Ms Farah
Damji
Kazuri Properties Ltd
1a Waterlow Road | London | N19 5NJ
The Right Honorable Grant Shapps, MP
Minister for Housing
DGLC
Kazuri Properties Ltd
1a Waterlow Road | London | N19 5NJ
The Right Honorable Grant Shapps, MP
Minister for Housing
DGLC
26 March
2012 URGENT
via e mail and Fax
Dear Mr
Shapps
I write in
dismay about the additional funding being given to charities such as Crisis and
Shelter next month, to “help end
homelessness” in the private rented sector.
This is referred hereto on the Crisis PRS website
The Crisis PRS Access Development Programme funds new community based services that help single homeless people find and
sustain good quality accommodation in the private rented sector (PRS). It
builds on Crisis’ history and expertise in PRS solutions to homelessness and
represents an investment of over £10m of DCLG funding over a three year period.
There is no independent monitoring or evaluation of outcomes or sustainability in what Crisis and Shelter are doing. I know of cases in which dozens of tenancies have not been maintained because support was not there for tenants being placed through the scheme, and in others when quite manageable performance targets were reduced by 75% because charities who had been given this funding could not access private landlords, whom they have to engage in order to get people into properties. Once a person has been offered a property through the private rented sector they are removed from the Local Authority’s Housing List and are no longer able to access it, therefore if they cannot maintain the tenancy, they are homeless again without recourse to the Local Authority or indeed the charity funded by these hare-brained schemes. One I know , Vision Housing claims to house ex offenders and has been granted fifty thousand pounds. The owner then insists the tenant also gets a crisis loan from the DWP to pay a “referral fee,” thereby poverty pimping off the most needy and destitute. I am an ex offender, I have gone through the ridiculous process of trying to access suitable housing and that this is not acceptable, you cannot seek to profit through other people’s desperation, it’s worse than loan sharking or doorstep payday loans which at least are in the process of being regulated.
I attach a schedule of Kazuri’s outcomes up to November 2011 so you can see the model works. Not one woman has been sent back to prison, bee convicted of a new offence or gone back to a violent relationship and we are now expanding the provision to assist Local Authorities move men and women off the Housing Lists and also out of prison and from Accident and Emergency wards into sustained housing.
This has been good for Kazuri, when charities
who have been funded through the Crisis grants have not been able to access landlords even through letting agencies, they have
approached us and paid referral fees because ours is not a leaky charity bucket
model which breeds disempowerment , we
are a social enterprise, with a triple bottom line, human, social and financial
return on investment. Our tenancy
agreements actually state the tenant must partake in employment, education and/
or training, do a minimum of 5 hours of
volunteer work in a recognized project for
the benefit of the community to help restore the broken social bond and work
with a mentor. We undertake monthly tenancy checks and support our tenants to become self sufficient, contributing
members of society. This is not the model to which charities who have been
rinsing Supporting People budgets for years work. They are being paid through
Supporting People budgets to keep people on benefits disempowered and dependent on Local Housing Allowance. Rather
like characters from a Dickens novel, they are paid to retain a substrata of society to stay within the culture of entitlement which
is no longer affordable to our society . Sadly in this case, truth is stranger
than fiction.
Crisis and
Shelter fund charities who cannot compete in the highly competitive private
rented sector and whilst there are undoubtedly pockets of good practice, they
are not given any outcomes which they have to attain, by Central Government. This
is free money, literally for nothing except to manage their own top heavy
bureaucratic structures. This is far
removed from this Government’s move away from
non-performance and moving towards rewarding success rather than
stagnation through the payments by results models. I am greatly
concerned at the lengths to which Crisis and Shelter attempt to demonize and indeed criminalize all
landlords with their recent Rogue Landlords campaign and by the flyer attached
herewith , which I picked up in my local Sainsbury’s supermarket.
The sector
has long called for regulation and good landlords, which are the vast majority
do not condone or participate in the illegal activities of a few rogue
landlords who are common criminals, benefitting from the poorest and most
vulnerable in society . Indeed one of the most respected landlord’s organizations has just started a petition asking the
Government to bring in mandatory licensing of lettings agencies. This
should be supported and applauded. I ask
where the funding is coming from for the film that Shelter has
commissioned and whether this has been
sanctioned by Government. Surely it is in everyone’s interest to work with the
landlords who are the gateway to the private rented sector, not disgust and
alienate them completely. Why then would
they encourage name-calling and hostility towards those people who must
engage in the process of providing shelter. When private landlords see campaigns based on bullying, they cease to
offer their properties up to the private rented sector. Let’s face it, who
hasn’t been burnt by private rented sector “incentives” run by Local
Authorities? Tower Hamlets and Brighton councils are now planning to run their
own social lettings agencies. With the
amount of bad feeling and arrears they generate
and the rush to remove risk and responsibility to the private sector, these schemes are doomed to fail and I
will be there lighting the funeral pyre when they implode and Heads of Housing
are asked why they didn’t act in cooperation with landlords rather than trying to change the sector to fit
public sector preconceptions, backwards momentum and rigidity.
The voluntary sector cannot take on the risk
or the responsibility as pointed out by Bernard Jenkin, Chair of the Public Administration Select
Committee (PASC) recently when discussing the failure of the
Government’s much touted Work Program. There
is no transparency in the process around which funds are decanted
to Crisis or to Shelter and no
transparency either in the way these funds are given the charities who benefit
or to the tenants they are supposedly placing in tenancies.
Until the
complete and audited evaluation of the current funding schemes in place and a
report is published concerning what has actually been achieved in the way of
sustained (longer than 6 months) tenancies and other outcomes, such as lessened
benefits and journey travelled towards employment or education, I must ask that
this next round of funding is suspended. There is no case to be made for simply
passing money on to charities who do NOT help homeless people and who have
never built a building or been a landlord.
Based on the Housing First model which Kazuri has successfully deployed,
there is no point offering jewelry making classes, as do Crisis in their lovely
building (located in a prime location and expensively staffed), for people to get into work as they cannot
work if they have nowhere to live. The voluntary sector cannot sustain the risk
of the responsibility to engage the private rented sector in this manner.
Shelter and Crisis are good at academia, policy and research, let them raise
and generate funding for that, not pretend to be tinkering round actually
putting people into long term homes, which is the heart of the problem.
Kazuri is
in the process of compiling a response along with some of the largest landlord
organizations and regulatory bodies, developers, builders, town planners ,
property lawyers and housing specialists
as well as institutional investors and high street banks to Sir Adrian Montague’s call for consultation
asking why the private and institutional investor will not engage in the
private rented sector. I would urge you to wait till the evaluations of Sir
Adrian’s findings before funding anymore
“charity” private rented sector schemes.
I hope to
hear from you as a matter of urgency. I am considering having the funding issue brought forward to the Public Accounts
Committee and will seek Judicial Review about the process as to how the funding
has been allocated. I trust this will not be necessary.
Kind regards