Industry Viewfinder
“What portion of the housing stock your organisation owns would you describe as ‘safe’ and would you say is affected by, or is classed as damp or mouldy?”
When asked why they believed this, respondents gave welcoming feedback. One said the Act has been received positively by housing professionals because “they now have a real duty of care to understand the needs of residents.” Continuing with those who say the landscape shiſt itself is the reason for
housing professional’s receiving the act well, one said that, “because of the act, people are aware,” and another that “things have to get better.” Others argued that landlords should be meeting these standards regardless of
legislation, saying “it’s something in our DNA, we should always be doing it.” Similarly, another said that most professionals they know “always want to
improve and work towards eliminating any negative reactions.” Despite the positive reception overall, however, 14% reported the act has
been received negatively by the sector. One respondent put this down to the “additional work and record keeping,
with less staff than five years ago.” Continuing, they also cited the legal worries of “pressure from no-win no-fee solicitors to take action on behalf of residents.” Worries of additional burdens were a common theme. “Te initial reaction
has been positive, but trundling through the required repairs is the issue,” said one housing professional. Others were concerned by the “limited amount of time to react,” of the “added burden and cost,” and another stated that housing professionals “just don’t think they know what to do, and there aren’t the resources to do it effectively.” Further concerns included the “blaming of tenants” still being “widespread,”
and that some housing professionals simply “don’t know about it.” For the wider sector as a whole, the consensus among the majority was also
one of positivity, with 11% of respondents believing the Act will ‘very positively’ affect the housing sector, 59% ‘positively’, 10% ‘negatively’, 0% ‘very negatively’, and a notably large 21% who said they didn’t know.
HEALTH AND SAFETY Positively, when it came to trust in the trades dealing with such issues, the vast majority (84%) of our respondents believed that the trades they work with are aware of their impacts on health and safety. Further, the majority of respondents believed that, in the wake of Awaab
Ishak’s death, the culture around the remediation of issues of damp and mould has improved. Of the 71% that believed the culture has improved since, respondents said
that the tragedy “brought home the reality and made those in power sit up and listen,” that “tenants are taken more seriously,” “people are happier ” and “taking it seriously,” and that the event highlighted “clear oversight at board and executive level.” However, over one in ten respondents (11%) had not heard of the tragedy,
and this still leaves nearly one in five (18%) who have heard of the tragedy, yet did not believe that the culture has improved since. One such respondent argued that “providers are panicking,” and that the sector “doesn’t have enough staff.”
“How well do you think the majority of housing professionals have reacted to the Social Housing Act?”
Again worried about resources, another respondent worried that there are
“no extra funds,” despite the “greater pressure on the frontline to react.” Another argued that while “rents have been capped,” providers are leſt with “less income to deal with disrepair.” Of the remaining concerns, one user furthered their worries of “disrepair
claims lining solicitors pockets,” and another believed the regulation following the tragedy has “changed for the worse.”
REPERCUSSIONS When it came to the enhanced role of the Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) introduced in the Act, again the vast majority felt positively. 55% felt ‘positive’ about this enhanced role, and a further 13% felt ‘very positive.’ Asked to explain why this was, respondents said the sector “needs a
professional approach to housing and accountability,” that this is a “change for the better,” that the change “provides more motivation,” as well as lauding the “greater powers to deal with failing organisations.” Additionally, respondents noted the need for “all staff to be qualified,”
enabling their ability “to enhance their service to tenants.” While in the minority, there was a small number who weren’t entirely happy about the enhanced role of the RSH, with 6% thinking ‘negatively’ of the change,
30 | HMMFebruary/March 2024 |
www.housingmmonline.co.uk
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
