Jimmy Devlin
Recent activity
Comments (29)
-
Comment on: Direct payment pilot landlords revealed
Universal Credit will include all "Housing " costs , paid not by the Local Authority as HB now is , but direct to the claimant.
It will alter the responsibility for payment of the rent therefore .
This is why these pilots are going ahead. -
Comment on: Tenants face 8 per cent rent hike
The decrease should have read "Up to £16 per week" not 16% as stated.
Sorry for any confusion caused. -
Comment on: Tenants face 8 per cent rent hike
Please don't forget that Local Authorities will almost certainly reduce individual's Council Tax rebates over this same period .
During this week's Commons debate MPs were claiming some Council "adjustments" to Council Tax benefits will lead to a 16% decrease for some people. If they also rent from the Council this will be on top of the massive rent increases .
Talk about a double whammy . -
Comment on: Contract renegotiations put solar deals at risk
Once again, the biggest losers will be the tenants, many of whom have been plunged into Fuel Poverty caused by the huge recent increases in Energy Bills.
Landlords should use everything in their powers to help alleviate the stress on their Fuel Poor tenants , and I believe that renewable solar energy is definitely the best way to help them at present. -
Comment on: Contract renegotiations put solar deals at risk
Once again, the biggest losers will be the tenants, many of whom have been plunged into Fuel Poverty caused by the huge recent increases in Energy Bills.
Landlords should use everything in their powers to help alleviate the stress on their Fuel Poor tenants , and I believe that renewable solar energy is definitely the best way to help them at present.
Discussions (1)
-
NTV and Accountability to tenants
A recent article in IH included a comment attributed to Michael Gelling apparently speaking in his capacity as chair of TAROE , in which he stated that tenants may be prepared to forego next year's 2
Posts (3)
-
Posted in: Resident Scrutiny Panel
The (Social housing ) sector is being de-regulated , along with the almost complete lack of accountability from PRS landlords (outside category 1 HHSRS issues and Selective licensing of HMOs) .
Tenants living in all tenures have become almost totally disempowered.
Tenant "Participation" has been developed to allow the retention of total control in the hands of the landlords . That's why Tenant Panels must be managed by (only) tenants themselves, retain full independence and be democratically accountable to the wider community as well as social tenants.
It's proposed in the Localism Bill that a new, closer relationship between Tenant Panels and the Housing Ombudsman be developed (once merged with the LG Ombudsman ), particularly with regard to handling complaints from tenants against the landlord/s is necessary.
Landlords can have no part in selecting /appointing ( compliant )tenants to organise and manage the Panels.
Tenants must control and operate Panels themselves, independently of any vested or outside interest/s.
I am aware that the so called 4 NTOs (I can't understand why TPAS is still referred to as a national tenants representative organisation when it has more than 300 Registered housing providers in its membership), are currently working together along with CIH and the NHF to develop a framework model for Tenant Panels .
Since every neighbourhood is demographically unique , and each Provider is a private company , every Tenant Panel will need to operate slightly differently to others, due to local issues and demographics etc.
Where TRAs exist , they are usually well capable of developing independent scrutiny panels, without the need for any expensive "Consultants " to design a panel for them.
Experienced tenant activists are often not only excellent expert Community Leaders , but also have untapped skills and expertise which should be used to drive this change to wider independent tenant scrutiny .
Having taken part in a wide range of discussions and policy debates RE: Localism and Social Housing Reform , since the Bill was published, I've been struck by the amount of tangible fear in the Housing Sector that Providers may be unable to control Tenants Panels and deflect criticism and complaints etc.
Large numbers of HAs are desperately attempting to perpetuate control as they have previously , by marginalising effective tenants and TRAs which are considered "too challenging ". Setting up "Compliant" Panels similar to that described by the poster.
Indeed in the recently published CIH Regional Members policy brief on the probable impact of Localism on the sector and housing professionals " Thematic discussion for CIH English Regions April2011- Practical Implications of Localism " , it states that : "The bill is proposing to change the way social tenants can complain to the Housing Ombudsman about their social landlords"
No reference whatever to "Tenants Panels", and certainly no recognition of the absolute requirment for independence and autonomy.
The original poster has touched on what appears to be a very raw nerve for Social Landlords.
Social tenants don't need patronising , we require nothing more than the opportunity to design and manage Tenants Panels ourselves .
Most experienced tenants represntatives are more than capable of succeeding.
Unless tenants fully support local Panels , they will be unacceptable to the majority of honest diligent tenants who work tirelessly (unpaid ) on behalf of their neighbourhoods to improve quality of life and services for everybody (including PRS tenants , leaseholders and home owners), and if Panels quickly become meaningless where will victimised tenants take their serious complaints once the TSA disappears?
Tenants should by now be clamouring (locally)to determine how Tenants Panels are to be designed and established, and more importanntly demanding complete indepedence from all outside interference, and /or vested interests.
This is the apparent intent of those proposals included in the De-centralisation & Localism Bill.(Social Housing Reforms)
Jimmy Devlin
Chair
North West Tenants & Residents Assembly
-
Posted in: Local Offers - how are you developing them?
I still can't quite believe that a majority of "Involved tenants" haven't yet woken up to the fact that TP/involvement is simply a mechanism to allow the housing provider to retain complete top down control .This is the most "Disempowering" top down controlled structure imagineable. Everything else is illusory.
The sooner we establish Independent Local Tenants Panels everywhere ,possibly linking with Independent Neighbourhood Groups (Localism agenda as part of the Big Society strategy), local residents will be in a position to speak without fear. Watch what happens then.
This is the only way to ensure the required culture change happens quickly. Otherwise our neighbourhoods will continue to degenerate as services worse and crime increases as the reform programme starts to bite.
The enfranchisement of local residents is the aim of the Sustainable Communities Act which has recently been enacted (October 01st) after receiving Royal Assent.
Culture change can now occur, but I am not holding my breath , particularly in Labour controlled areas.
Tenants shouldn't sit on the touch line complaining, get stuck in and use these new powers.
-
Posted in: NTV and Accountability to tenants
A recent article in IH included a comment attributed to Michael Gelling apparently speaking in his capacity as chair of TAROE , in which he stated that tenants may be prepared to forego next year's 2% Rent reduction on condition that when future inflationary increases occur we are looked upon favourably and they could be limited to soften the blow .(This is how I interpreted his response)
A different article in the same edition of IH referred to Michael's "offer " from tenants.
I am a social renting tenant. I am not a member of TAROE . I fundamentally disagree with TAROE's official stance on this and have spoken with a large number of other tenants who feel the same way.
It should be pointed out that TAROE does not speak on behalf of all tenants,and it's views should be in reference only to its membership-tenants to whom the organisation is accountable.
I have serious concerns that once the National Tenant Voice is launched a similar misapprehension may ensue.
The NTV I am told is not a membership organisation, and therefore cannot be considered "representative" of more than its Board of Directors (Appointed)and the 50 National Council members(also appointed) .
With little or no built in "Accountability" to tenants in general, any/all decisions taken at the NTV level may impact every social housing tenancy in England if considered strategic or policy etc.
This is unwelcome in my opinion and I think that grass roots tenants should seek cast iron guarantees that the NTV will never be considered "representative" of more than its constituent parts (Appointed Board and Council), and should never have power to determine policy on behalf of ALL tenants until such time that the NTV can be considered "Fully Accountable" to ALL tenants. This would prevent the perceived danger of a National "Tick Box" consultation etc.
For this (and other)reasons the NTV project should be re-thought and if necessary delayed until such time that a strong bottom up structure can be developed to support a meaningful Accountable National tenants and residents Organisation ...NTV
Perhaps if ordinary tenants like myself better understood the remit and role/s of the NTV it may help gain support for the NTV?
But every NTV update briefing I have received so far is totally devoid of any detailed explanation or information which may help allay my concerns.
How will the NTV be accountable to ALL social tenants ?