Local Councils Breaking The Law

[Hymie]

This is a perennial story covered by Private Eye, with the only difference year on year being the increasing numbers of families placed in B&B for longer than 6 weeks.

Apparently the law states that councils should not place families in B&Bs unless there is no alternative, and only then for a maximum of six weeks.

Private Eye (issue 1460) reports that 1,100 families with children are in B&Bs beyond this limit (eight times more than in 2010).

It appears to me that one of the many reasons for this is that there is no penalty placed on local councils for failing to comply with the law – which makes the law pretty pointless IMHO.

[Baldric]

Thank you for telling us.

[hc4361]

What would be the point of fining the councils? Council tax would have to go up, there would be less money in the pot for housing.

The benefit cap imposed by the government has caused a shortage in private rentals that will accept people on benefits. I agree that a B&B is not the place for people with children but what can the councils do if there literally are no vacant properties? Thousands of houses and flats have been built near me over the last few years and are still being built. Many of these are for the public housing sector and they are being occupied as soon as they are built. Still there are waiting lists.

Yet we still have empty houses that are privately owned; single people or couples living in 2, 3 and 4 bedroom social housing properties because their children have left home and they refuse to move.

Of course a small minority of the parents in B&Bs have brought the situation upon themselves. If I were a landlord I would hesitate to rent my property to someone who has been evicted numerous times for non-payment of rent and/or anti social behaviour. What should be done with people like that? Yet the council are obliged to provide accommodation.

I don't know what the solution is but at least a B&B provides shelter, heating and some sort of security.

[Old_Geezer]

And is there an alternative ? Presumably no council wants to pay out for B&B if there is some other option. Unless the suggestion is to put folk up a hotel somewhere, which would be daft law.

[hc4361]

OG, hotels do count as B&B, there are plenty of big chain hotels that provide rooms in this situation, such as Travelodge

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-42080648

That is no better than B&Bs, with no cooking facilities, no laundry facilities and very limited space.

[Old_Geezer]

Ok. So, still no alternative then ?

[bednobs]

I THink og has it - it's not unlawful as there is no alternative

[douglas9401]

"The benefit cap imposed by the government has caused a shortage in private rentals that will accept people on benefits."

or

Greedy landlords still demand eyewatering and unjustifiable rent in the face of a changing world because they're so used to sucking on the public teat.

[Hymie]

Bednobs – included within the Private Eye article:-

‘In a third case, the council told a couple with two teenage children living in a single room that it was not illegal to keep them in a B&B for more than six weeks; it is.’

[hc4361]

If I were a landlord and could get £x a month for renting out in the private sector I wouldn't take less for accepting a tenant on benefits. I would be in it to make a profit, not to do the job of the government and council.

The council housing stock should never have been sold.

[cassa333]

Hymie. What do you propose is done then?

[dannyk13]

The councils are between a rock and a hard place, either accomodate them in a B & B or turn them out onto the streets.

[Hymie]

cassa333 – I propose that local councils are prosecuted for breaking the law.

[hc4361]

Pointless, Hymie - the council's money is our money and I don't want my council tax going in fines. The councils need more money from central government to invest in social housing.

[Hymie]

hc4361 – Why prosecute me for breaking the law – after all, any fine I pay will be from my money?

[hc4361]

That's your money, not mine, hymie. You must be aware that the councils are not housing families in emergency accommodation through choice or spite - it is far cheaper to house them in a flat or house than a B&B or hotel. Even emergency hostels for families are not cheap because of the need for staff.

[Hymie]

hc4361 – OK, why prosecute you for breaking the law – after all, any fine you pay will be from your money?

[hc4361]

You are not making sense. My money isn't given to me by my neighbours to pay for their services. Me being fined will not detract from the services they get nor increase their bills.

[New Judge]

"Greedy landlords still demand eyewatering and unjustifiable rent..."

It's called supply and demand, OG. There are not too few properties, there are too many people. It's as simple as that.

[EDDIE51]

Council only use B&B as a last resort and then only for the minimum time. It is too expensive to do other. But if there is simply no other accommodation available what do you suggest they do? Fining them is useless , as said the fine can only come out council tax leaving even less for housing.
Margaret Thatcher is to blame for much of the problem. When council / social house sales were first allowed the cash raised HAD to be spent ONLY on providing more social housing. Thatcher cancelled that condition and allowed councils to use the money for anything they wanted it for. The housing shortage is largely due to that.

[bednobs]

"Apparently the law states that councils should not place families in B&Bs unless there is no alternative, and only then for a maximum of six weeks"
but what i am saying is there is no alternative, so that's how they get round it.