Letters

I am writing in response to the article “Landlords face snap inspections on nuisance” (23 July, page 7). I agree with Tim Winter that “the plans would have to define what constitutes the ‘will of a community’ or else run the risk of giving power to unrepresentative minorities”.

It is generally older people who express their concern about antisocial behaviour and, in most cases, the culprits are deemed to be children and young people. People for Action is running a project with housing associations on involving young tenants in decisions that affect their lives. We have found that most tenant associations consist of a disproportionate number of older tenants.

Therefore, although we would not wish to be critical of the representativeness of tenants’ groups on many topics, it is more than likely that they would have a bias on this particular subject, largely because of the age profile.

So it is crucial that any move forward on this approach by the Home Office ensures that any formally acknowledged groups and associations can demonstrate that they have taken the views of young people and young tenants into account when formulating their position on antisocial behaviour.

As most young people, when questioned, seem to have the same aspirations as everyone else for their communities, it is probable that views would coincide, rather than collide, on this subject.

However, with the antisocial behaviour bandwagon rapidly gathering pace, this does need to be double-checked if we are to avoid demonising a substantial section of our society.

Clare Whiting, project officer People for Action

A waste indeed

While reading “A waste of time and money” (13 August, page 30), the phrase “making a rod for your own back” came to my mind.

So, “the ombudsman does not generally consider complaints when legal action is under way, but decided to investigate in view of the seriousness of this allegation”?

Well, investigating a complaint that is already subject to the legal process invites a duplication of effort that is inevitably wasteful of the time and money of both parties to the dispute.

It also has the potential to thoroughly confuse the issue, for what happens if the court and the ombudsman come to different conclusions?

David Brown, housing consultant, London SE22

Dorset has sharks, too

Re: “Shark attack” (13 August, page 26)

– I am chair of a small but very effective and much needed financial advice charity, Money Advice, in the Hamworthy area of Poole in Dorset. We have the same problems as the big city estates, with a high level of low literacy and numerical skills.

Tenants and others who need support find us more approachable than banks and councils. The demand for our service is high – last year we dealt with 731 enquiries.

Over the years the council has been very supportive with grants – but this only pays for about half our running costs.

Unfortunately for the potential victims of loan sharks, it is now becoming increasingly difficult to find new funders to keep this much-needed project going.

Randolph C J Meech, chair Hamworthy Money Advice Project

Assess early and feel the benefit

It is in our favour to recover housing benefit overpayments but it creates problems for the man in the street when local authorities fail to assess the amount accurately. Bloated, inaccurate assessments allow local authorities to claim higher bonuses and reflect badly on the claimant in court.

Accurate assessments should be carried out prior to the issue of summons, which is not always the case, in my experience.

Edwina Plumbley Comment made at www.housing-today.co.uk

Stop mollycoddling tenants

John Thomson’s letter “Misguided measures” hits the nail on the head (6 August, page 20). Why indeed should landlords be responsible for their tenants’ antisocial behaviour?

Surely, the reason many people expect others to do something at no cost to themselves is because social landlords have, for too many years, treated their tenants as infants. When a tenant breaks a window the landlord reglazes; when they lose their keys, it replaces them, often at no cost to the tenant.

Surely, it is completely logical that people expect to be treated like children so long as the prevailing culture of social housing allows this to continue.

Inger Collingridge, housing officer Exeter Housing Society

Community cuts will be a disaster

I read “Community initiatives fund cut by £2m” (6 August, page 13) with dismay because of the lack of any real comment on the seriousness of this issue.

The cut is, in effect, a step back from the commitment by the Housing Corporation in its recently launched involvement policy, which says: “We will continue to support [the development of good involvement initiatives] through our IGP and CTE grant programmes.”

Certainly the corporation will “continue to support” but at a greatly reduced level.

The announcement was not made until well into the financial year and it is clear from the corporation website that no new applications will be entertained this year.

Just as importantly, the website makes it clear that the prospectus for 2005/6 bids won’t be released until spring 2005, so there will be an inevitable late draw-down of grant even next year.

The cut in grant is particularly strange when it is a relatively small part of the corporation’s budget but vital to developing new ideas and practice in an era where “continuous improvement” underpins everything.

One imagines that if the fund were targeted at new building rather than developing stronger communities the decision might have been different.

Clearly it is now a done deal but if all past recipients of IGP and CTE made their views known to the corporation, some changes might be achieved in future years.

Charlie Garratt, chief executive People for Action X

A cunning plan

The South-east England Regional Assembly’s South-east Plan was not published on 31 July, as claimed in the story “South-east ‘needs more roads or building target won’t be met’” (13 August, page 14).

The regional assembly is currently drafting the South-east Plan and consultation is scheduled for January 2005. The plan will be submitted to the government in July 2005.

The government’s support for the A34 study is essential because the transport corridor, which includes not just the A34 but also the parallel rail route, is of national and regional economic importance: it provides a link to two international ports and to Europe.

A recent study set out the scope of the transport-related problems along the corridor. It highlighted the scale of the existing problem and the fact that existing development proposals are being held up due to congestion problems on the trunk road network.

This study also made it clear that the corridor will be under increased pressure in the future, as more houses and other developments are needed in this part of
the South-east. The assembly is calling on the government to provide funds to take forward a more detailed appraisal of the corridor that will identify key infrastructure requirements to address existing and future transport problems using a coordinated approach.

The assembly believes that growth of between 32,000 and 36,000 dwellings per year is needed across the South-east growth area up to 2026. Research is being done to see what effect this would have locally and how the plan could include a framework that would deliver such levels of growth in a more sustainable way.

In many ways, the government’s response to the questions posed for this corridor serves as a timely reminder of one of the key issues facing the country as a whole: how to balance the need for further development with the need to address inherent weaknesses in our transport infrastructure.

Martin Tugwell, head of regional transport planning, South-east England Regional Assembly

Lost opportunities

I was interested to read your feature about bad recruitment practices (“Can’t get the staff?”, 13 August, page 20) because my son-in-law has experienced just this kind of treatment.

He has a science degree and considerable management experience. He wanted to use his abilities to greater social effect, so he applied to a large housing association.

It was so slow sending him an application form that it arrived the day before the deadline. Many of the questions were dense, ambiguous or highly complex and impossible to answer in the tiny boxes provided.

He did not complete the form. His next few attempts to apply were not acknowledged at all, nor did other housing associations send him application forms.

He starts teacher training this autumn.

Richard Kendall, by email

I am a professional temping in the social housing sector and I have become exasperated at the practices of some employers when advertising for staff.

Why is it, for example, that some prospective employers take forever to process applications, sometimes missing their own stated deadlines, but then contact applicants out of the blue, expecting them to drop everything and attend an interview less than one week after the call?

Wouldn’t it be better to say in the advert when first and second interviews will be held, and stick to those dates?

Why do many employers not supply details of the package on offer? This not only applies to information packs sent out with application forms but to subsequent enquiries to human resources departments. Why not include a list of the benefits that go with the position?

People from outside social housing or local government won’t know anything about the pension scheme or how it works, about employer’s and employee’s contributions, holiday allowances, sick pay arrangements, death in service and early retirement benefits.

To assume that this will be discussed at interview presupposes the prospective candidate will risk wasting time off work for an abortive interview.

Why do so many organisations advertise a pay band knowing full well they will only appoint at the bottom of the scale?

Wouldn’t it be more honest to advertise the pay scale but add the rider that new appointments are always subject to a stated maximum pay level?

In any case, surely a pay scale is there to allow senior management the flexibility, if necessary, to match local pay rates and thereby attract the best staff, as much as to provide a reward mechanism for steady career development?

Finally, why do so many organisations occupy such tired offices? It’s very off-putting to visit an organisation for the first time to find them working in conditions typical of local authorities in the 1960s and 1970s.

Does senior management think there is virtue in deliberately neglecting to redecorate their offices, to replace carpets, furniture and lighting and install air conditioning? These things are taken for granted in other sectors.

If social housing organisations want to persuade people of ability to move into the sector, they need to start matching their competitors in the world of private business.

Name and address withheld