Institute to run regulator’s ASB advice unit
CIH to set up anti-social behaviour team
The Chartered Institute of Housing has been commissioned by the Tenant Services Authority to set up a team to help tackle anti-social behaviour.
Recruitment is underway for the four members of the group, which will be based at the CIH, and will be charged with advising social landlords on best practice and making the best use of resources.
In November last year the TSA announced it was setting up a team to advise social landlords on dealing with anti-social behaviour. The announcement came alongside a £10 million government initiative aimed at tackling problems in 130 local authorities across England over the next two years.
As part of this, the CIH was commissioned to draft new guidance for social landlords on tackling anti-social behaviour.
Abigail Davies, CIH head of policy, said: ‘Feeling safe and secure in your home is hugely important for any resident. CIH and housing professionals already undertake a leading role in the creation of safer communities. This new initiative will provide new opportunities for the sector to learn and improve professional practice over the next two years.
‘CIH is pleased to be at the heart of this project to drive forward sector-led improvement, and, most importantly embed it within the sector. This project will give much-needed support in situations which are often challenging and dangerous, but an increasingly important aspect of the work of housing professionals.’
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (5)
B.S. Townroe | 19/01/2010 11:09 am
Is it too cynical to suggest that the outcome of this best practice team will be more tales of the toilet habits of bears, religious affiliation of the Pope, etc.?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
| 19/01/2010 12:23 pm
"CIH head of policy, said: ‘Feeling safe and secure in your home is hugely important for any resident"
Err...this would be the same CIH that is advocating that a portion of the 30% percent of social housing tenants who are actually working and paying rent should pay more rent because they are in work and earning money?
God save us from the machinations of social housing "professionals". I hope this organisation is not in receipt of taxpayer funding.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
kass | 19/01/2010 2:16 pm
‘Feeling safe and secure in your home is hugely important for any resident"
Now, what a revelation out of the blue!... Surely the Chartered Institute of Housing should have known about this since the very day it was founded, since residents (the very reason why the social housing sector exists, and not just to give these fat cats a career and a retirmenet pension) have always naively believed that having a social tenancy they would get some security and safety... How stupidly naive we all were in our younger days!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
J Carr | 20/01/2010 9:36 am
Well done to the people involved in this. It feels like a reasonable way to help people who have to endure unacceptable behaviour. Let's offer some encouragement to get more projects like this off the ground.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
sue thompson | 15/02/2010 3:47 pm
Good gracious even more money for anti social behaviour what an industry we have allowed to mushroom. Surely if we spent all this money on more prisons and actually did some hard punishments for the culprits instead of lining the pockets of people employed in this industry life would be better for all. To quote one employee in this farcical industry 'It is not in my best interests to cure these problems, otherwise I would lose my job'. Our local teams do not visit problem people, do not wish to leave their nice cosy offices, stop anyone trying to get all parties together, in case the problem is solved and send nasty letters based on unsubstatiated evidence from trouble-making neighbours. Of course they do issue the occasional ASBO - One local authority in 20 months with 19 employees issued 2 ASBOs and 6 fly-tipping notices - is this good value for money.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment