The BedZed overspend and the Peabody Trust's problems meeting the decent homes standard came as no surprise. It is a typical scenario faced by many registered social landlords (9 January, page 7).

I appreciate that we must continue to build and provide homes for those who need them most; for too long now, too many housing associations have focused on development growth and ignored reinvestment in the homes they already have. This argument is clearly supported when you look at the condition of the new Peabody homes on page 7 as opposed to that of the traditional buildings in Pimlico that were shown on page 9. Despite the unusual design and dodgy looking funnels poking out of the roofs, in comparison, I know which I'd rather live in if given the choice.

It's always good for a business to get awards and recognition for good practice and innovation, but existing tenants think more of landlords who show they care by reinvesting in their homes, and actively share their responsibilities for maintaining them. It should be remembered that existing tenants – through their rents and the asset value of the homes they live in – contribute to the funding of new homes, so there is a bit of loyalty due. There has to be a balance between development and reinvestment, which can be achieved, as some associations are ably demonstrating.

If this results in a further lack of new-build homes so be it: maybe the powers that be will then have a rethink on the financial support provided to the sector. You can't have your cake and eat it; in our case, we can't build what we can't afford.

I have lived in poor quality conditions and saw my housing association developing homes all around me in a neighbourhood where I and my family had grown up. How do you think I felt when I was told, as many tenants are, that there was no money to bring my home up to a "decent" standard or when I enquired about being offered one of the new homes but was told that the local council had 100% nomination rights? It all seemed really unfair and caused an awful lot of resentment.

The decent homes standard has been long awaited, but what would have happened if this initiative hadn't been imposed on us? Would we have carried on ignoring the homes we built years ago and the plight of the tenants who lived in them? I can't understand why sometimes in housing, even the most simple and common sense things are made so complicated by allegedly intelligent people who should know better.

Source

Housing Today

Postscript

Name and address withheld