You are viewing 1 of your 1 free articles
Record number of ‘serious detriment’ cases in 2019/20, says RSH
England’s social housing regulator has said it identified the potential for serious harm to tenants in a record number of cases in 2019/20.
The Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) determined that 15 breaches of its consumer standards met the “serious detriment” test, up from six in 2018/19.
In its eighth annual consumer regulation review setting out themes and lessons from the cases, the RSH said this “significant” increase was driven by referrals relating to local authority landlords.
Reports to the RSH of potential consumer standards breaches at councils were up more than three-quarters (76%) on the previous year and the regulator found there was a “serious detriment” in seven cases.
Only two councils breached the RSH’s consumer standards and met the serious detriment test between 2015/16 and 2018/19.
READ MORE
“We attribute this to the increase of our communication with the sector, particularly the level of engagement with local authorities about the importance of complying with the consumer standards,” the report said.
“We consider this to be a material change in the way local authorities monitor and report their compliance to the regulator and is key in explaining the higher numbers of cases where we found a breach of the consumer standards and serious detriment this year.”
The RSH received 597 consumer regulation referrals in 2019/20, up 19% from the previous year.
Of these, 274 (46%) were within its remit. It investigated 143 of these (52%) for potential standards breaches, leading to the 15 “serious detriment” conclusions – 10% of those investigated.
Apart from the proportion of referrals resulting in a finding of a breach and serious detriment rising to 2.5% from 1% the previous year, the percentage of cases moving through the RSH’s consumer regulation process remained consistent.
The proportion of self-referrals from social landlords rose from 31% to 38%, while the proportion from tenants fell from 47% to 37%.
The report said several Home Standard breaches arose in 2019/20 in cases where housing associations or councils “have failed to understand what is required of them to ensure tenants are safe in their homes”.
It warned that this is particularly a risk for providers where housing management services are delivered by a third-party – such as with lease-based housing associations or councils using ALMOs.
It added that as well as being clear on health and safety requirements, providers should focus on treating tenants fairly and taking into account their diverse needs, responding to complaints effectively including those from shared owners, and maintaining robust governance arrangements supported by good quality data.
Transparency with the RSH when issues do emerge “gives the regulator confidence” that the problems can be resolved and may affect the level of intervention required, it added.
Fiona MacGregor, chief executive of the RSH, said: “We expect housing associations and local authorities, including boards and councillors, to look carefully at this consumer regulation review and learn from the lessons we have identified.
“Social housing tenants deserve a good service from their landlords and providers should identify and deliver any improvements they need to make.
“Where providers are experiencing issues, including potential breaches of consumer regulation, they should talk to us as soon as possible.”
Jargon-busting: some regulatory terms and what they mean
- Co-regulation: this means boards are responsible for deciding how to meet the regulator’s standards – the regulator does not prescribe how to do this
- Gradings under review list: a public list of providers under investigation who are at risk of being judged non-compliant with regulatory standards
- In-depth assessment: a planned inspection, in which the regulator assesses a providers viability, governance and approach to value for money
- Narrative regulatory judgement: a detailed explanation of the reasons behind a regulatory judgement. Narrative judgements are published where a providers’ viability or governance ratings have changed, or where RSH has particular issues or concerns.
- Reactive engagement: refers to the regulator reacting to complaints or allegations about a provider and taking action
- Stability check: an annual assessment of all providers owning 1,000 social homes or more. RSH uses accounts and statistical return data to check for any changes in a providers’ risk profile.
- Strapline regulatory judgement: where a provider is meeting the standards, and its governance or viability ratings have not changed since its previous judgement, the regulator does not publish a full judgement explaining its reasons for the gradings. Instead it just publishes the gradings themselves, in a ‘strapline’.
