Councils call for “realistic and achievable timetable” and allocation of new burdens funding for implementation of Awaab’s Law
The Local Government Association has called on the Government to work with the social housing sector to set a “realistic and achievable timescale” for implementation of Awaab’s Law.
‘Awaab’s Law’ was named after Awaab Ishak from Rochdale, who died at two years old from a respiratory condition caused by extensive mould in the housing association flat where he lived.
In January this year the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities launched a consultation on a range of measures including the introduction of strict time limits for social housing providers requiring them to take swift action – in some cases within 24 hours - in addressing dangerous hazards such as damp and mould.
In its response to the consultation, the LGA pointed out that multiple changes are being introduced alongside Awaab’s Law over the next few years that will impact on housing asset management services and delivery.
These include the proposed new Decent Homes Standard, and new Consumer Standards, including the new Competence and Conduct Standard with the requirement for professional qualifications.
It called on the Government to ensure that such changes are “coordinated and introduced in a sensible manner so that landlords can appropriately review their asset management models and delivery and respond to them in the round.
“This includes working with the sector to set a realistic and achievable timescale for implementation of Awaab’s Law.”
In its response the LGA said it supported the principle that “everyone deserves a safe, decent, warm, and affordable place to live” and that health hazards should be investigated and fixed in a timely manner.
“Councils already work hard to deliver good outcomes for tenants – despite significant financial constraints – and are committed to improving housing conditions for all residents,” it insisted.
However, the LGA said it was concerned that the cost impact assessment issued by DLUHC failed to adequately estimate the cost of implementing the proposals within the Awaab’s Law consultation.
“We urge the Government to engage with councils to undertake a full, updated cost assessment to identify the likely costs of the proposals and allocate new burdens funding appropriately,” it said, adding that the proposed implementation of the law was likely to place an additional burden on local authorities in their roles as registered providers of social housing.
The LGA said it had repeatedly made both the Regulator for Social Housing and DLUHC aware of the significant financial income and expenditure pressures on individual Housing Revenue Accounts (HRAs) “and the impact this is having on the ability to fund the vital investment needed to improve and regenerate existing stock and deliver effective social housing management services to tenants”.
The LGA welcomed a Government commitment that new burdens funding would be paid to local authority registered providers without an HRA, but expressed concern that the vast majority, which have an HRA, would need to fund the additional costs out of the income from rents.
The response renewed the LGA’s call for DLUHC to “urgently undertake an in-depth review of the future sustainability of HRAs.
The LGA also urged the Government to clarify where Awaab’s Law might conflict with other repair regulations, including the Secure Tenants of Local Housing Authorities (Right to Repair) Regulations 1994.
The response said: “The Right to Repair Regulations already stipulate timeframes for repairs in the social rented sector. We propose that the Government either aligns the timescales set out in the Right to Repair Regulations with those proposed in Awaab’s Law or repeals the right to repair regulations to avoid conflicting regulations.”
In response to the consultation question on whether “Awaab’s Law should apply to all Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) hazards, not just damp and mould”, the LGA said it believed Awaab’s Law should be limited to “anything which is a significant and imminent risk to the household, as assessed by a competent professional.”
Harry Rodd