Your name's not down, you're not coming in

South Northants Homes was forced to take an unusual step in 2014. The 2,900-home housing association set up its own waiting list of tenants for its empty properties after finding South Northamptonshire Council’s list had run dry.

This was not because South Northamptonshire had suddenly solved the supply crisis locally, but because of the way it had changed its waiting list criteria, using new freedoms under the Localism Act. The council introduced stricter rules, including imposing new local connection and permanent employment requirements. These criteria left the council with a shortage of commodities for social housing.

The council eventually reassessed and relaxed its allocations policy in 2015 to remove the permanent employment requirement, but the case illustrates the extent to which some councils are looking to restrict their waiting lists.

Inside Housing research published last week shows 120 councils out of 159 who responded to a Freedom of Information Act request have introduced stricter criteria, resulting in 237,793 people being struck off waiting lists and a further 42,994 barred from joining. So how are councils using this new freedom? And why is it necessary to restrict access to waiting lists?

The most commonly adopted criteria by councils is a local connection test, with 57% requiring applicants to have lived in the area for a certain amount of time.

Melanie Rees, head of policy at the Chartered Institute of Housing, warns such tests could lead to some groups being discriminated against.

She says: “There have been concerns about the potential discrimination of local connection requirements going back to the 1970s, when it was shown that newly arriving communities from the Caribbean, Asia and so on were being excluded from access to good quality accommodation.”

Rent arrears

Other councils have introduced a ban on people in rent arrears joining the waiting list. There are 21 councils, or 13% of respondents, who block those in debt from accessing social housing. However, one council is now reconsidering its rent arrears criteria as part of a consultation on their allocations policy because it “is not a helpful broad-brush approach”, a senior figure in the housing team says.

She says individual circumstances need to be taken into account. She adds: “There have been stories where people will take out doorstep loans to pay off a debt and get on the allocations list, which is just compounding their financial problems.”

Harrow Council has toughened up its criteria to include eligibility for housing only once a household is short of two bedrooms, no extra bedroom for a family member over 21 and medical priority only given to those with a “severe” need.

Glen Hearnden, portfolio holder for housing at Harrow Council, suggested the move was due to a shortage of “good quality, affordable accommodation”. He said it is becoming “more difficult” because Harrow has one of the smallest stocks of social housing in London. Harrow is taking steps to build 5,000 new homes, he says, but the problem “won’t be solved overnight”.

Housing experts generally support the move to give councils the freedom to change their allocations criteria based on local supply and demand. However, Ms Rees says this must be based on “robust information in terms of need” and regular reviews of the impact of these policies must be included.

A number of councils have taken this advice and are considering relaxing their criteria because their rules were creating a shortage of applicants for housing. Cheshire West and Chester Council is consulting on allowing all households access to the waiting list because of a “limited demand for some property types”.  South Cambridgeshire District Council has relaxed its local connection criteria from five years to a requirement for applicants to have lived in the area six out of the last 12 months.

Local connections

Several other consequences of new allocation rules have come to light. An Irish Traveller recently successfully argued in the High Court that North Somerset Council had discriminated against Gypsies and Travellers by extending its two-year local connection requirement to this community. In 2014, the Court of Appeal ruled Hammersmith & Fulham Council’s old policy to block access to the waiting list for those in temporary accommodation was unlawful.

Councils also have to be wary of complaints to the Local Government Ombudsman from people who feel they have been denied access to waiting lists unfairly. The Ombudsman in January revealed that complaints and enquiries about councils’ allocations policies have shot up 13% in 2014/15 compared to the previous year.

Similarly, our research shows there have been 775 occasions where councils have reversed a decision to remove a person or block access to a waiting list since 2012. Croydon Council had the highest number of reversals, with 207 people added back onto the waiting list. A Croydon Council spokesperson said this was largely due to people not telling the council they had more children.

Despite this, the overall trend towards tightening of criteria is not in danger of being halted. The Local Government Association says a tougher financial climate for social housing will “increase the pressure on councils to further reconsider allocations policies in the coming years”.

The government is also toughening up its guidance. A recent White Paper says people should have been living in an area for four years, rather than the current two years, before accessing social housing.

As social landlords consider cutting back on social housing developments in favour of market rented homes to counteract the 1% rent cut, the supply of social housing is set to dwindle further. This could have a knock-on effect for allocations policies and eligibility could be further restricted. For those who fall between the cracks in the criteria, the future is uncertain.