CASP's submitted response to Camden's Consultation of Introductory Tenancies July 2007
APPENDIX 1
Summary of responses from District Management Committees during consultation on Introductory tenancies
This appendix summarises issues raised at DMCs during the statutory consultation outlined in paragraph 1.3 of the attached report.
June DMCs had long agendas with a significant number of important agenda items presented for consultation. This restricted the time available to discuss introductory tenancies especially in Kentish Town and Holborn. Participants at all DMCs were invited to submit comments at a later date if they wished to do so.
Camden Town DMC Motion passed unanimously that “the Committee oppose the use of introductory tenancies”. Concerns had been expressed about the fact that introductory tenancies would apply to all tenants as opposed to other remedies for anti-social behaviour (like demoted tenancies) which are only applied to perpetrators. Some contributors also said they thought existing remedies for ASB were adequate.
Gospel Oak DMC Questioners asked about support for vulnerable tenants and security of tenure for existing tenants. No further concerns were raised after the responses to the questions and the report was noted.
Hampstead DMC Tenants asked questions about support for vulnerable tenants and explained how much is involved for witnesses in possession proceedings for nuisance expressing the hope that introductory tenancies would help make addressing anti-social behaviour easier. One sceptical contributor suggested new tenants would wait for a year and a day before engaging in anti-social behaviour. Unanimous vote to support the report.
Holborn DMC The meeting over ran and there was no time left to discuss the report or for questions and answers. Those present were invited to submit comments later. An observation was made that the real question was would the benefits of introductory tenancies justify the amount of work and cost involved in bringing them in.
Kentish Town DMC The meeting was over running and after 3 contributors raised issues that concerned them the agenda item was ended due to lack of time. The concerns raised were that introductory tenancies were an erosion of tenants security of tenure that had taken many years of campaigning to obtain, that the council had adequate means to deal with ASB currently, that there was no evidence to prove that introductory tenancies were effective, that it was part of a general trend towards the centralisation of services which tenants did not want and which would increase the possibility of “witch hunts” against new tenants from minority groups.
A motion was proposed that the report about introductory tenancies be “thrown out”. This was not seconded. A motion that had originally been proposed by a victim of ASB as an alternative if the first motion was passed was then passed unanimously: that the Council be urged to tackle anti-social behaviour by strengthening its activities in relation to housing patrols, witness support and evidence gathering.
At the time of writing no additional comments from individual DMC members have been received.
Camden Association of Street Properties (CASP) also submitted comments. These are summarised below:
• Some members feel Camden already has sufficient tools to tackle ASB especially when used effectively by well trained staff.
• Some members feel that housing staff have varying levels of skill in housing management and dealing with ASB so residents don’t receive a consistent service. They felt that this should be addressed by training staff before introductory tenancies are brought in.
• Some members see the case for introductory tenancies but only if the relevant support agencies are in place and properly funded, co-ordinated by well trained staff with a considerate and sympathetic outlook. Any arrangements put in place should be sustained long term.
• Some members are very concerned about the impact on vulnerable tenants and feel existing support is often poor. They believe the focus should be on improving support services rather than introducing non secure tenancies.
• Some members are worried about the risk of false allegations being made against vulnerable people and feel it’s crucial to have safeguards against this.
• Some members are strongly against demoted tenancies and some support them as a way to address ASB.
• Some members feel it is crucial to fully support new tenants at the outset so they understand how the new system works and to address potential confusion amongst existing tenants.
Contributed by Mike Cookson Taylor
