage are either awaiting the outcome of a homeless application under section 188 of the
1996 Act, or are waiting for an offer of suitable accommodation (up-to-date statistics can be
found in section 5 of this note).
Nick Raynsford, then Minister for Housing, described the circumstances in which a
household might be placed in Bed & Breakfast (B&B) accommodation during an
adjournment debate on the subject in April 2001:
Bed-and-breakfast accommodation is used by local authorities as one way of
discharging a legislative duty to secure accommodation for homeless households. In
many cases, an authority owes an interim duty to homeless families while it completes
inquiries to determine whether a substantive duty is owed under legislation. The
authority may decide that the applicant does not have a priority need or is found to
have become homeless intentionally or not to be without alternative accommodation.
In such cases, the authority will not have a substantive duty and the use of temporary
bed-and-breakfast accommodation for a short period is understandable. It is less
1
2
3
Measures in the Localism Act 2011 have given local authorities the option of offering “flexible” tenancies to
households applying for social housing. These tenancies, where implemented, are fixed term tenancies for a
minimum of two years.
Localism Act 2011 (Commencement No.2 and Transitional Provisions) (England) Order 2012, (S.I. 2012/2599)
For more information see Library standard note SN/SP/1164, Homelessness in England
3
appropriate as a discharge of the substantive duty to provide accommodation for
homeless households that have been accepted as the responsibility of the local
authority. However, I know that some local authorities have to use it for that purpose. I
would be particularly concerned if authorities were using temporary bed-and-breakfast
accommodation when that could be avoided.
Homeless families are generally placed in bed-and-breakfast accommodation because
no better options are available. Having said that, not all authorities facing serious
pressures are making extensive use of bed and breakfast. Indeed some, including my
own local authority in Greenwich, have avoided bed and breakfast even though they
accommodate substantial numbers of homeless households. Often that is because
they have been more successful in directly re-housing homeless households into
permanent housing, or they have secured better alternative forms of temporary
accommodation. We should remember that those in bed and breakfast are just a small
proportion of the total number of households placed in temporary accommodation
pending the availability of a more settled housing solution. 4
Shelter’s June 2004 report, Living in Limbo, which was based on a survey of more than 400
homeless households living in temporary accommodation in England, found that living in
temporary accommodation has a “devastating’ impact on the health, education and job
opportunities of the homeless”. The authors estimated that temporary housing was costing
the taxpayer over £500 million each year at that time:
•
•
•
•
•
£300 million on higher rents and additional housing benefit costs
£90 million on additional take up of out-of-work benefits (income support)
£50 million on out-of-school provision for children
£30 million on additional take up of sickness benefits (incapacity benefit)
£10 million on additional visits to the GP due to health problems.
Following a series of freedom of information requests the Bureau of Investigative Journalism
reported that Westminster Council would spend £41.8m housing families in temporary
accommodation in 2013/14:
Cuts to housing benefit are having a reverse effect on costs for Westminster Council,
which is predicting its bill for homelessness will rise 63.5% since last year when
temporary accommodation cost the council £25.5m. 5
2
The numbers in temporary accommodation
Up to date figures on the number of households in temporary accommodation are presented
in tabular form at the end of this note.
During the early 1990s the use of B&B accommodation for homeless households fell from a
peak of 13,550 in September 1991 to under 5,000 at the end of 1993. The mid-1990s saw
authorities manage to restrict their use of B&Bs to around this level. The late 1990s and
early 2000s again saw a sharp rise in the number of households in all types of temporary
accommodation, including B&Bs.
The most recent figures issued by the Government show that the total number of homeless
households in temporary accommodation (of all types, including B&B) stood at 57,350 at
the end of September 2013. 6 This is 8% higher than on the same date in 2012. After
4
5
6
HC Deb 3 April 2001 cc58-9WH
Westminster hit by soaring housing costs, 8 June 2013
rd
CLG Statistical Release, Statutory Homelessness: England 3 Quarter 2013, 5 December 2013
4
seasonal adjustment the number of households in temporary accommodation stood at
56,980, an increase of 2% on the previous quarter. 7 The December 2013 statistics
show the ninth quarterly increase since the ending, in 2011, of the long-term downward
trend in the seasonally-adjusted number of households in temporary accommodation,
which peaked in 2004.
The Labour Government focused particular effort on reducing the number of homeless
households, particularly those with children, placed temporarily in B&B accommodation. It is
acknowledged that the use of B&B accommodation is primarily (but not solely) a London
problem and that it is expensive, inadequate and has unacceptable long-term effects on
homeless people.
In March 2002 the then Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the
Regions, Stephen Byers, described as ‘unacceptably high’ the figure of 12,290 households
(at the end of September 2001) placed in B&B accommodation by local authorities. 8 This
figure represented a rise of 24% on September 2000. By the end of the fourth quarter of
2002 the number of families with children or expectant mothers in B&B stood at 5,600,
representing 44% of all households in B&B. 9 The most recent statistics show that at the end
of September 2013 of the 57,350 households in temporary accommodation 42,150
included dependent children and/or a pregnant woman. Of these 42,150 households
with children, 2,100 were in bed and breakfast style accommodation, up 4% from 2,020
at the end of the same quarter in 2012. Of these 2,100 households, 790 (38%) had been
in bed and breakfast style accommodation for six or more weeks (80 of which pending
review). This represents a decrease of 10% compared with September 2012. The total
number of homeless households placed in B&B style accommodation at the end of
September 2013 stood at 4,600, representing a 6% increase on September 2012.
Shelter, the housing charity, has drawn attention to the fact that over 80,000 children across
Britain will be living in temporary accommodation on Christmas day 2013. 10
London saw an increase in the number of households placed in temporary accommodation
of 11% compared with September 2012 (42,260 compared with 38,170) and accounts for
74% of the total England figure.
At the end of September 2013 11,650 households in temporary accommodation were placed
in another local authority’s area, representing an increase of 27% on September 2012.
Up until the last 14 quarters, local authorities had succeeded in reducing the numbers in
B&B accommodation, particularly for families with children, and achieved this against a
background of rising homeless acceptances up to 2003. The total number of households in
all types of temporary accommodation is higher than in 1997 but had been falling since the
fourth quarter of 2005. The statistics released in December 2013 note:
Historically, there tends to be a lag between a change in direction in the number of
acceptances and a change in direction in the number of households in temporary
7
8
9
10
ibid
HC Deb 5 March 2002 c146
ODPM Statistical Release SH-Q4, 13 March 2003
Inside Housing, “Shelter warns of 80,000 children in temporary accommodation,” 4 November 2013
5
accommodation. The change in direction in the time series during 2012 followed the
increase in acceptances series that began in 2010. 11
In response to a parliamentary question tabled by Karen Buck in May 2012, the then
Housing Minister, expressed concerns over the increased use of B&B accommodation by
local authorities:
... I am concerned that a small number of authorities are placing families in bed and
breakfast accommodation beyond the six week limit.
I have written to 20 local authorities who between them account for almost 80% of
families in bed and breakfast for more than six weeks, reiterating the Government's
position that this practice is unacceptable, urging them to prioritise elimination of the
use of long term bed and breakfast accommodation for families, and offering support
from my Department to do so.
The Government has increased levels of funding on homelessness, and has
announced an additional £70 million investment over the last year. We are introducing
changes through the Localism Act which will give local authorities increased flexibility
to use the private rented sector to meet their homelessness duties, and reduce the
need for them to place any families in bed and breakfast accommodation. 12
In November 2012 the National Housing Federation (NHF) published Homeless Bound? a
study of homelessness in London, the south east and east of England. The report
highlighted a 60% increase in the number of children and pregnant women living in B&Bs
with over a third in B&Bs for longer than the six-week limit – representing a 200% increase
over two years. The NHF called on the Government to monitor the full amount of time that
children spend in B&Bs beyond the six week limit.
In September 2013 Westminster Council faced criticism from the Local Government
Ombudsman (LGO) for keeping around 40 families in B&B for longer than six weeks.
Westminster offered to pay the affected families £500 each. 13 In October 2013 the LGO
published No Place Like Home: Councils' use of unsuitable bed & breakfast accommodation
for homeless families and young people which sets out lessons councils can learn from
complaints around the use of inappropriate B&B accommodation.
3
Initiatives to reduce the use of temporary accommodation
3.1
The B&B Unit (now closed)
On 1 May 2001 the Labour Government announced the establishment of a new taskforce,
the primary aim of which was to help homeless families out of B&B accommodation. It was
proposed that the B&B Unit would focus its attention on London but would also assist any
local authority area in England that required help.
The Unit became fully operational on 1 October 2001 and became part of the new
Homelessness Directorate within the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in 2002. It worked
with local authorities, RSLs, the voluntary sector and others to implement a £35 million
programme to ensure that by March 2004 no homeless family with children had to live in a
B&B hotel except in an emergency, and even then for no more than 6 weeks. The Unit
disseminated existing good practice and helped to pilot new ideas. As well as providing
11
12
13
rd
CLG Statistical Release, Statutory Homelessness: England 3 Quarter 2013, 5 December 2013
HC Deb 23 May 2012 c679W
BBC news London, Westminster homeless put in B&Bs for too long, 24 September 2013
6
advice and support, the Unit sought to influence wider debates and ensure that people
working on regeneration and related projects took into account the impact of their work on
homelessness.
After the Unit’s disbandment the Department created a homelessness implementation team
to help local authorities with the homelessness agenda.
3.2
The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003
On 3 December 2002 Barbara Roche, then the Minister responsible for tackling
homelessness, announced the Government’s intention to outlaw the use of B&B hotels for
homeless families except in emergencies by strengthening the homelessness legislation.
She also announced that £350,000 would be used to finance new services for homeless
families placed in temporary accommodation and to help them resettle into permanent
housing. Research was to be carried out to assess the impact of temporary accommodation
on health and education. 14
The press release accompanying the announcement stated that the Government would
consult in 2003 on options for strengthening the homelessness legislation by Order and
through statutory guidance. Lord Rooker, then Minister of State at the ODPM, announced
the publication of a consultation paper on 13 May 2003. 15 The Labour Government
published a summary of responses to the consultation paper on 17 November 2003. 16 On
the same day, Yvette Cooper, then Minister for Housing, announced the Government’s
intention to:
Make an Order under s.210 of the 1996 Housing Act to come into force on 1 April
2004 to end the long-term (defined as more than six weeks) use of Bed and Breakfast
(B&B) accommodation as temporary accommodation for homeless families with
children or where a member of the household is pregnant;
Issue statutory guidance to bring together and re-state existing minimum standards for
all temporary accommodation used by housing authorities to accommodate homeless
families and individuals under the legislation;
Issue statutory guidance on additional standards that should apply to B&B
accommodation where this is used by housing authorities to accommodate homeless
families and individuals under the legislation; and
Issue statutory guidance on the arrangements that should be put in place to ensure
that all households placed in temporary accommodation by housing authorities under
the legislation receive support to ensure that their health, education and welfare needs
are met. 17
The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 (SI 2003/3326)
was laid on 23 December 2003 and came into force on 1 April 2004. Guidance for local
authorities on the implementation and interpretation of the Order can be found on the CLG
website.
14
15
16
17
ODPM press release 2002/0379, 3 December 2002
HL Deb 13 May 2003 WA28 - The consultation document, Improving Standards of Accommodation for
Homeless Households Placed in Temporary Accommodation, is on the CLG’s website (now archived).
The summary of responses can be found on the CLG website (now archived).
HC Deb 17 November 2003 26WS
7
In May 2004 the Labour Government announced a ‘significant achievement’ against its B&B
reduction target:
Figures collected by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister show a 99.3 per cent.
reduction in the number of homeless families with children living in bed-and- breakfast
hotels for longer than six weeks, and who were placed there by a local housing
authority as a discharge of a homelessness duty, over the two years since March 2002
when the target was set. Local authorities reported a total of only 26 families with
children in bed-and-breakfast in excess of six weeks as of 31 March compared to an
estimated 3,500–4,000 homeless families with children placed long-term in bed-andbreakfast hotels in March 2002. This reduction reflects the excellent achievement of
local authorities working with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. A total of 328, or
95 per cent., of local authorities met the bed-and-breakfast target.
In London, where the highest concentrations of homelessness exist and where the
highest number of families had been accommodated in bed-and-breakfast hotels,
there were no homeless families who have been in bed-and-breakfast for longer than
six weeks on 31 March.
Figures collected also show that the total number of homeless families with children in
bed-and-breakfast was reduced by 88 per cent. from an estimated 6,730 in March
2002 to 780 in March 2004. This is the first sustained reduction in total use of bedand-breakfast to house homeless families for over a decade.
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will continue to work with local authorities,
voluntary sector organisations and other stakeholders to: sustain this target and our
successful reductions in rough sleeping. We will also continue to work with
stakeholders on tackling and preventing wider homelessness problems more
effectively. 18
A total of 16 authorities failed to meet the B&B reduction target by the end of March 2004. As
noted in section 2 above, until 2003, reductions in B&B usage took place against a
background of increased homeless acceptances and increased placements in other types of
temporary accommodation.
Section 2 also refers to concerns raised by the National Housing Federation in Homeless
Bound? (November 2012) in which the NHF refers to the need to monitor the length of time
that children are spending in B&B accommodation given the 200% increase in numbers
placed in this type of accommodation over the last two years.
3.3
Guidance on the use of B&B accommodation
In performing their duties to homeless people under Part 7 of the 1996 Housing Act (as
amended) local authorities are obliged to have regard to the Homelessness Code of
Guidance for Local Authorities. This Guidance was revised to take account of changes made
by the 2002 Homelessness Act and the extension of the priority need categories.
Where an authority is providing interim accommodation for a homeless household pending a
decision on their application under section 188 of the 1996 Act, the Guidance notes that the
use of B&B accommodation should be avoided where possible:
Housing authorities should avoid using Bed&Breakfast (B&B) accommodation
wherever possible. Where B&B accommodation has been used in an emergency
18
HC Deb 4 May 2004 c70WS
8
situation, applicants should be moved to more suitable accommodation as soon as
possible. The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003
provides that B&B accommodation is not suitable accommodation for families with
children and households that include a pregnant woman unless there is no alternative
accommodation available and then only for a maximum of six weeks. 19
Where an authority accepts a duty to secure accommodation for a household that is
unintentionally homeless and in priority need, the accommodation provided must be
‘suitable.’ The Code of Guidance provides the following advice for authorities on using B&B
accommodation for discharging a re-housing duty:
Bed and Breakfast (B&B) accommodation caters for very short-term stays only and
generally will afford residents only limited privacy and may lack certain important
amenities, such as cooking and laundry facilities. Consequently, where possible,
housing authorities should avoid using B&B hotels to discharge a duty to secure
accommodation for applicants, unless, in the very limited circumstances where it is
likely to be the case, it is the most appropriate option for an applicant. The Secretary
of State considers B&B hotels as particularly unsuitable for accommodating applicants
with family commitments and applicants aged 16 or 17 years who need support. 20
The revised Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities includes more stringent
standards for housing homeless people in B&Bs. These standards are contained in Annex
17 to the Code. 21
CLG began to collect specific data on the numbers of 16 and 17 year-olds placed in B&B
accommodation in 2007. 22 In November 2006 the then Secretary of State at CLG, Ruth
Kelly, announced that by 2010 local authorities should only place 16 and 17 year-olds in
B&B accommodation in an emergency. At the end of September 2013 there were 80
households headed by 16 and 17 year old applicants in B&B style accommodation of which
20 had been there longer than six weeks. 23
The homelessness charity, Centrepoint, has supported a ban on using B&B hotels for
homeless 16 and 17 year-olds for some time. Research published in June 2004 found that
teenagers were spending an average of 16 weeks in B&B and that “a significant number”
had been approached by other residents trying to sell drugs, or for sexual exploitation. 24
Centrepoint concluded that authorities were “reshuffling” priority groups in the light of the sixweek time limit on housing families in B&B accommodation and that attention had been
moved away from finding suitable alternatives for other vulnerable homeless groups. 25
A report by Homelessness Link (June 2013) explores the causes of homelessness among
16 and 17 year olds, its long term impact and whether they are being safeguarded by local
authorities: No Excuses – preventing homelessness for the next generation.
The ODPM: Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions Select Committee
carried out an inquiry into homelessness in 2004, the report of which was published in
January 2005. The Committee recommended that the Government should set a target to
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CLG, Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities, July 2006, para 7.6
ibid para 16.28
ibid
HC Deb 14 December 2006 c1276W
rd
CLG Statistical Release, Statutory Homelessness: England 3 Quarter 2013, 5 December 2013
‘Stop putting teens in B&Bs, say charity,’ Housing Today, 9 July 2004
‘Centrepoint sounds alarm over fate of teenagers as B&B priorities shift’, Community Care, 1-7 July 2004
9
end the use of B&B for any homeless household except as an emergency short-term
response. 26 The Labour Government responded thus:
The Government continues to believe that bed and breakfast hotels represent the
least suitable form of accommodation for most households and should be used only as
a last resort. We have made this clear in statutory guidance (Homelessness Code of
Guidance for Local Authorities). The Government will be issuing a revised Code of
Guidance later this year and, in the light of the Select Committee’s recommendations,
we will consider strengthening the guidance on this point. We consider that,
particularly when accommodating 16 and 17 year olds, the local authority should focus
not only on the type of accommodation that is suitable for the applicant but also on
ensuring that appropriate support is available.
We have considered whether a new target should be introduced to minimise the use of
bed and breakfast hotels to discharge a homelessness duty owed to single homeless
applicants. We have concluded that a national target is not necessary at present.
What is necessary is ensuring that we have a full understanding of the causes of
homelessness among this group and the impact that living in temporary
accommodation can have on them. We have therefore commissioned a nationally
representative study that will include a survey of 500 homeless 16 and 17 year olds
and look at the impact of different forms of temporary accommodation and support.
This will offer us a more robust evidence base upon which to base future policy.
Moreover, since 2002 the overall use of bed and breakfast hotels by local authorities
has fallen, including for non-family households, as a result of the measures authorities
have put in place to meet the B&B target. Improvements in homelessness prevention
and the quality and supply of settled homes will benefit all households at risk of
homelessness.
Local authorities are free to set their own additional targets or restrictions in relation to
the use of B&B hotels and may use homelessness grants from ODPM to support
reductions in the inappropriate use of temporary accommodation. Advice on this can
be found in ‘Achieving Positive Outcomes on Homelessness’ (ODPM 2003). 27
Authorities have used a variety of methods to reduce the numbers in B&B including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
26
27
28
Controlling repeat homelessness by putting additional staff time into supporting
people in their tenancies;
Appointing a family mediator to work with single people experiencing difficulties at
home to promote reconciliation and prevent eviction;
Developing ‘tenancy sustainment’ officers to work with families in the private rented
sector to ensure housing benefit is paid on time;
Fostering a culture change in private sector procurement;
Organising inter-borough landlords’ days to provide information and advice, improve
standards and generate new lettings;
Establishing landlord and tenant matching services;
Converting underused garage sites into affordable housing;
Developing front-line prevention services; and
Operating a ‘spend to save’ policy using the B&B budget on prevention of
homelessness. 28
Third Report of Session 2004-05, Homelessness, HC 61-I, para 25
ODPM, January 2005, Cm 6424
‘Winning the B&B battle,’ London Housing, December 2003
10
3.4
The Gold Standard initiative
The then Housing Minister, Mark Prisk, speaking to Inside Housing in September 2012,
reportedly pledged to ensure that councils’ use of bed & breakfast accommodation for
homeless families does not turn into an ‘insurmountable problem’. 29 The Minister met with
representatives of eighteen London authorities in December 2012 during which he reminded
authorities of their duty not to place families in B&Bs except in an emergency and for no
longer than six weeks. He said that “breaking the law is avoidable and unacceptable.” 30
Failure to comply with The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order
2003 (SI 2003/3326) puts local authorities at risk of judicial review proceedings. The Local
Government Ombudsman has also upheld complaints where authorities have kept families
in B&B style accommodation for long periods. 31
On publication of the June 2013 statistics the Minister called on all councils to reduce the
number of families in B&B style accommodation. 32 The Government launched a £1.8 million
“Gold Standard” approach to homelessness in June 2013:
Under this system councils will test new solutions and learn from neighbouring areas
who have managed to turn the situation around. By sharing and spreading best
practice, all councils can ensure that vulnerable families across the country can find a
stable, suitable home as soon as possible.
Councils joining the Gold Standard must commit to preventing homelessness. This
involves tackling 10 local challenges, which include a requirement to abide by the law
when housing families in bed and breakfast accommodation. 33
Fifteen councils were invited to bid for a share of the £1.8m funding. 34 On 1 August 2013 the
Minister announced that seven local authorities accounting for 50% of families in B&B over
six weeks would benefit from this additional funding. A new working group was established
to “work closely with local authorities using B&B to house families to help them tackle this
damaging practice.” 35 By November 2013 Inside Housing was reporting that only one
council had undertaken the first stage of the 10 step programme:
Figures from Winchester Council, which is administering the scheme of behalf of the
Communities and Local Government department, reveal that although 93 per cent of
English Councils have signed up to the scheme, two thirds of them have not made
plans to take part in this initial ‘diagnostic peer review’ and 52 have not finalised when
they will start the process. Winchester has yet to undertake the first step itself. 36
3.5
Using private rented tenancies
The Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities explains how housing authorities
can use the private rented sector to prevent homelessness or secure accommodation for
applicants once homeless:
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Inside Housing, “Prisk pledges to curtail use of B&Bs for homeless,” 20 September 2012
CLG, Homelessness Roundtable, 4 December 2012
Inside Housing, “Council fined for housing family in B&B for weeks”, 11 June 2013
CLG, Press Release, 7 June 2013
ibid
The Bidding Prospectus for the funding can be found on the Department for Communities and Local
Government website.
HC Deb 12 September 2013 cc819-20W
Inside Housing, “Councils snub gold standard scheme”, 29 November 2013
11
Housing authorities may seek the assistance of private sector landlords in providing
suitable accommodation direct to applicants. A general consent under s.25 of the
Local Government Act 1988 (The General Consent under Section 25 of the Local
Government Act 1988 for Financial Assistance to Registered Social Landlords or to
Private Landlords to Relieve or Prevent Homelessness 2005) allows housing
authorities to provide financial assistance to private landlords in order to secure
accommodation for people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. This could
involve, for example, the authority paying the costs of leases; making small one-off
grants (“finders’ fees”) to landlords to encourage them to let dwellings to households
owed a homelessness duty; paying rent deposits or indemnities to ensure
accommodation is secured for such households; and making one-off grant payments
which would prevent an eviction. There is no limit set on the amount of financial
assistance that can be provided, however authorities are obliged to act reasonably
and in accordance with their fiduciary duty to local tax and rent payers. Housing
authorities may also make Discretionary Housing Payments (DHP) to a private
landlord to meet a shortfall between the rent and the amount of housing benefit
payable to a person who is homeless or at risk of homelessness. DHPs are intended
to provide extra financial assistance where there is a shortfall in a person’s eligible
rent and the housing authority consider that the claimant is in need of further financial
assistance. They are governed by the Discretionary Housing Payment (Grant) Order
2001. Housing authorities should also consider working with private landlords to
arrange qualifying offers of assured shorthold tenancies which would bring the main
homelessness duty to an end if accepted by the applicant. 37
The Localism Act 2011 has enabled authorities, with effect from 9 November 2012, to
discharge their duties towards households accepted as unintentionally homeless and in
priority need, by offering a private rented tenancy (with a minimum term of 12 months)
irrespective of objections that the household may have to being housed in the private rented
sector.
Following a consultation exercise the Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation)
(England) Order 2012 was brought into force on 9 November 2012. Statutory guidance on
the Order has been published to which local authorities must have regard when discharging
(ending) their duties to homeless households by using private rented accommodation. The
guidance describes situations in which private rented housing should be regarded as
unsuitable; the location requirements of the Order also extend to any accommodation
secured under Part 7 of the 1996 (including temporary accommodation).
See section 3.6 (below) for information on recent difficulties local authorities in London have
faced in securing private tenancies for use as temporary accommodation.
3.6
Private sector leasing
The main alternative option to B&B accommodation is privately-owned housing which is
leased to housing associations or local authorities for use as temporary accommodation.
The private landlord in this arrangement receives a regular income while the social landlord
is responsible for managing the property and collecting rent/Housing Benefit payments from
the residents. In the case of accommodation leased to housing associations, local authorities
are able to nominate homeless households for temporary placement in these properties.
The Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities encourages authorities to enter
into leasing arrangements:
37
CLG, Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities, July 2006, para 16.20
12
Accommodation leased from a private landlord can provide housing authorities with a
source of good quality, self-contained accommodation which can be let to applicants.
Where there is a need for temporary accommodation, housing authorities are
encouraged to maximise their use of this type of leasing, in so far as they can secure
cost-effective arrangements with landlords. 38
Measures introduced by the Local Government Act 2003 made it easier for authorities to
enter into leasing arrangements:
Under the prudential capital finance system (introduced by the Local Government Act
2003 on 1 April 2004) local authorities are free to borrow without Government consent,
provided that they can service the debts without extra Government support. The
authority must determine how much it can afford to borrow. The new system ended
the former financial disincentives to use leasing (and other forms of credit).
Consequently, there is no longer any need for special concessions relating to leases
of property owned by private landlords where that property is used to accommodate
households owed a duty under Part 7. When entering into leases, as when borrowing,
the capital finance rules simply require authorities to be satisfied that the associated
liabilities are affordable. 39
Self-contained units meet households’ need for space and privacy but rents for this type of
accommodation are generally high as they usually incorporate a market rent plus an
allowance for voids, bad debts and management charges. In the early 2000s difficulties with
the administration of Housing Benefit were identified as one of the main barriers to the
further development of privately leased accommodation by housing associations:
The impact of the comparatively high rents on properties leased from the private
sector, the fact that the majority of homeless households are dependent on housing
benefit and poor housing benefit delivery is resulting in unsustainably high levels of
debt for many housing associations. Currently nearly £12 million in housing benefit is
owed to nine London housing associations for the 10,000 temporary homes they
provide for homeless households.
The situation is having such a serious impact on housing associations’ cash flows that,
just when the supply of decent temporary housing desperately needs to be expanded,
many associations are reluctantly having to consider whether they can afford to
continue to supply this sort of housing in a number of local authority areas. 40
On 13 March 2002 the Labour Government announced the provision of extra funding for
local authorities in the form of Housing Benefit subsidy to encourage the use of privately
leased accommodation as opposed to B&Bs. 41 However, in November 2006 the Department
for Work and Pensions (DWP) signalled its intention to tackle local authorities that were
believed to be profiting from temporary accommodation by charging rents inflated to the
maximum Housing Benefit cap levels. A DWP consultation paper issued to local authorities
on 1 November 2006 contained some short-term proposals and long-term plans:
•
•
38
39
40
41
In the short-term the DWP are seeking to ‘secure agreement to at least a 5%
cut in thresholds and caps for 2007/8 in London’
In the medium-term they want to ‘gain acceptance that we will have to return
to this area in 2008/09, with a view to making further subsidy reductions’.
ibid para 16.15
CLG, Homelessness Code of Guidance for Local Authorities, July 2006 para 16.16
Shelter, Bed and Breakfast – the way forward, 19 November 2001
HC Deb 13 March 2002 c1123W
13
•
In the long-term DWP aim ‘to secure agreement in principle to the longerterm proposal to simplify the subsidy arrangements for temporary
accommodation, and provide better incentives for local authorities to improve
efficiency’. 42
A DWP Circular issued in November 2007 noted that Housing Benefit subsidy for privately
leased accommodation had risen by 22 per between 2004/05 and 2005/06 while caseloads
fell over the same period by 8 per cent. A further reduction in subsidy of 10 per cent was
imposed by the DWP for 2008/09. London authorities predicted that this would make it much
harder for them reduce numbers in B&B and would force them to use more “out of borough
placements” in cheaper areas of London. 43
A review of the subsidy system was carried out in early 2008 by a panel of housing experts,
government officials and council representatives. Reports suggested an intention to
separate out the management costs of temporary accommodation and pay a fixed amount of
subsidy per home from a centrally controlled pot. 44 The implementation of the new system
was delayed. While welcoming more time for consultation and consideration, councils
reported a reluctance to enter into new leasing contracts until the long-term funding of
Housing Benefit was confirmed. This was reportedly forcing shorter-term deals at a cost to
the public purse. 45
The DWP published a consultation paper, Supporting people into work: the next stage of
Housing Benefit reform, 46 on 15 December 2009; the consultation period closed on
22 February 2010. In respect of subsidy for temporary accommodation the paper stated:
6.13 The provision of Housing Benefit for customers living in temporary
accommodation has become increasingly expensive despite recent reductions in the
number of households living in temporary accommodation. Such high rents represent
a barrier to customers entering employment and means that some families can remain
without work, living in temporary housing, for years.
6.14 We are also concerned that some of the highest levels of Housing Benefit are
being paid to those placed in temporary accommodation by their local council. We
want to explore further ways to deliver lower cost temporary accommodation and to
ensure that where councils are able to negotiate lower rents for temporary
accommodation in the private rented sector than the Local Housing Allowance rate for
the area, those lower costs can be passed on to tenants and the taxpayer.
6.15 The Government is determined to change subsidy rules to better reflect the going
rate for property in the area and encourage local authorities to charge tenants more
reasonable rents. 47
The DWP issued Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit Circular S7/2009 in December 2009.
This Circular set out new Housing Benefit subsidy arrangements in respect of claims from
42
43
44
45
46
47
London Councils Housing Forum, 5 December 2006
Inside Housing, “Stop-gap measures”, 29 February 2008
Inside Housing, “Benefit reform plans to be delayed,” 23 May 2008
Inside Housing, “Temporary to permanent benefit”, 6 June 2008
Cm 7769
ibid
14
households living in temporary accommodation from 1 April 2010. 48 The key changes
included:
For customers placed into non self-contained accommodation (board and lodging or
licensed), HB subsidy will be limited to the 1 bedroom self-contained Local Housing
Allowance (LHA) rate based on the location of the property.
For those in self-contained licensed and short-term lease accommodation, the
maximum HB subsidy will be determined by using 90% of the LHA rate for the size of
the property plus an element for management costs (£60 per week for local authorities
outside of London, £40 per week for authorities in London).
The changes affected claimants already placed in the various types of temporary
accommodation except for claimants living in housing association leasing schemes (HALs).
These claims continued to be treated as excluded Rent Allowance cases except where the
local authority considers the rent is unreasonably high or the claimant’s property is
unreasonably large. The Circular set out the reasons for the change:
The current thresholds and caps do not reflect the actual costs of leasing properties of
different sizes in the private sector in different localities. The significant increases in
HB expenditure for customers living in temporary accommodation in recent years were
unsustainable. This has largely been driven by some local authorities in London (with
large caseloads) charging unnecessarily high rents, which as well as increasing
expenditure, can be perceived by customers as a barrier to work.
The Government issued Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit Circular S1/2011 which set out
further subsidy changes 49 for Housing Benefit claimants living in temporary accommodation;
these have applied since 1 April 2011. The changes have:
•
extended the scope of the new subsidy scheme to include cases in housing
association leasing schemes and other similar types of temporary accommodation
not previously included; and
•
fixed the LHA rates used in the formula to calculate subsidy at the January 2011
rates. The use of January 2011 LHA rates will continue until at least the end of
March 2013. (The Government is currently exploring options for temporary
accommodation subsidy from April 2013 onwards and intends to engage with key
stakeholders on this issue later in 2011).
•
These reforms are intended to bring consistency to the level of HB subsidy
payable in respect of similar types of temporary accommodation. This will bring
about greater fairness in terms of the level of funding available to different
providers of temporary accommodation (registered housing associations1, LAs
and others). This approach should help to reduce HB expenditure in this area, by
encouraging providers to reduce their leasing and management costs and achieve
better value for money for the taxpayer. It should also help to drive down rents in
many cases. 50
The Government’s emergency Budget of June 2010 included a series of announcements in
respect of Housing Benefit/Local Housing Allowance rates which came into effect on
48
49
50
The Income-Related Benefits (Subsidy to Local Authorities) (Temporary Accommodation) Amendment Order
2009 (SI 2009/2580)
Introduced by the Income-Related Benefits (Subsidy to Local Authorities) (Temporary Accommodation)
Amendment Order 2010 (SI 2509/2010)
Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit Circular S1/2011
15
1 April 2011. Authorities expressed concerns around the impact that these changes would
have on their ability to use accommodation leased from private landlords. 51 The increased
number of households placed in B&B style accommodation in London is felt by some to
reflect the impact of LHA restrictions on authorities’ ability to access private housing for use
as temporary accommodation. 52
In Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit Circular G10/2012 the DWP confirmed that Housing
Benefit subsidy for all temporary accommodation cases would continue to be based on
the “current arrangements” from April 2013. 53 The Circular provides the following
information on the treatment of housing costs for temporary accommodation when
Universal Credit (UC) is phased in: 54
UC claimants housed in temporary accommodation will receive their housing support
as part of their UC. This will be based on the appropriate LHA rate for the household.
The management element for temporary accommodation cases in UC will be
separated out and paid directly to LAs in order to protect this funding stream.
We are still considering how the separate management element will be paid for UC
claimants, but our preferred option is to provide additional funding through top-ups to
LAs discretionary housing payment (DHP) pots with a mechanism to reflect changes in
local caseloads.
This is intended to be an interim solution to protect provision and LA funding. We are
looking to work with stakeholders and other Government Departments on a long term
solution.
All people claiming HB will continue on the current rules until the claim migrates into
UC. The migration timetable is still to be confirmed.
As the 2012 Welfare Reform Act progressed through Parliament specific concerns were
raised in relation to the impact of the household benefit cap on people placed in temporary
(leased) accommodation. The benefit cap was piloted in four London local authorities and
was rolled out across the country over the summer of 2013. The cap means that families
cannot receive more than £500 per week in benefits (£350 for single people). 55 Because the
rents in privately leased accommodation can be very high, there is a view that the cap could
leave households in temporary accommodation with very little to cover their living expenses
once the rent is paid. Lord Best moved an amendment to exclude families placed in
temporary accommodation from the benefit cap:
Amendment 61 also seeks to take the edge off one of the most extreme aspects of the
total benefit cap. This amendment would exclude from the cap families placed by their
local authority in temporary accommodation-normally a private rented flat when the
council has struck a deal with the landlord. Rents for temporary accommodation, even
though many local authorities send the homeless family some distance to the
cheapest neighbourhoods they can find, are high and the housing benefit has to
51
52
53
54
55
For more information see Library Note SN/SP/5638
Westminster hit by soaring housing costs, 8 June 2013
i.e. as set out in Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit Circular S1/2011
Universal Credit began to be phased in for certain claimants in the pathfinder areas from April 2013. Full
migration of existing claimants to Universal Credit is not expected to be complete until 2017
There are some exemptions to the application of the cap, for example people in receipt of Disability Living
Allowance – for more information see Library note SN/SP/6294. The cap was introduced in four London
Boroughs in April 2013 and was phased in for all other authorities between 15 July and September 2013.
16
encompass an extra charge to cover the administration of the arrangements. A total
bill for a family of three children could be £440 a week in London, even though a
central London borough has despatched the family to the lowest-priced
accommodation it can locate. If £440 goes on rent, a total benefit cap of £500
obviously leaves practically nothing for all the family's other costs, as the noble Lord,
Lord Greaves, noted earlier. There is no prospect of them surviving on the remaining
income within the cap, but the family concerned cannot do anything to rectify the
situation. They have not chosen the accommodation but have been sent there by the
council because nowhere else can be found for them. Yet, if they stay there, and pay
the rent, they face destitution. 56
Lord Freud responded for the Government:
I have already said in my response to Amendment 58D that it is too early to say how
we are going to treat people in temporary accommodation for housing costs purposes
in 2013 and beyond. Following our informal consultation with key stakeholders last
year, we are considering the policy design for temporary accommodation and will
share more details about our plans before too long. 57
The Government confirmed that the cap does apply to households in temporary
accommodation:
What impact will the benefit cap have on those in temporary accommodation?
The benefit cap will apply to people in temporary accommodation whether claiming
through HB subsidy or Universal Credit. However, any discretionary housing payments
(DHPs) they might receive will not be taken into account, meaning they will be on top
of their benefit entitlement under the cap. 58
Lord Freud expanded on this during consideration of the draft Housing Benefit (Benefit Cap)
Regulations 2012:
On temporary accommodation, a point raised by the noble Lord, Lord McKenzie, that
is again an area where we will use DHP. I know that the noble Lord, Lord Best, did
some sums, but clearly this will be a huge incentive to move people very quickly to
something much more permanent rather than staying for the full year in temporary
accommodation, which, as he rightly said, is very expensive. Under universal credit,
there are likely to be changes. We are looking at how we deal with temporary
accommodation-especially the division between the management costs to which he
referred and the actual housing payment element. We are out to consultation on that
area and there will be more developments. 59
May 2013 saw reports of some housing associations, who manage privately leased
accommodation on behalf of local authorities, serving notices on residents ahead of the
introduction of the benefit cap:
Associations are doing this where they manage properties used by local authorities for
temporary accommodation which are owned by private landlords. Under private sector
lease arrangements associations have to guarantee a level of rental income to the
landlord, and will be out of pocket if the tenant falls into arrears.
56
57
58
59
HL Deb 23 January 2012 c884
HL Deb 23 January 2012 c893
See DWP Circular HB/CTB G6/12 – Annex A, June 2012
HL Deb 6 November 2012 GC101
17
A number of associations are serving notices warning tenants could be evicted and
are considering terminating leases early and returning the properties to the private
landlords. 60
Statistics released in March 2012 recorded a decrease in the use of self-contained
accommodation by local authorities:
At the end of December 2011, 85 per cent of households in temporary accommodation
were in self -contained accommodation - a decrease from 87 per cent on the same
date last year. The decrease in the use of self-contained accommodation is largely
due to a decline in the use of accommodation leased from the private sector by local
authorities and housing associations, which decreased by 6 per cent from 27,730 to
26,080 households. 61
This decrease continued according to statistics released in September 2012:
At the end of June 2012, 83 per cent of households in temporary accommodation were
in self-contained accommodation - a decrease from 85 per cent on the same date last
year. 62
However, the December 2013 statistical release records 88% of households in temporary
accommodation as placed in self-contained accommodation. 63
London Councils published Tracking Welfare Reform: Meeting the financial challenge
(September 2013) in which it assessed the potential impact of the household benefit cap on
families placed in leased accommodation in London:
In some cases in London, housing benefit entitlement is reduced to 50p per week
meaning that there is effectively no tenure or part of the country that would provide
affordable accommodation and consequently no reasonable housing offer that can be
made to them by the local authority. The entire shortfall of a household in temporary
accommodation is effectively transferred from central government (through housing
benefit), to the affected household and then, where the household cannot pay the rent,
to the local authority through the subsidy of temporary accommodation.
If it is assumed that the 4,600 capped London households in temporary
accommodation lose the average amount identified in government’s impact
assessment (£105 per week), London local authorities would be faced with an
additional, non-recoupable financial burden of more than £25,000,000 per year; equal
to around half of the savings to central government the benefit cap is expected to
produce in London. 64
3.7
Out of borough temporary accommodation
Several media reports in April/May 2012 referred to certain councils in London seeking
accommodation outside of the Capital for use as temporary and permanent housing for
households to whom they owed a statutory housing duty. 65 These councils argued that a
combination of the Olympics, Housing Benefit restrictions and high demand for privately
rented housing had made it very difficult to find suitable temporary accommodation in
60
61
62
63
64
65
Inside Housing, “Providers warned over temporary housing plan”, 10 May 2013
th
CLG Statistical Release, Statutory Homelessness: England 4 Quarter 2011, 8 March 2012
nd
CLG Statistical Release, Statutory Homelessness: England 2 Quarter 2012, 6 September 2012
rd
CLG Statistical Release, Statutory Homelessness: England 3 Quarter 2013, 5 December 2013
London Councils, Tracking Welfare Reform: Meeting the financial challenge, September 2013, p6
See for example Guardian, “London looks to export council tenants”, 27 April 2012
18
London. Part two of the Government’s consultation paper, Homelessness (Suitability of
Accommodation) (England) Order 2012, stated:
It has come to light that some local authorities are seeking accommodation for
households owed the main homelessness duty far outside their own district.
Government is willing to explore whether protections around location of
accommodation need to be strengthened and how this might be done. We expect that
any measures adopted following this consultation process would apply to any
accommodation offered by authorities in discharge of their duties under Part VII of the
Housing Act 1996, including temporary accommodation, private rented sector offers
and social housing. 66
The Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2012 was brought into
force on 9 November 2012. Statutory guidance on the Order has been published to which
local authorities must have regard when discharging (ending) their duties to homeless
households by using private rented accommodation. The guidance describes situations in
which private rented housing should be regarded as unsuitable; the location requirements of
the Order also extend to any accommodation secured under Part 7 of the 1996 (including
temporary accommodation).
The then Minister met with eighteen London authorities reporting high homelessness
numbers, including households in temporary accommodation, on 4 December 2012.
Representatives of the local authorities highlighted the following challenges:
•
difficulties in procuring private rented housing at affordable rates;
•
private landlords are less inclined to lease properties to councils or let to tenants in
receipt of LHA as they have access to alternative tenants willing to pay higher rents. 67
CLG officials suggested a new procurement model for private rented accommodation with
councils adopting a strategic partner role and acting in collaboration. 68
A report by the Action and Research Centre (RSA) Between the cracks – exploring in year
admissions in schools in England (July 2013) studies the impact of moving schools on young
children.
3.8
Settled Homes Initiative (now ended)
On 4 April 2006 the then Housing Minister, Yvette Cooper, set out plans for a new pilot
scheme to help families in London move from temporary accommodation into settled homes:
Following the Chancellor's announcement in the Budget of an Extra Homes Pilot, local
authorities and housing associations in London will be invited to put forward innovative
proposals to help reduce the number of households living in insecure temporary
accommodation in the capital.
The new pilot will build on the range of existing and emerging 'temporary to
permanent' housing schemes. For example, in Newham, the 'Local Space' scheme is
working to provide more affordable and settled homes over the long term by capturing
funding that was previously being used to pay for costly temporary accommodation.
66
67
68
DCLG, Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2012, May 2012, paras 38-39
CLG, Homelessness Roundtable, 4 December 2012
ibid
19
In particular, the pilot scheme will explore new approaches which help families to
overcome barriers to work, provide settled homes, and reduce the cost of funding
expensive temporary homes through housing benefit.
The Government is committed to reducing the number of households in temporary
accommodation by 50 per cent by 2010. While 86 per cent of households in temporary
accommodation are living in self contained housing, they do not provide the security
and opportunities a settled home brings.
The pilot scheme is an important measure in the Government's report 'Building on
Success: London's challenge for 2012' published today, which sets out a range of
actions being taken by the Government and its partners to address the housing needs
of the Capital, including plans to increase the number of new homes to meet rising
demand, a new drive to bring empty homes back into use and action to tackle
overcrowding and homelessness. 69
A London targeted funding pot of £30m in capital grant was set aside. On 19 April 2007 the
outcome of the bidding round for this scheme was announced:
Housing Minister Yvette Cooper and Mayor of London Ken Livingstone today
announced the winning bids for a £30 million programme to help families move from
temporary accommodation into long-term settled homes.
The Settled Homes Initiative will enable schemes in Bromley, Hackney, Westminster,
Brent, Ealing and West London to purchase around 900 homes and convert them over
time into quality settled social housing.
This innovative approach uses housing benefit to help buy homes for families who
would otherwise be in insecure and very expensive private sector accommodation,
with no certainty about how long they could live there.
Today's announcement builds on the range of existing and emerging 'temporary to
settled' housing schemes in the Capital, which provides a stable home for families that
is converted into social rent housing over the long-term. 70
This initiative has now ended.
3.9
The supply of affordable housing
Labour’s approach
In February 2003 the Labour Government published Sustainable Communities: Building for
the Future in which the then Deputy Prime Minister acknowledged that Governments over
the last 30 years had failed to meet housing need. Against a background of rising house
prices, increased numbers of families living in temporary accommodation and a reduction in
the rate of affordable housing completions by social housing providers, the then Chancellor
and Deputy Prime Minister commissioned Kate Barker to carry out a review of housing
supply in the UK in April 2003.
Following the publication of Kate Barker’s final report in 2004, Review of Housing Supply:
Delivering Stability: Securing our Future Housing Needs, the Labour Government committed
itself to achieving a ‘step-change’ in housing supply. The initial aim was to secure 200,000
net additions to the housing stock per year (up from around 150,000 in 2004/05) by 2016.
This target was extended in 2007 to increasing the supply of housing by 240,000 per year by
69
70
ODPM Press Release 2006/0077, 4 April 2006
CLG Press Release, £30 million for more settled homes in London, 19 April 2007
20
2016 and ensuring an addition to the housing stock of three million homes by 2020. Much of
this additional growth was expected to result from reforms to the planning system and from
the development of four ‘growth areas’. In addition to recommending an overall increase in
housing supply, Kate Barker identified a specific need for an increase in the supply of social
housing of 17,000 homes each year. She also said there was case for providing up to 9,000
homes a year above this level in order to make inroads into the backlog of unmet housing
need.
As part of the 2004 Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) the Labour Government
committed additional funding to the development of new social housing. Planned
expenditure on new affordable housing more than doubled between 1997 and 2008
(reaching £2.25 billion in 2008). The then Government said that an extra 10,000 homes for
social rent would be provided between 2004-05 and 2007-08, representing a 50 per cent
increase in provision and amounting to 75,000 new social rented homes in total. A
commitment was also made to deliver more than 40,000 homes for essential public sector
workers and low-cost home ownership schemes in areas of high housing demand; almost
£1 billion of the Housing Corporation’s 71 National Affordable Housing Programme was
earmarked for shared ownership schemes over 2006-2008 (out of a total budget of £3.9
billion).
The boost to affordable housing provision announced in the 2004 CSR was welcomed by
housing commentators, but they also pointed out that the level of social housing supply
envisaged was still short of the levels argued for by Kate Barker. There had been an
increase in number of social rented homes constructed since 2002/03 but output was still at
a substantially lower level than that achieved in 1994/95.
In the light of the credit crunch housing commentators questioned whether the then
Government’s house building targets would be achieved. When questioned on the likelihood
of delivering three million new homes by 2020 the then Minister, Ian Austin, said the
Department “does not produce forecasts of housing supply” but acknowledged that “the
current financial and economic conditions will make the achievement of [the Government’s]
housing supply ambition extremely challenging.” 72 The steps taken to increase the supply of
affordable housing at that point were set out in a written answer in March 2009:
Mr. Rob Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
what recent steps she has taken to increase the supply of affordable accommodation.
Mr. Iain Wright: We are committed to the delivery of affordable housing, and are
investing over £8 billion in affordable housing over the three years, 2008-11—a 50 per
cent. increase on the previous three years. This investment is being made through the
Homes and Communities Agency. Our aspiration is to reach 70,000 new affordable
homes a year by 2010-11.
The September housing market package of measures was aimed at increasing
confidence, stability and fairness in the housing market. This offered up to 10,000 firsttime buyers currently frozen out of the mortgage market the chance to get onto the
property ladder through a new shared equity scheme, Homebuy Direct; Support for up
to 6,000 of the most vulnerable homeowners facing repossession to remain in their
home through a mortgage rescue scheme; Improving the support offered through the
benefit system to homeowners with mortgages who lose their jobs, at a cost of £100
71
72
The Homes and Communities Agency took over the investment role of the Corporation in December 2008.
HC Deb 13 July 2009 c125W
21
million over the next two years; working with regional development agencies to
support the most critical regeneration schemes with the greatest potential to transform
their communities and specifically on social rent, bringing forward £400 million in order
to deliver up to 5,500 new social homes over the next 18 months on top of current
assumptions.
The pre-Budget announced £775 million of housing and regeneration investment
brought forward to help offset the impact of economic shocks on priority programmes
and provide additional fiscal stimulus. This included £250 million on Decent Homes
programmes to fund improvements and improve energy efficiency in 25,000 council
homes; a further £150 million on social rented housing to bring forward delivery of up
to 2,000 more social rented homes; £175 million for major repairs to council housing
stock, and £100 million to support key regeneration and housing infrastructure
projects.
Additionally, the RDAs will consider the scope for bringing forward up to £100 million
nationally to provide a stimulus to regional and national economic development. The
Government also extended the Mortgage Rescue scheme to include cover for second
charge lending and the Support for Mortgage Interest scheme for homeowners who
lose their jobs.
These announcements build on those previously made in May and July 2008. We are
continuing to work closely with the Homes and Communities Agency in order to secure
73
continued delivery of affordable housing.
The Government’s approach
Changes to the Homes and Communities Agency’s 2010/11 budget were confirmed on
5 July 2010 by the new Government:
On 24 May reductions were made to the HCA’s programmes of £230m as part of
wider efficiency saving imposed on CLG. These were made up of £100m (National
Affordable Housing Programme); £50m (Kickstart Round 2); £30m (Gypsy & Traveller
Programme); £50m (Housing Market Renewal, subject to consultation).
As part of the Government’s announcement on the above reductions, it was indicated
that Housing Pledge funding for the HCA of £780m was not secure. However, the
Treasury also indicated that £170m of funding would be reinvested in the HCA for
social rented housing, creating an overall potential shortfall in funding for the Agency
of £610m (£780m - £170m = £610m).
The Government has decided that granting the remaining £610m in full is
unaffordable, given the extent of similar commitments across the rest of government.
However, the Government has guaranteed that £390m will be available this year, on
top of the £170m announced on 24 May 2010. This will be prioritised towards new
affordable housing as well as meeting existing commitments on Decent Homes and
Mortgage Rescue.
In total the £780m coupled with £230m in programme cuts, created a total potential
shortfall in funding of £1.010 billion. This set against a funding commitment from
government of £170m and now a further £390m means that the HCA has a
programme reduction in 2010/11 of £450m in total (£230m (as above) plus £220m as
73
HC Deb 18 March 2009 c1177W
22
per yesterday’s announcement). This reduces the HCA’s capital budget for 2010/11 by
around 10 per cent, to £4.11bn. 74
The then Minister for Housing, Grant Shapps, confirmed that the £390m available to the
HCA would build over 8,500 new homes, including 4,500 social rented homes, over 3,000
homes for sale at affordable prices and 1,000 stalled by the recession. 75
In the October 2010 Spending Review the Government confirmed the HCA’s budget of
£4.5 billion for 2011-15. This sum includes £100m for bringing empty homes back into use
and £200 million for the mortgage rescue scheme. The budget over the previous
Comprehensive Spending Review period 2008-2011 was £8.4bn.
The Government announced that social landlords will be able to offer new “intermediate”
tenancies (referred to as affordable rent tenure) on which a higher rent will be payable (80%
of market rents subject to a cap) – the additional revenue from these rents can then be
reinvested in new housing development:
Social landlords will be able to offer a growing proportion of new social tenants new
intermediate rental contracts that are more flexible, at rent levels between current
market and social rents. The terms of existing social tenancies and their rent levels
remain unchanged. Taken together with continuing, but more modest, capital
investment in social housing, this will allow the Government to deliver up to 150,000
76
new affordable homes over the Spending Review period.
One of the key ways in which the Coalition intends to stimulate new house building, aside
from direct investment in new social housing and low cost home ownership, is through its
New Homes Bonus Scheme. Grant Shapps outlined the scheme in a letter to authorities
published on the day of the Spending Review:
Our commitment to increasing housing supply will be delivered by devolving power to
local people and stimulating increased private sector investment. In April 2011 we will
introduce the New Homes Bonus, a powerful fiscal incentive for local authorities to
deliver more homes. We have set aside over £900m of funding and the scheme will
match fund the Council Tax on every new home for each of the following six years.
Many Local Authorities have the opportunity to benefit substantially from this scheme,
which will commence in financial year 2011-12. A consultation on the scheme design
will be launched in November 2010.
To support growth we will give Local Authorities the freedom to borrow against tax
revenues and will also provide access to a Regional Growth Fund to fund capital
projects which could support housing growth and market renewal schemes. By
rationalising the current array of standards and regulations, the Government will
reduce the cost of development. We will also make better use of surplus public land to
support housing and other locally-driven development. The Homes and Communities
Agency (HCA) will be a much smaller investment and enabling agency, tasked with
working more closely with Local Authorities. 77
November 2011 saw publication of the Government’s housing strategy for England, Laying
the Foundations. Chapter 2 of this document set out the Government’s plans for increasing
the supply of housing, including a new Get Britain Building investment fund of £400m.
74
75
76
77
http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/public/documents/HCA_briefing_note_6_July_2010.pdf
http://www.communities.gov.uk/newsstories/housing/1631659
Cm 7942 page 8
ibid
23
Further measures were announced as part of the Housing Stimulus Package on
6 September 2012. The Government said an additional £300m in capital funding would be
made available to deliver “up to 15,000 affordable homes and bring 5,000 empty homes
back into use.” The Government also announced that new legislation (The Infrastructure
(Financial Assistance) Act 2012) would enable the Government to underwrite the debt of
housing associations and private sector developers.
The 2013 Budget included additional money for the affordable homes guarantee programme
and the Build to Rent fund:
Support for affordable housing
1.108 The £200 million Build to Rent fund announced at Autumn Statement 2012 was
significantly oversubscribed. Budget 2013 announces that this fund will be expanded
to £1 billion to support the development of more homes in England. The fund will
provide equity or loan finance to support the development finance stage of building
new homes for private rent.
[...]
1.111 Affordable housing plays an important part in the Government’s overall drive to
boost housing supply and stimulate economic growth. The Government has recently
issued a prospectus to support affordable homes delivered through the guarantee
programme. The Government now wants to go further and will double the existing
affordable homes guarantee programme, providing up to an additional £225 million to
support a further 15,000 affordable homes starting in England by 2015. 78
The 2013 Autumn Statement contained further commitments in relation to new house
building. The Chancellor announced:
•
local authority borrowing caps will be increased by £150m in 2015/16 and a further
£150m in 2016/17. The government intend that this will support the development
of 10,000 new affordable homes. This additional borrowing capacity will form part
of the local growth fund, allowing local authorities who have an agreement with
their LEP to bid for it. Bids will be prioritised on the basis of value for money and,
to minimise the amount of funding needed, the government will expect bidders to
contribute public sector land and to sell high-value vacant stock;
•
there will be a £1bn, 6-year programme to unlock new large housing sites. The
programme will begin in 2014/15, on 9 specific sites, capable of unlocking around
27,000 houses. £50 million of this will be earmarked for LEP supported bids;
a range of measured aimed at removing barriers to the building of new homes in
the planning system. This includes a consultation on potential changes to the New
Homes Bonus, which would introduce mechanisms to withhold payments where
planning applications are only approved on appeal. 79
Additional information on the Government’s initiatives to stimulate housing development can
be found in Library note SN/SP/6416.
78
79
HC 1033, March 2013
CIH Briefing on the 2013 Autumn Statement, 5 December 2013
24
4
Comment
Shelter was highly critical of the Labour Government in the light of the overall increase in the
numbers of households placed in temporary accommodation up to 2005. In a press release
issued in response to the statutory homelessness data published in December 2004, Shelter
called on the Government to “make a strong commitment to a coherent, effective strategy for
tackling the problem,” 80 while in November 2006 the charity further called on the Government
to provide funding for an extra 20,000 new social homes between 2008 - 2011 on top of
those already planned. 81
The Public Accounts Committee published a report on the ODPM’s progress in tackling
homeless in November 2005. The Committee described the reduction in the number of
families with children in B&B accommodation as a “significant achievement” but went on to
say:
It is important that homeless households are not moved from one unsatisfactory form
of accommodation to another. The ODPM is strengthening the statutory standards that
apply to temporary accommodation but local authorities are responsible for inspecting
and enforcing them. ODPM needs to obtain better assurance on the quality of
temporary accommodation by collecting more systematic intelligence on the frequency
and results of inspections, and apply pressure for improvements by promoting the new
powers of local authorities under the 2004 Housing Act. 82
Housing commentators were concerned that the scrapping of Regional Strategies
(containing house building targets) by the current Government would have an adverse
impact on the supply of new housing, along with the reduction in the HCA’s budget. 83 There
are also significant concerns around the potential impact on homelessness levels of the cuts
to Housing Benefit expenditure announced in the June 2010 Budget and the October 2010
Spending Review. 84
The Chartered Institute of Housing, Shelter and the National Housing Federation have joined
forces to provide regular reports on Government progress in relation to key housing issues –
one of these issues concerns action to tackle homelessness. The first progress report was
published in October 2011 – the Government received a “red light” in relation to its policies in
this area:
The recent increases in the number of homeless acceptances and number of
households in temporary accommodation raise concerns that a positive downward
trend may be ending, especially given the anticipated effect of the Government’s cuts
to welfare in the months to come We already know, thanks to a leaked letter from
DCLG to Number 10, that officials were deeply worried about the potential impact of
changes to housing benefit, which it was said could place up to 40,000 vulnerable
families at risk of homelessness. Ministers have clearly been warned about the threat
posed by welfare reforms to their stated objectives on homelessness and should
review these cuts urgently. 85
On publication of the March 2012 statistics the Chief Executive of Crisis said:
80
81
Shelter press release, Shelter slams government as number of homeless households hits 100,000, 13
December 2004
Shelter, Against the Odds, 2006
82
HC 653 of Session 2005-06, The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Tackling Homelessness
83
Guardian, “Anxiety over government’s housing revolution,” 23 June 2010
See London Councils, Tracking Welfare Reform: Meeting the financial challenge, September 2013,
The Housing Report (chapter 4), October 2011
84
85
25
Our worst fears are coming to pass. We face a perfect storm of economic downturn,
rising joblessness and soaring demand for limited affordable housing combined with
government policy to cut housing benefit plus local cuts to homelessness services. 86
The second progress report was published in May 2012 – the assessment of the
Government’s progress in this area attracted another “red light”:
The large increase in homeless acceptances and rough sleepers is deeply troubling.
Ministers need to respond urgently to this growing problem, which could be
exacerbated by further cuts to Housing Benefit in 2013. 87
The third edition (November 2012) recorded another “red light” assessment:
The number of households in temporary accommodation continues to creep upwards,
and the 51,640 recorded in the second quarter of 2012, up 2.4% on the previous
quarter, surpasses the 50,400 counted in the period during which the Government
came to power. 88
Particular attention was drawn in this report to the increase in the number of families with
children in B&B accommodation:
Figures show the number of families with children in B&B for more than six weeks
rocketed by 331% in the first two years of the Government, from 160 in the second
quarter of 2010 to 480 in the first quarter of 2012 and 690 in the second quarter, the
latest period for which figures are available. 89
5
Statistics on the numbers placed in temporary accommodation
See pages 27-28 (below)
86
87
88
89
The Guardian, “Homelessness rise of 14% just the tip of the iceberg,” 8 March 2012
The Housing Report (chapter 4) May 2012
The Housing Report (chapter 4) November 2012
Ibid – note that the December 2012 statistics had not been released at the time of publication.
26
Households in England accommodation arranged by local authorities under the homelessness provisions of the 1985 and 1996 Housing Acts by type of accommodation¹
Total number Bed and breakfast hotels
of households
accommodated
Number
at end of quarter
Hostels/Women's refuges
Number
Percentage
of total
change on
previous quarter
Private sector accommodation
(eg on lease or licence, or direct with L'lord)
Number
Percentage
Percentage
of total
change on
previous quarter
Other types including
local authorities' and RSL's own stock
Number
Percentage
of total
change on
previous quarter
of total
change on
previous quarter
1985 Housing Act
At end of quarter:
1989
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
31,510
33,740
36,260
37,900
11,460
11,710
11,880
11,480
36.4%
34.7%
32.8%
30.3%
12.9%
2.2%
1.5%
-3.4%
6,940
7,230
7,840
8,020
22.0%
21.4%
21.6%
21.2%
11.2%
4.2%
8.4%
2.3%
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
13,110
14,800
16,540
18,400
41.6%
43.9%
45.6%
48.5%
1.7%
12.9%
11.8%
11.2%
1990
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
41,150
43,040
45,870
45,270
12,150
12,170
12,140
11,130
29.5%
28.3%
26.5%
24.6%
5.8%
0.2%
-0.2%
-8.3%
8,030
8,450
8,990
9,010
19.5%
19.6%
19.6%
19.9%
0.1%
5.2%
6.4%
0.2%
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
20,970
22,420
24,740
25,130
51.0%
52.1%
53.9%
55.5%
14.0%
6.9%
10.3%
1.6%
1991
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
50,000
56,290
60,170
59,930
12,240
13,300
13,550
12,150
24.5%
23.6%
22.5%
20.3%
10.0%
8.7%
1.9%
-10.3%
10,230
10,200
10,620
9,990
20.5%
18.1%
17.6%
16.7%
13.5%
-0.3%
4.1%
-5.9%
..
20,380
22,290
23,740
..
36.2%
37.0%
39.6%
..
..
9.4%
6.5%
27,530
12,410
13,710
14,050
55.1%
22.0%
22.8%
23.4%
9.6%
..
10.5%
2.5%
1992
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
62,090
64,550
65,500
63,070
12,220
10,510
9,660
7,630
19.7%
16.3%
14.7%
12.1%
0.6%
-14.0%
-8.1%
-21.0%
10,310
10,960
11,180
10,840
16.6%
17.0%
17.1%
17.2%
3.2%
6.3%
2.0%
-3.0%
25,190
27,840
28,760
27,910
40.6%
43.1%
43.9%
44.3%
6.1%
10.5%
3.3%
-3.0%
14,370
15,240
15,900
16,690
23.1%
23.6%
24.3%
26.5%
2.3%
6.1%
4.3%
5.0%
1993
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
61,380
57,920
56,500
53,580
7,570
6,520
6,130
4,900
12.3%
11.3%
10.8%
9.1%
-0.8%
-13.9%
-6.0%
-20.1%
10,890
10,520
10,790
10,210
17.7%
18.2%
19.1%
19.1%
0.5%
-3.4%
2.6%
-5.4%
26,720
24,980
23,960
23,270
43.5%
43.1%
42.4%
43.4%
-4.3%
-6.5%
-4.1%
-2.9%
16,200
15,900
15,620
15,200
26.4%
27.5%
27.6%
28.4%
-2.9%
-1.9%
-1.8%
-2.7%
1994
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
52,340
48,660
48,110
45,630
4,920
4,770
4,780
4,130
9.4%
9.8%
9.9%
9.1%
0.4%
-3.0%
0.2%
-13.6%
10,460
10,310
10,330
9,730
20.0%
21.2%
21.5%
21.3%
2.4%
-1.4%
0.2%
-5.8%
20,860
18,120
17,470
15,800
39.9%
37.2%
36.3%
34.6%
-10.4%
-13.1%
-3.6%
-9.6%
16,100
15,460
15,530
15,970
30.8%
31.8%
32.3%
35.0%
5.9%
-4.0%
0.5%
2.8%
1995
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
46,350
45,940
46,690
44,140
4,480
5,160
5,260
4,500
9.7%
11.2%
11.3%
10.2%
8.5%
15.2%
1.9%
-14.4%
10,380
10,470
10,620
9,660
22.4%
22.8%
22.7%
21.9%
6.7%
0.9%
1.4%
-9.0%
14,130
12,830
12,220
11,530
30.5%
27.9%
26.2%
26.1%
-10.6%
-9.2%
-4.8%
-5.6%
17,360
17,480
18,590
18,450
37.5%
38.0%
39.8%
41.8%
8.7%
0.7%
6.4%
-0.8%
1996
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
43,240
43,300
43,830
42,190
4,750
4,370
4,500
4,160
11.0%
10.1%
10.3%
9.9%
5.6%
-8.0%
3.0%
-7.6%
10,090
10,140
10,360
9,640
23.3%
23.4%
23.6%
22.8%
4.5%
0.5%
2.2%
-6.9%
11,410
11,130
11,530
10,980
26.4%
25.7%
26.3%
26.0%
-1.0%
-2.5%
3.6%
-4.8%
16,990
17,660
17,440
17,410
39.3%
40.8%
39.8%
41.3%
-7.9%
3.9%
-1.2%
-0.2%
27
Households in England in accommodation arranged by local authorities under the homelessness provisions of the 1985 and 1996 Housing Acts by type of accommodation¹
Total number Bed and breakfast hotels
of households
accommodated
at end of quarter
1985 and 1996 Housing Acts
1997
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
Number
2
Hostels/Women's refuges
Number
Percentage
LA or RSL stock
of total
previous quarter
Number
Percentage
change on
previous quarter
Number
Percentage
change on
of total
Other Private Sector 2 Accommodation
(inc private landlord)
Leased from the Private Sector
by an LA or RSL
of total
previous quarter
Number
Percentage
change on
Percentage
change on
change on
of total
previous quarter
of total previous quarter
41,250
43,720
45,290
44,870
4,100
4,500
4,630
4,520
10%
10%
10%
10%
-1.4%
9.8%
2.9%
-2.4%
9,680
9,430
9,450
8,730
23.5%
21.6%
20.9%
19.5%
0.4%
-2.6%
0.2%
-7.6%
9,600
11,600
12,960
13,700
23.3%
26.5%
28.6%
30.5%
..
20.8%
11.7%
5.7%
11,360
11,620
11,630
11,350
27.5%
26.6%
25.7%
25.3%
..
2.3%
0.1%
-2.4%
6,510
6,570
6,620
6,570
15.8%
15.0%
14.6%
14.6%
..
0.9%
0.8%
-0.8%
1998
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
47,520
49,390
52,510
53,790
4,820
5,380
5,890
7,240
10%
11%
11%
13%
6.6%
11.6%
9.5%
22.9%
9,730
9,490
9,820
9,760
20.5%
19.2%
18.7%
18.1%
11.5%
-2.5%
3.5%
-0.6%
13,950
14,800
16,360
17,560
29.4%
30.0%
31.2%
32.6%
1.8%
6.1%
10.5%
7.3%
12,090
12,960
15,590
14,750
25.4%
26.2%
29.7%
27.4%
6.5%
7.2%
20.3%
-5.4%
6,930
6,760
4,850
4,480
14.6%
13.7%
9.2%
8.3%
5.5%
-2.5%
-28.3%
-7.6%
1999
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
56,580
58,430
61,450
62,180
6,570
7,700
8,240
8,000
12%
13%
13%
13%
-9.3%
17.2%
7.0%
-2.9%
9,840
10,210
9,960
9,660
17.4%
17.5%
16.2%
15.5%
0.8%
3.8%
-2.4%
-3.0%
18,600
18,740
20,330
20,330
32.9%
32.1%
33.1%
32.7%
5.9%
0.8%
8.5%
0.0%
16,210
15,030
15,300
16,280
28.6%
25.7%
24.9%
26.2%
9.9%
-7.3%
1.8%
6.4%
5,360
6,750
7,620
7,910
9.5%
11.6%
12.4%
12.7%
19.6%
25.9%
12.9%
3.8%
2000
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
65,170
67,520
71,860
73,080
8,680
8,910
9,420
9,870
13%
13%
13%
14%
8.5%
2.6%
5.7%
4.8%
10,300
10,320
10,460
10,790
15.8%
15.3%
14.6%
14.8%
6.6%
0.2%
1.4%
3.2%
21,380
22,490
23,700
24,320
32.8%
33.3%
33.0%
33.3%
5.2%
5.2%
5.4%
2.6%
17,060
19,720
18,570
21,610
26.2%
29.2%
25.8%
29.6%
4.8%
15.6%
-5.8%
16.4%
7,750
6,080
9,710
6,490
11.9%
9.0%
13.5%
8.9%
-2.0%
-21.5%
59.7%
-33.2%
2001
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
75,200
75,920
77,800
77,510
10,860
11,390
12,220
11,860
14%
15%
16%
15%
10.0%
4.9%
7.3%
-2.9%
10,610
10,320
11,280
10,680
14.1%
13.6%
14.5%
13.8%
-1.7%
-2.7%
9.3%
-5.3%
25,480
25,450
25,930
26,570
33.9%
33.5%
33.3%
34.3%
4.8%
-0.1%
1.9%
2.5%
21,900
21,970
20,050
20,600
29.1%
28.9%
25.8%
26.6%
1.3%
0.3%
-8.7%
2.7%
6,350
6,790
8,320
7,800
8.4%
8.9%
10.7%
10.1%
-2.2%
6.9%
22.5%
-6.3%
2002
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
80,200
81,660
85,010
85,140
12,710
12,720
13,950
13,240
16%
16%
16%
16%
7.2%
0.1%
9.7%
-5.1%
9,570
9,770
9,720
9,640
11.9%
12.0%
11.4%
11.3%
-10.4%
2.1%
-0.5%
-0.8%
27,760
28,470
28,870
27,580
34.6%
34.9%
34.0%
32.4%
4.5%
2.6%
1.4%
-4.5%
20,660
22,610
23,840
25,940
25.8%
27.7%
28.0%
30.5%
0.3%
9.4%
5.4%
8.8%
9,510
8,090
8,620
8,740
11.9%
9.9%
10.1%
10.3%
21.9%
-14.9%
6.6%
1.4%
2003
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
89,040
91,870
94,440
94,610
12,440
11,390
10,310
8,420
14%
12%
11%
9%
-6.0%
-8.4%
-9.5%
-18.3%
10,060
10,420
10,790
10,370
11.3%
11.3%
11.4%
11.0%
4.4%
3.6%
3.6%
-3.9%
28,260
27,590
27,560
27,470
31.7%
30.0%
29.2%
29.0%
2.5%
-2.4%
-0.1%
-0.3%
28,370
31,460
35,140
38,740
31.9%
34.2%
37.2%
40.9%
9.4%
10.9%
11.7%
10.2%
9,920
11,010
10,640
9,620
11.1%
12.0%
11.3%
10.2%
13.5%
11.0%
-3.4%
-9.6%
2004
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
97,680
99,530
101,300
101,030
7,090
7,250
7,460
6,450
7%
7%
7%
6%
-15.8%
2.3%
2.9%
-13.5%
10,780
10,580
10,380
10,060
11.0%
10.6%
10.2%
10.0%
4.0%
-1.9%
-1.9%
-3.1%
27,880
27,960
28,220
27,730
28.5%
28.1%
27.9%
27.4%
1.5%
0.3%
0.9%
-1.7%
42,390
42,640
43,720
46,140
43.4%
42.8%
43.2%
45.7%
9.4%
0.6%
2.5%
5.5%
9,540
11,140
11,530
10,640
9.8%
11.2%
11.4%
10.5%
-0.8%
16.8%
3.5%
-7.7%
2005
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
101,070
100,970
101,020
98,730
6,780
6,290
6,100
4,950
7%
6%
6%
5%
5.1%
-7.2%
-3.0%
-18.9%
10,280
9,870
10,020
9,230
10.2%
9.8%
9.9%
9.3%
2.2%
-4.0%
1.5%
-7.9%
26,630
27,440
25,030
24,220
26.3%
27.2%
24.8%
24.5%
-4.0%
3.0%
-8.8%
-3.2%
46,530
46,990
48,860
49,910
46.0%
46.5%
48.4%
50.6%
0.8%
1.0%
4.0%
2.1%
10,860
10,380
11,020
10,420
10.7%
10.3%
10.9%
10.6%
2.1%
-4.4%
6.2%
-5.4%
2006
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
96,370
93,910
93,090
89,510
5,150
4,900
4,900
4,210
5%
5%
5%
5%
4.0%
-4.9%
0.0%
-14.1%
9,010
8,930
8,460
7,840
9.3%
9.5%
9.1%
8.8%
-2.4%
-0.9%
-5.3%
-7.3%
22,350
20,800
20,180
18,840
23.2%
22.1%
21.7%
21.0%
-7.7%
-6.9%
-3.0%
-6.6%
49,670
49,320
49,710
48,850
51.5%
52.5%
53.4%
54.6%
-0.5%
-0.7%
0.8%
-1.7%
10,200
9,980
9,850
9,770
10.6%
10.6%
10.6%
10.9%
-2.1%
-2.2%
-1.3%
-0.8%
2007
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
87,120
84,900
82,750
79,500
4,310
4,070
4,090
3,530
5%
5%
5%
4%
2.4%
-5.6%
0.5%
-13.7%
7,640
7,230
7,180
6,620
8.8%
8.5%
8.7%
8.3%
-2.6%
-5.4%
-0.7%
-7.8%
18,040
17,240
16,490
15,910
20.7%
20.3%
19.9%
20.0%
-4.2%
-4.4%
-4.4%
-3.5%
45,600
44,610
43,430
41,730
52.3%
52.5%
52.5%
52.5%
-6.7%
-2.2%
-2.6%
-3.9%
11,540
11,750
11,570
11,710
13.2%
13.8%
14.0%
14.7%
18.1%
1.8%
-1.5%
1.2%
2008
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
77,510
74,690
72,130
67,480
3,840
3,440
3,230
2,560
5%
5%
4%
4%
8.8%
-10.4%
-6.1%
-20.7%
6,450
6,020
5,800
5,250
8.3%
8.1%
8.0%
7.8%
-2.6%
-6.7%
-3.7%
-9.5%
14,740
14,030
13,420
11,930
19.0%
18.8%
18.6%
17.7%
-7.4%
-4.8%
-4.3%
-11.1%
40,480
41,130
39,990
38,790
52.2%
55.1%
55.4%
57.5%
-3.0%
1.6%
-2.8%
-3.0%
12,000
10,070
9,710
8,950
15.5%
13.5%
13.5%
13.3%
2.5%
-16.1%
-3.6%
-7.8%
2009
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
64,000
60,230
56,920
53,370
2,450
2,150
2,050
1,880
4%
4%
4%
4%
-4.3%
-12.2%
-4.7%
-8.3%
5,170
4,710
4,480
4,150
8.1%
7.8%
7.9%
7.8%
-1.5%
-8.9%
-4.9%
-7.4%
10,480
9,520
8,780
8,180
16.4%
15.8%
15.4%
15.3%
-12.2%
-9.2%
-7.8%
-6.8%
37,450
35,920
34,130
32,430
58.5%
59.6%
60.0%
60.8%
-3.5%
-4.1%
-5.0%
-5.0%
8,460
7,930
7,490
6,730
13.2%
13.2%
13.2%
12.6%
-5.5%
-6.3%
-5.5%
-10.1%
28
Households in England in accommodation arranged by local authorities under the homelessness provisions of the 1985 and 1996 Housing Acts by type of accommodation¹
Total number Bed and breakfast hotels
of households
accommodated
at end of quarter
Number
2
Hostels/Women's refuges
Number
Percentage
LA or RSL stock
of total
previous quarter
Number
Percentage
change on
previous quarter
Number
Percentage
change on
of total
2
Other Private Sector Accommodation
(inc private landlord)
Leased from the Private Sector
by an LA or RSL
of total
previous quarter
Number
Percentage
change on
Percentage
change on
change on
of total
previous quarter
of total previous quarter
2010
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
51,310
50,400
49,680
48,010
2,050
2,410
2,660
2,310
4.0%
4.8%
5.4%
4.8%
9.0%
17.6%
10.4%
-13.2%
4,240
4,320
4,360
4,160
8.3%
8.6%
8.8%
8.7%
2.2%
1.9%
0.9%
-4.6%
7,790
7,650
7,610
7,430
15.2%
15.2%
15.3%
15.5%
-4.8%
-1.8%
-0.5%
-2.4%
30,920
29,820
28,740
27,730
60.3%
59.2%
57.9%
57.8%
-4.7%
-3.6%
-3.6%
-3.5%
6,320
6,200
6,320
6,380
12.3%
12.3%
12.7%
13.3%
-6.1%
-1.9%
1.9%
0.9%
2011
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
48,240
48,330
49,100
48,920
2,750
3,120
3,370
3,170
5.7%
6.5%
6.9%
6.5%
19.0%
13.5%
8.0%
-5.9%
4,250
4,370
4,380
4,310
8.8%
9.0%
8.9%
8.8%
2.2%
2.8%
0.2%
-1.6%
7,490
7,570
7,890
7,990
15.5%
15.7%
16.1%
16.3%
0.8%
1.1%
4.2%
1.3%
26,960
26,240
26,380
26,080
55.9%
54.3%
53.7%
53.3%
-2.8%
-2.7%
0.5%
-1.1%
6,790
7,050
7,090
7,370
14.1%
14.6%
14.4%
15.1%
6.4%
3.8%
0.6%
3.9%
2012
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
quarter 4
(P)
(P)
(P)
50,430
51,640
52,960
53,130
3,960
4,270
4,350
4,000
7.9%
8.3%
8.2%
7.5%
24.9%
7.8%
1.9%
-8.0%
4,360
4,350
4,390
4,270
8.6%
8.4%
8.3%
8.0%
1.2%
-0.2%
0.9%
-2.7%
8,270
8,590
8,920
9,080
16.4%
16.6%
16.8%
17.1%
3.5%
3.9%
3.8%
1.8%
26,040
25,930
26,300
26,410
51.6%
50.2%
49.7%
49.7%
-0.2%
-0.4%
1.4%
0.4%
7,810
8,490
9,000
9,360
15.5%
16.4%
17.0%
17.6%
6.0%
8.7%
6.0%
4.0%
quarter 1
quarter 2
quarter 3
(P)
(P)
(P)
55,300
56,210
57,350
4,500
4,320
4,600
8.1%
7.7%
8.0%
12.5%
-4.0%
6.5%
4,470
4,590
4,700
8.1%
8.2%
8.2%
4.7%
2.7%
2.4%
9,270
9,770
9,780
16.8%
17.4%
17.1%
2.1%
5.4%
0.1%
26,250
24,890
25,470
47.5%
44.3%
44.4%
-0.6%
-5.2%
2.3%
10,810
12,640
12,820
19.5%
22.5%
22.4%
15.5%
16.9%
1.4%
2013
Notes:
1
Households in accommodation arranged by local authorities pending enquiries or after being accepted as homeless under the 1996 Act (includes residual cases aw aiting re-housing
2
From 2002 Q1 onw ards, some self-contained accommodation in Annex-style units previously recorded under B&B now more appropriately attributed to Private Sector Accommodation.
Homeless at home is defined as those households accepted as ow ed a main duty but able to remain in their existing accommodation for the immediate future. Cases in the final tw o columns
include those households aw aiting a decision on their application.
(P) Provisional data .. Data not collected
Totals may not equal the sum of components because of rounding.
3
29