House to home: giving social housing tenants a place to call home

Transcription

1 Summary House to home: giving social housing tenants a place to call home A case for the provision of basic decoration and floor covering in social housing, along with access to furniture packages. Brian Robson Acting Head of Policy and Research Recommendations Social housing could be more effective in reducing poverty if basic decoration, flooring and the option of low-cost furniture packages were provided with it. Social housing providers can respond to tenants needs by providing a higher void standard and furniture packages. The research Gemma Duggan Senior Consultant, Altair Ltd APRIL 2018

2 Background Social housing could be more effective in reducing poverty. Making a social house a home can often increase financial hardship. Providing basic decoration, flooring and furnishing can be a struggle for new social housing tenants. They often have to choose between building up significant levels of debt, or living for long periods in a shell, without basic goods. Key points For tenants on low incomes allocated a property by a social landlord, the costs of making the property into a home can result in significant financial hardship. Helping tenants make a house a home can lead to more sustainable tenancies, reduced evictions and increased satisfaction for both staff and tenants. Introduction Social landlords pride themselves on providing housing for those in need; for most this is their stated mission and purpose. However, an unfurnished tenancy is not enough for most social housing tenants, who are on very low incomes. They lack the means to provide basic decoration and furniture. In these circumstances, the tenancy is unlikely to be viable or sustainable. This issue is acuter in vulnerable groups, but not limited to those groups. To support those on low incomes, social landlords need to provide more than bricks and mortar, they need to support tenants in creating a home. A clear theme identified in Housing and life experiences, on which this project is based, is the difficulty some participants had in making a social housing property a home. A tenancy in social housing offered people stability and security. However, this was immediately undermined for some as they fell into debt making the property habitable. This report proposes that basic decoration, as well as floor coverings, should come as standard with all social housing properties. In addition, tenants should be given access to affordable furniture packages with no up-front costs. This will help tenants make a house a home, reduce the risk of them having to go without basic goods, or use either high-cost credit or expensive rent-to-buy companies. It may also reduce eviction rates and refusals of properties, and create a more positive relationship between tenant and landlord. Several participants in the Housing and life experiences study, cited the challenges they or family members experienced in bringing a social housing property up to a good standard. Some spoke not only of the costs involved, but also the stress. One talked of getting into 2,000 to 3,000 of debt related to sorting out the property. Another spoke of spending all her savings, 6000, on decorating her social-rented property when she moved in because of its poor decorative state. Another reported having to go to BrightHouse to get a fridge and the extra costs associated with this. 2

3 It took us 13 years to get this house. I was told this was it, there was no help going to be given there was no money for decorating. I had to use the credit card, I had to buy my boy a bed, bedding, carpet, blinds I had to buy, curtains, it s things that we had to have. Are you with me? I had to buy flooring, and then you have to pay someone to come in and do the flooring. So then I had to take out loans. I m in debt about 2,500 which is quite a lot. I ve never been in that much debt. But, what was I supposed to do? I can t tell my boy he can t have a bed to sleep in. Melanie, social housing tenant (Croucher et al, 2017). Out of those in the study identified as being in poverty, a majority were in ill health, had disabilities or significant caring responsibilities for a disabled relative. All these factors made decorating and transporting or moving furniture particularly difficult. The current approach to providing furniture Currently, the majority of social housing properties are let with no floor coverings, window coverings, white goods or furniture, and without being decorated. On one level this is understandable. Social housing tenancies offer security, and tenants have traditionally been given a long-term secure tenancy. They are therefore expected to take responsibility for making their property a home, just as a home-owner would. Unlike other tenures, social housing must also meet the decent homes standard, ensuring a basic standard of property condition. Also, in most areas of the UK, social housing rents are much cheaper than the private sector. In general, social tenants do not pay a deposit to cover damage to furnishings or goods provided. However, social housing is dominated by households on low incomes. Half of English social housing tenants are from the lower 20% income bracket (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2016a). In Scotland in 2015, 74% of social-rented households had a net income of 20k or less, which compares to 49% of private-rented households, 49% of households owned outright, and 17% of households buying with a mortgage (Wired.gov.uk, 2017). Tenancy allocations are based on those most in need, prioritising the poorest and most vulnerable (Pearce & Vine, 2014). In 2015/16 nearly a fifth, 21%, of lettings of both local authority and housing association properties were made to homeless households (Perry et al, 2017), and only 37% of social rent lettings went to tenants in employment. Security and low rent often do not overcome the reality of not having funds to provide basic decoration, floor coverings and furniture to low-income tenants. Social housing could better meet the needs of its key client base. In addition, in England security is being diluted with the introduction of much shorter tenancies in the social housing sector. Where these are in place it seems unfair to expect low-income households to make up-front investments in decoration and floor coverings, the lifespan of which will outlast that of the tenancy, and which are not easily transferred to a new property. It is evident that social landlords are aware of this issue. They support a variety of schemes and initiatives to help new tenants access decorating supplies and furniture. The majority are run as add-on schemes by social landlords, or via links to independent charities. These schemes vary in what they cover and their location, and they are often only available to those tenants identified as vulnerable. They mainly focus on second-hand goods or the provision of decoration supplies or vouchers. These schemes have many limitations. In some areas no support is offered, while tenants often lack transport to take advantage of furniture schemes. Tenants often lack the physical wellbeing to decorate a house or fit carpet and very few schemes provide floor coverings. These limitations mean add-on schemes are not a solution to the task of making a social house a home. 3

4 Exceptions to this are more comprehensive furniture package schemes, such as Newcastle Furniture Services (NFS). NFS offers basic furniture packages for tenants with no up-front costs. These are re-charged through service charges and at no risk to the landlord. However, even this scheme does not offer assistance with decoration, nor does it supply carpets or curtains. Key issues identified Financial Stress You move into a brand new house, you ve got to spend 300 to get a fridge, because you need a fridge because you need milk, you need to keep food. Then the first thing I had to buy was a microwave because I didn t have the cooker. If you move in and you had, even if it s just the bare minimum, a fridge, a cooker, a kettle, things like that. That means you can move in and you know, okay, I can make a cup of tea, I can make the kids some dinner. That s how a lot of people end up at BrightHouse and things like that, and then put you in debt and then you take out a loan to pay out the debt and you end up in more debt. Then it goes on and on and on. Young, single parent, social housing tenant (Croucher et al, 2017). A range of research demonstrates that new tenants often struggle to afford to furnish a property, as well as decorate or fit carpets. Participants in the Housing and life experiences study spoke of getting into thousands of pounds of debt sorting out their social housing property. Another reported having to go to BrightHouse to get a fridge and the extra costs associated with this. A study of new tenants in Northern Ireland demonstrated that, as well as getting in debt, tenants often went without basic goods for significant periods of time, storing food in filled sinks as there was no fridge, or having to eat fast-food because they had no means of cooking (Ambrose et al, 2016). Other participants in the Housing and life experiences study who were in the social-rented sector also talked about decorating and keeping their homes nice over time, and how difficult this was on a low income. Many others remarked that it was simply beyond their means to keep their homes as they would like them, and for some this was a source of considerable distress. Barriers beyond money A majority of the participants in the Housing and life experiences project had health problems, disabilities or significant caring responsibilities. All these factors made decorating, and transporting or moving furniture, particularly difficult. Over 30% of social renters are full-time carers, or longterm sick or disabled (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2016a). It is difficult to see how these tenants would be able to carry out decorative work without support, and demonstrates that decoration vouchers or recycled paint and supplies would not be enough to support these individuals in bringing their property up to a basic decorative state. 4

5 Choice Choice plays an interesting part in the provision of decorated and furnished tenancies. On the one hand, lack of consumer power undermines tenants ability to choose a furnished property or one with higher levels of decoration. Tenants often wait a long time to be allocated a social housing property, and cannot always afford a deposit for a private sector property. So, when offered a tenancy they do not feel empowered to either turn it down or not comply with the terms of the landlord. A provider who responded to our survey said: Properties are in such demand tenants will accept them in any condition. This was evidenced by the Housing and life experiences study. Claudia felt she had no choice but to take the social housing property she was offered: I was in a hostel with my daughter, and this was the property they offered me. I did refuse it because of the work, it was really, really bad. Yes, it was really, really bad, but my housing officer said if I didn t take it I would be in the hostel for another 12 to 18 months, so that s why I took it. Single parent, London, social housing tenant, (Croucher et al, 2017). An interviewee Altair spoke to who worked for a housing association said they were under pressure to let empty properties quickly in order to save money. This meant tenants were often given a very short notice period to move in. The interviewee said the standard notice period for tenants was five days, which was not enough time for the tenants to secure white goods and furniture. On the other hand, choice of decoration is clearly important to tenants. Where social housing tenancies continue to offer more security, it is still important to allow tenants an opportunity to decorate their own properties after the initial probation period, so that they feel the property is their home. Sustaining tenancies A previous study undertaken by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that 25% of interviewed tenants who had been given support in furnishing their tenancy felt they would have lost their tenancy without support to furnish their home (Rooney, 1997). A study by Pawson et al (2006) of tenancy sustainment in Glasgow found that an inability to secure adequate furniture featured highly as a reason for tenancy failure. The study found that the tenancy termination rate in unfurnished tenancies was more than double the rate in furnished tenancies (25% versus 10% in 2003). Given the difficulties of being able to decorate and furnish a home outlined above, it is clear that furniture provision can be important in sustaining tenancies. This is backed up by anecdotal evidence from housing professionals who claim that inability to afford to furnish a home is one of the main causes of tenancy abandonment and arrears early in the tenancy. Feedback from interviews with both housing professionals and tenants suggested that the effect of not furnishing properties to a decent standard does not only influence arrears, it also worsens anti-social behaviour. For example, noise in one flat can trouble the flat below due to lack of floor coverings. This might lead to abandonment. An evaluation of the effect of a housing improvement programme in London also demonstrated that tenants who viewed their property as a home rather than house or flat are more likely to exhibit higher levels of ownership and commitment to it (Hickman et al, 2011). Poor decorative state and lack of furnishings are likely to undermine this commitment. 5

6 Benefits Tenants satisfaction and quality of service offer. During our discussions with social landlords, quality of service provision and of the properties provided emerged as a priority. The provision of decoration, floor coverings and furniture packages is a practical way to improve a landlord s offer to tenants. It is also a way for providers to demonstrate an understanding of tenant needs, and suggests an approach to meeting them, in the light of the government Social Housing Green Paper, which focuses on the tenant experience (Brown, 2017). The Human Cities Institute found that almost half of tenants (47%) want social landlords to provide furniture as part of their tenancy, and a further 36% would like them to help with furniture in a variety of ways (Gulliver and Timmins, 2015). Despite being more satisfied than private renters with their current tenure, the English Housing survey found that, when asked about their current accommodation, social renters are less satisfied than any other tenure, with dissatisfaction among social renters at 13%, compared with 10% of private renters (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2016b). Decoration and furniture may improve satisfaction levels. Staff satisfaction. Housing association staff felt improving the decorative condition of a socialrented property was the right thing to do. This theme came out of the survey of landlords we undertook and was backed up by interviews and discussion during the workshop phase of this project. Feedback from those surveyed and interviewed who worked on the front line was especially supportive. One front-line staff member from one of the workshops suggested it would improve her job satisfaction and another said: It s time we improved things, it s sad putting people into properties, families with nothing to their name, and they sit on cold, bare floors, have no means to prepare a meal and only have sheets up at the windows. Detailed Proposal To reduce the cost and stress to tenants moving into a social-rented property we propose social landlords should introduce the following two elements as part of a house to home scheme: 1. Adopt a higher void standard for the social-rented sector, including the provision of floor coverings and neutral decoration: Leave decoration and flooring and window coverings in place if they are left by previous tenants and meet the landlord s standards. Suggest that it is a condition of the tenancy that floor coverings must still be in place and in good condition at the end of the introductory tenancy. After the introductory period, tenants are able to replace or redecorate the property. All tenants sign a clear waiver, indicating that the floor coverings and curtains (where they remain) are gifted to them, meaning they are responsible for any repair or liability issues. All tenants sign to say that they understand that the landlord is not responsible for the ongoing upkeep of the decorations. Provide low-cost rental options for furniture and white goods at a service charge. 6

7 2. Make available furniture and white goods at low rental prices, including furniture packs that can be in the property at short notice. The scheme should: Be available to all tenants, if wished. Limit product choice to allow for low cost. Goods remain as the property of the landlord to make a service charge applicable, allow tenants flexibility to return them and stop paying if they wish. Renew goods if damaged and at the end of their lifecycle. Be administered through a plan such as NFS at no risk to the landlord. As an additional option, providers may wish to consider putting in place a scheme for existing lowincome or vulnerable tenants. After five years, low-income tenants would qualify for one room to be decorated per year, assuming no right-to-buy application is in place, there are no arrears or possession proceedings, and only in a limited colour palette provided for all properties. Costs Looking at both two- and three-bedroom properties across all six areas of the Housing and life experiences study, the increase in overall costs is on average just over 2%. This would only be for new lets, so would not initially apply to all stock. Each landlord would have to model the costs based on assumptions relevant to their business and locality. However, as many housing providers have applied Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases to their business plan assumptions, once CPI plus 1% increases to rents are applied after 2020 this additional cost has very little effect on providers medium- and long-term business plans. For this proposal, we have modelled the increased costs brought about by providing basic decoration, and the wider effect this has on eviction rates and void loss. We have not modelled the provision of furniture packages, as we would expect this to be recharged, via service charges, at cost with a slight uplift for damage and loss. There would therefore be little or no effect on costs to the landlord. To carry out this modelling we have used a number of assumptions, the details of which can be found in the technical report for this proposal. 7

8 Table 1: Average improved void standard costs (per two-bedroom property) Total void costs with carpets and curtains 3, Total costs per week 5.92 Eviction costs Reduction in eviction costs per tenancy Reduction in eviction costs per week 0.25 Average gain in weekly rent due to furnished tenancies 0.15 Cost per property per week with improved void standard costs 5.66 Cost per property per week with current void standard costs 4.10 Additional cost per property per week 1.56 Table 2: Effect of the improved void standard in six different regions in the UK Hull Fife Belfast London Oxford North Wales 2-bed 3-bed 2-bed 3-bed 2-bed 3-bed 2-bed 3-bed 2-bed 3-bed 2-bed 3-bed Income Total weekly income Total weekly expenditure Surplus Total weekly surplus Total annual surplus , , , , , , , , , Effect of proposal Additional cost per property % of weekly rent % 2.28% 2.47% 2.61% 2.04% 2.23% 1.35% 1.38% 1.64% 1.68% 2.32% 2.29% Views of low-income study participants on the proposal When asked about the need to provide decoration and furniture, participants in the Housing and life experiences study were very supportive. They felt that a clean, well-decorated property with floor coverings should be provided as standard. Several participants explained that they would be happy to pay a small charge on the rent for furniture, as long as it was affordable. With one participant explaining that they did not Expect something for nothing. A theme running through comments, apart from support for the scheme, was that of choice. Participants did not want to limit their choices over furnishing the property or decorating it in the future. Several participants reported that the cost of decoration was an issue for longstanding tenants, as well as new tenants. 8

9 Conclusions Most social housing is let to those on low incomes. Social housing tenants are also more likely to have health problems or be disabled. This housing should be provided decorated to a basic standard, and with floor covering. In addition, tenants should be given access to affordable furniture packages with no up-front costs. This would come at a cost to the landlord, but would have a major, positive effect on new tenants. It would help tenants make a house a home, reduce the risk of them having to go without basic goods, or use either high-cost credit or expensive rent-to-buy companies. It will also have benefits for the landlord by reducing eviction and abandonment rates, reducing the number of refusals of properties, improve staff morale on the front line, and create a more positive relationship between tenant and landlord. References Ambrose, A, Batty, E, Eadson, W, Hickman, P and Quinn G, (2016) Assessment of the Need to Provide Furniture for New NIHE tenants. CRESR, Sheffield Hallam University. Brown, C (2017) Javid announces wide-ranging green paper on social housing Inside Housing [Online] Available at: [Accessed 21 November 2017] Croucher, K, Quilgars, D, Baxter, D and Dyke, A (2017a) Housing and life experiences: First interviews with a qualitative longitudinal panel of low income households, Second interim report to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. York: Centre for Housing Policy. Croucher, K, Quilgars, D, Baxter, D and Dyke, A (2017b) Housing and life experiences: Primary research findings [Unpublished] Croucher, K, Quilgars, D, Baxter, D and Dyke, A (2018) Housing and life experiences. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Department for Communities and Local Government, (2016a) Social housing lettings in England: April 2015 to March London: Department for Communities and Local Government. Department for Communities and Local Government (2016b) English Housing Survey Headline Report, London: Department for Communities and Local Government. Gulliver, K, Timmins, K (2015) Furnishing homes, furnishing lives: an initial discussion of how furnished tenancies support sustainable communities. Liverpool: Furniture Resource Centre. Wired.gov.uk (2017) New statistical publication - Social Tenants in Scotland, 2015 [Online] Available at: [Accessed 21 November 2017] Perry, J, Stephens, M, Wilcox, S, Williams, S, (2017) UK Housing Review. London: Chartered Institute of Housing. Pearce, J, Vine, J (2014) Quantifying residualisation: the changing nature of society in the UK Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, Vol 29 (4), pp Rooney, B (1997) The viability of furnished tenancies in social housing. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. 9

10 About the project This report provides an overview of the house to home proposal. A technical report covering the detailed research findings, including case studies and the financial modelling behind the proposal, is available here: The house to home proposal was shortlisted as one of the four potential initiatives that could help alleviate poverty identified through the Housing and life experiences (Croucher et al, 2017) study. For further details of the study and our methodology in selecting ideas, please see our covering report For further information This summary is part of JRF s research and development programme. The views are those of the authors and not necessarily those of JRF. This solution is part of a series. The cover report, Housing and life experiences: policy development by Gemma Duggan, and the research study these solutions respond to, Housing and life experiences: making a home on a low income by Karen Croucher, Deborah Quilgars and Alison Dyke, are published by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation. They are available as a free PDF at Read more summaries at Other formats available ISBN Joseph Rowntree Foundation The Homestead 40 Water End York YO30 6WP Tel: info@jrf.org.uk Ref: 3279