Homelessness Act is failing vulnerable ex-offenders

Ex-offenders were rehoused at a rate of just one a borough in the year after the Homelessness Act 2002 came into force.

A total of 250 were rehoused as a priority in the nine months after the legislation came into effect. After one year, that figure was still under 500, London-based charity Revolving Doors has revealed. There are just under 500 local authorities in England and Wales.

The Homelessness Act was meant to improve the lot of ex-prisoners who are homeless on release by making them a priority. However, Revolving Doors, which deals with mental health issues and the criminal justice system, said the figures showed there were a substantial number of former prisoners who were not getting help.

The prison population currently stands at 75,740 and crime reduction charity Nacro says its helpline takes 18,000 calls a year from prisoners, ex-offenders and their families. Of those, 26% are housing-related.

A new project, run by Shelter in 10 prisons across Yorkshire & Humber, dealt with more than 1000 housing-related queries in its first six months last year.

Nick O’Shea, director of development at Revolving Doors, said local authorities often deemed prisoners to be intentionally homeless – and therefore not a priority for rehousing – because of the offences they had committed.

He said: “The act says that if you are an ex-offender, you have been to prison and you present yourself as homeless with vulnerabilities, that is enough to get you priority status. But because it isn’t explicitly expressed, people are saying the intentionality overrules it. When you go to a housing office and say ‘I have been in prison’ they say ‘you have made yourself intentionally homeless’.”

Liz Phelps, policy officer at Citizens Advice, said prisoners were deemed intentionally homeless if they gave up their homes before going to jail to avoid arrears, or if they tried to keep their home but lost it because of arrears.

A spokesperson for the Youth Justice Board said the organisation was concerned that the definition of intentional homelessness was not being properly applied.