Throw us a bone
About ten years ago my local authority decided that it needed rather more joined up thinking when it came to resolving the difficulties faced by the myriad of tenants living within the borough. We had a very high proportion of private tenanted accommodation and also a significant social housing sector. Put quite shortly the problem was that tenants were getting into trouble with their rent – being evicted and quite literally ending up in the town hall with their suitcases asking for help.
About ten years ago my local authority decided that it needed rather more joined up thinking when it came to resolving the difficulties faced by the myriad of tenants living within the borough. We had a very high proportion of private tenanted accommodation and also a significant social housing sector. Put quite shortly the problem was that tenants were getting into trouble with their rent '“ being evicted and quite literally ending up in the town hall with their suitcases asking for help.
Of course that was not the whole of the problem. Tenants were having difficulties with disrepair, leaseholders were having problems with their service charges and many other problems such as the age-old problem of tenants not getting their deposits back and people with mortgages being thrown out for not paying the mortgage. Housing law is tough law, it concerns a real basic of human life '“ our home.
In our borough there were not many solicitors doing legal aid and only a few not-for-profit agencies. Residential landlord tenant work was something that only a few solicitors and advisors specialised in. More importantly there were a lot of people who did not qualify for legal aid and very significantly could not afford to pay solicitors on a private basis. These were the 'in-betweens', not too poor but not rich enough to be able to afford a lawyer. Accordingly there was a huge unmet need within the borough and it was decided to fund an organisation to meet that need and that in itself would take pressure off of town hall staff who would otherwise be inundated with enquiries for help.
This is how the local housing advice service was born, funded by the local authority.
It was an amalgam of two not-for-profit agencies and my firm. We have just celebrated our tenth anniversary. During that time we have prevented 1,500 people from becoming homeless, more than 35,000 live more securely in their homes, and we procured nearly half a million pounds in back-dated housing benefit payments.
We have done a lot more besides. While celebrating our success at a tenth anniversary event we had local councillors saying nice things about us along with the local MP and others. We have been a local success story. Sunshine amid the gloom.
Imagine our surprise then to hear recently that the service is to be abolished. Apparently a victim of the financial crisis and the need to slash costs. A week ago a representative of the local authority who told us of our fate did so with a smile on her face but she certainly had the assassin's dagger in her mind. The urge to cut is reaching a sort of fever pitch. It seems like bird flu and swine flu all over again. Let's cut and to hell with the consequences. If we do not cut we will all spiral out of control in some roller coaster of misery.
I am realistic enough to know that cuts have to be made and billions of pounds worth of deficit has to be cleared somehow. Nevertheless if you simply cut down services such as the one I have described it is quite possible that you will probably have to deal with additional costs elsewhere. When you squeeze a balloon the air simply whizzes down to the other end and when you stop giving tenants advice they simply search around elsewhere or become a much bigger problem. It has been said that every family being made homeless and having to be rehoused is likely to cost in the region of a quarter of a million pounds. How much better then to prevent the family from becoming homeless in the first place?
Cutting legal advice can seem a quick fix and an uncontroversial measure - after all, everyone hates lawyers and cutting their fees might even seem to be politically adept. But when a local authority's expenditure is cut there has to be a reason why. A failure on their part to recognise the good that legal advice can do for tenants has to contain an element of short-sightedness. Short-term political gain may result in long-term financial loss.
The vast majority of lay people have no idea of the law. Tenants still labour under the misapprehension that when they receive a Notice to Quit they must move out before that date otherwise all their belongings will be thrown on the street. Quite often landlords take tenants to court for no good reason. Homeless people are sometimes entitled to local authority accommodation when they have been turned away. Only good quality legal advice can remedy these matters. When the reservoir of legal advice runs dry that is simply not an end of the matter.
In those circumstances our celebration of ten years success has turned into a wake.
My sadness is not just at losing a little bit of funding which overall will make no real difference to my firm but it is a sadness for the clients, who will no longer be able to access this kind of advice. It is a sadness for the helpless, the vulnerable and the ignored.
No doubt the men in suits have done their sums. Nothing that I can say will really matter. But in time I suspect that people will look back at the cuts and ask whether it was really necessary to cut to the bone? As a client said to me only the other day, 'we live in really strange times and the only really certain thing is that when I visit your offices Cosmo the dog will always give me a hug'.
Dogs are of course quite unconditional in their love. Funders are much more fickle.