Have you missed your connection?

Housing officers are frequently asked to take a ‘joined up’ approach when working with other agencies. In reality, it’s not always obvious where each party’s responsibilities lie.

Inside Housing has taken three scenarios, all based on real life experiences, and asked what housing officers, social workers and the police should have done faced with these circumstances. For expert comment we’ve brought together the Chartered Institute of Housing and the British Association of Social Workers. The Association of Chief Police Officers could not provide an official line, so instead we managed to track down a police officer willing to give some personal insight.

The cases below highlight the best practice that should be applied. They also demonstrate the challenges to agencies working seamlessly in partnership.

Scenario one: the vulnerable tenant

Mary, 67, has autism and cancer. Having always lived with her parents, she now lives alone following their deaths.

Mary’s autism means she cannot function outside her usual routine. At home she locks the doors and refuses all visitors other than Macmillan nurses. Mary does not understand the need for contractors and surveyors to access her home to carry out decent homes work. During the last few months the house has become neglected.

One option is to find an alternative property for Mary, probably supported or sheltered accommodation - there is suitable housing nearby. This would involve a social services needs assessment. The housing department calls social services only to find Mary is not known to them.

Around two weeks later a social worker calls the housing officer to advise that no assessment will happen because when their department phoned Mary to ask whether she needed any help, she said ‘no I’m fine, thanks’. Hence she was assessed as having ‘capacity’ to cope alone.

The sad fact is, Mary probably had no idea who the caller was, or any real understanding of the purpose of the call.

What should happen in this case?

The CIH gives housing’s response:
‘The case study presents some questions and suggests some inconsistencies. It is suggested that Mary has never had an assessment from social services, yet it is known she has learning difficulties and autism and she has been receiving home visits from Macmillan nurses. A GP, ward nurse or hospital doctor may have made this referral, but it is surprising that wider support issues were not identified by those agencies then or by the visiting nurses.

‘If Mary is distressed at the prospect of being moved out of her home, why does she need to be decanted? There may be a communication problem between landlord and tenant: good practice would suggest a landlord’s policy and procedure for decanting tenants should be determined with the resident’s involvement. A supplementary question would be whether the repair work on Mary’s property is sufficiently major to merit decanting her.

‘Mary has not requested a move to sheltered accommodation. If she has capacity, and all she needs is support, then this can be provided by housing management support services.

‘If, however, Mary needs additional support with health and social care, bathing, cooking, cleaning and so on, then adult social care must take responsibility. The case study states ‘social services’ will not assess Mary. Adult social care has a duty to carry out a full assessment. Good practice would be to complete a referral form to the adult social care assessment team, detailing the landlord’s concerns.

‘There is a clear need for more effective partnership working between the landlord and adult social care in particular. The best way forward for Mary would be a case planning meeting with all relevant parties. Because Mary is vulnerable she may need somebody who can represent her best interests, hence the respective agencies need to know for definite what her capacity is.’

The BASW gives social workers’ response:
‘There is an implication here that social services ought to have known about Mary despite no one having referred her. It is often the case that social services get calls from other agencies who either assume that they know about a person or feel that they should and this can get the discussion off to a bad start. Please don’t assume we are telepathic.

‘The housing people seem to be dealing with Mary with understanding and sympathy in trying to find her somewhere nearby to live and to preserve her independence (some people would assume that if she has a learning disability she will have to go into an institution and that is very much not the case). I hope the housing officer, who will have been visiting Mary and explaining things to her, has made it clear that Mary has a choice - she may wish to return to her home after it has been brought up to standard or she may wish to enter supported or sheltered accommodation permanently.

‘Now we come to the (appropriate) referral to social services. What should happen in these circumstances is that all the information should be taken down and passed to a qualified social worker as it is clearly a complex situation. The social worker should then contact Mary’s GP and Macmillan nurses for more information and that would clearly have indicated Mary’s need for an assessment to help with the situation and raised some doubt about her mental capacity.

‘The social worker would then try to contact Mary and gently explain why he or she needs to come to see her. Even if Mary is hostile and says she is OK, the social worker must persist because it is in Mary’s best interests.

‘If Mary remains reluctant to let people in for repairs, despite full information and reassurance, and the social worker does have doubts about her capacity in this area, a specific assessment under the Mental Capacity Act would be carried out. An assessment may find that Mary does not lack capacity and that she (like all of us) is free to make an unwise decision.’

Scenario two: the forced entry

After a police raid, in which his front door was forced open, a tenant is arrested for possessing a firearm. He is imprisoned for 10 months. His landlord, a small housing association, is unaware of events. It owns dispersed street properties, so is not informed of events by neighbours.
Only when the tenant’s rent falls into arrears does a housing officer inspect the property and discover the broken lock. Why did the police not find out who owned the property?

Housing’s response:
‘Where a housing organisation has dispersed stock, it might want to consider regular visits to the property. This could be built into the housing officer’s responsibilities. Alternative sources of information could include other visits to the property - for example, all landlords have a legal duty to ensure gas safety by carrying out annual safety checks on all gas appliances.

‘This case indicates the need to develop more effective joint-working protocols between housing and the police. Is the landlord involved with a local community safety partnership? A CSP could have provided an opportunity for the police to raise this issue. Even if the landlord is not involved, a good CSP would identify the landlord and share the information.

‘Both parties can be unaware of the housing tools and powers available to deal with anti-social behaviour. The police would find it useful to know that a landlord can take injunctive action against someone who is committing crime or using their property to commit crime; also that a landlord has grounds for seeking possession of a property whose tenant is convicted of a crime.’

A former police officer’s response:
‘It is my understanding that the police should secure the property and they should tell the landlord about the raid - it may have been that they couldn’t trace the landlord. When I was in a similar situation I contacted the landlords before I organised an arrest warrant.’

Scenario three: the environmental health disaster

Sandra lives alone in a socially rented home which contractors must access for major works.

The housing officer’s visits to the property prove difficult. Neighbours report the tenant is a recluse known locally as ‘the cat woman’. There is an overwhelming stench from the house.

Following persistent visits to the property, finally accompanied by an environmental health colleague, the housing officer has no choice but to serve notice for possession.

Eventually Sandra answers the door, refusing access but staying at the door long enough for the officers to see the floors inside are covered in cat excrement. Officers explain what will happen if she refuses access to clean the property.

When the notice expires the officers revisit with a warrant, a team of industrial cleaners and a carpenter to force entry. Sandra refuses entry and becomes extremely distressed.

Police officers are called. They are reluctant to arrest her as she hasn’t committed a crime. Following pleas from the housing officer, they agree to take her to the local station. It’s enough time to begin the clear-up. The housing officers hope police doctors may assess Sandra, but after a couple of hours the officers say they can’t keep her any longer.

The housing officer takes her to the housing office, by which time she is calm and appears reasonable. They estimate that Sandra has not engaged with anyone for at least 20 years. She tells the officer she has cancer and has no GP but she has been receiving hospital treatment.
The officer finds Sandra temporary accommodation, a GP and sorts out benefit claims. Now Sandra is being supported by a tenancy sustainment officer. There is a real chance she will be able to maintain her tenancy. But how did such a vulnerable person slip through the net for so long?

Housing’s response:
‘Sandra’s landlord has a legal obligation to repair her home. The property clearly presents environmental health concerns which require action under environmental protection laws.

‘When Sandra exhibited signs of acute distress, it may have been more appropriate to have called a doctor, rather than the police. If a person is in danger of harming themselves or others and/or is refusing treatment, an emergency assessment may be necessary. This must be conducted by two doctors and an approved mental health officer.

‘A mental health assessment could have led to admitting Sandra to hospital under mental health laws. An emergency assessment could have been made by telephoning social services or if the police had had to take Sandra to a place of safety.

‘There are clear signs which suggest the need for adult social care to assess Sandra. Housing might consider completing a referral form to the adult social care assessment team, detailing all of the concerns the landlord has in relation to Sandra’s support needs. The landlord should revisit this with adult social care and insist on a full assessment of need.

‘There is a need for more effective partnership working between the landlord and adult social care in particular.’

Social workers’ response:
‘I am surprised the police did not have Sandra assessed by a doctor under the Mental Health Act while she was at the station. However, I wonder if the case could not have been handled differently from the beginning so Sandra did not have to end up at the police station. Housing and environmental health could perhaps have considered contacting Sandra’s hospital doctor to find out if she had a diagnosed mental health problem. The doctor could be urged to refer her to a hospital social worker.

‘Otherwise a referral could be made to the local community mental health team and perhaps either a community psychiatric nurse or a mental health social worker could get involved.

‘Sandra may or may not have a mental health problem but she is acting as though she has and is clearly a vulnerable adult. The nurse or social worker could try and build a relationship with Sandra, explain the situation and what needs to be done to improve things for her.

‘In this case it looks as though the housing officer does not refer on but continues to work with Sandra and gets a lot sorted out for her. It is sad that Sandra’s situation deteriorated and got out of hand in this way.

‘Stories of this kind are not uncommon. As the situation gets worse and worse, the person is too ashamed to seek help. There are also some people who seem to choose to live in squalor, refuse all offers of help and have no mental health or capacity issues. All we can do as agencies is let them know what the consequences of their lifestyle may be and that support is available should they change their mind.’

Police response:
‘You can’t detain someone in a police station without having grounds for arrest. Without knowing the details I can’t say why they were detained. You can take someone to a place of safety if their environment is deemed unsafe and if they are incapable of making a decision themselves, under the Mental Health Act.’

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment