An end to ASBOs?
The review of anti-social behaviour powers must not impact the ability of social landlords to tackle the problem
In her speech on 28 July 2010 home secretary Theresa May launched a review of the powers available to tackle anti-social behaviour.
The review will look at existing measures such as anti-social behaviour orders, anti-social behaviour injunctions, parenting orders, criminally sought ASBOs (known as CRASBOs), and closure orders with a view to replacing this raft of solutions with ‘a simple, clear and effective regime’ to reduce bureaucracy and improve effectiveness.
The home secretary clearly sees a role for housing providers in tackling ASB and refers to housing associations being key in doing so. Landlords are often best placed to tackle ASB in their communities by working with and gaining the trust of witnesses. \
However, we do not want to go back to the situation before the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 when social landlords were limited to enforcing tenancy terms only.
Before ASBOs children’s behaviour could not be tackled effectively by landlords, even though youth crime is one of the most reported nuisances.
reviously, only the tenant themselves could be made subject to an injunction but ASBIs incorporated other members of their household or visitors.
lso, only behaviour ‘in the locality’ of the property could be dealt with by way of possession or an injunction although, in reality, the problem is often far more wide-reaching.
It is right that some measures in the current ASB toolkit are rarely used and are not as effective as others, but it is fundamentally important that landlords retain the powers necessary to tackle ASB in their communities.
Jane Plant is an associate solicitor at Anthony Collins LLP
jane.plant@anthonycollins.com
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (3)
Anonymous | 27/08/2010 1:13 am
Ms Plant clearly hasn't had enough first-hand experience of the sector to know that allocation is the key, prevention always being better than cure.
This needs a change from needs-based to merit-based allocation among other things including the incorporation of conditions in the tenancy to filter out the malevolent.
Still, I don't suppose that route is going to offer much of a living for someone who needs the farceur of asbo legislation to get on ther other side of the equation on human rights.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Harry Lime | 27/08/2010 9:30 am
Correct me if i'm wrong, but there ARE conditions in tenancies, which can be invoked if necessary to filter out the malevolant. Granted it's not as "sexy" as you're assumption that everyone that is in housing "need" is clearly going to be a scumbag that will cause ASB, but it appears your wish has already been granted - aren't you the lucky one??
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Sidney Webb | 27/08/2010 10:10 am
Sorry - wrong - we do want to go back to before Blair, when landlords enforced tenancies, and police enforced laws. We do not want to have to pay extra to our landlords to act as a police fore. If youth crime is the problem then the clue is in the word crime as to who should deal with it.
Just because the police, the courts, and the prison service are going to become shadows of their former selves is no excuse to perpetuating the restriction of cost and responsibility of dealing with it to landlords.
Harry is right that existing tenancy clauses allow landlords to take action where occupants or visitors to a property cause problems.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment