Following an open bidding process, the Department of Health has announced the results for the second round of the Care and Support Specialised Housing Fund (CASSH). CASSH was first launched in 2012, it aims to support the development of specialised housing for older people, adults with physical disabilities, learning difficulties or mental health needs.

Accoridng to the gov.uk website:

“A total of 79 schemes are set to receive around £84.2 million to develop up to 2,000 affordable homes. These will be built over the next few years. View the full list (excluding London) of phase 2 successful bids.

Suitable housing is an important part of making sure that people can remain as independent as possible, for as long as possible, in a home suited to their needs.

There is more information on the CASSH Fund and a list of allocations on the Care and Support Specialised Housing Fund: guidance and allocations page, you can also read about the Mayor’s Care and Support Specialised Housing Fund and the London allocations.”

Local Enterprise Partnerships are not transparent enough given they are responsible for “significant amounts” of taxpayers’ money, the National Audit Office has concluded.

According to Inside Housing:

“Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs), business-led partnerships between the private sector and local authorities which have estimated they will create 224,300 homes, were set up in 2010 following the abolition of regional development agencies.

There are currently 39 LEPs across the country and the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has made a £12bn Local Growth Fund available to them to improve the economic prospects of particular areas, of which £7.3bn has been allocated through Growth Deals.

However, in a report published today the National Audit Office (NAO) concluded LEPs “are not as transparent to the public as we would expect given that they are now responsible for significant amounts of taxpayers’ money”.

The DCLG has not given LEPs “specific measures” of success, such as a housebuilding target, which makes it “challenging” to assess the value for money of Growth Deals “without a clear idea of what the department hopes to achieve through them”, the report said.

It is also “not clear” how the department decided the funding provided to the Local Growth Fund would be “sufficient” without a specific objective for what LEPs hoped to achieve.

The NAO was unable to find out details of senior staff pay for 87% of LEPs from publicly available accounts.

The report also said 42% of LEPs said they do not publish a register of interests for board members.

The government sees LEPs as essential to progressing its devolution agenda and has asked LEPs to be closely involved with devolution bids.

However, the NAO found LEPs are “often uncertain” how they fit into devolution plans, “particularly in areas where their economic geography does not align with that of the combined authority”.

The NAO found LEPs have “serious reservations about their capacity to deliver and the increasing complexity of the local landscape, and there is a risk that projects being pursued will not necessarily optimise value for money”. Only 5% of LEPs thought they had enough funding to meet government’s expectations.

A DCLG spokesperson said: “This report misses the point. The government is pushing forward an ambitious devolution agenda, with the most significant transfer of powers out of Whitehall to local places for a generation.” “

More than 3,250 council homes were sold under the Right to Buy in the last quarter of 2015, with just 396 replacements started.

According to Insde Housing:

“Figures published by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) revealed a 1% drop in sales compared to the same period last year, but a 5% increase in sales receipts.

It means a total of 38,479 council homes have been sold since discounts were raised in 2012, with 4,594 replacements started.

The government pledged that all additional homes sold as a result of the boosted discounts would be replaced when it revitalised the scheme in 2012.

Overall Right to Buy sales dropped by 1%, from 3,288 sold between October to December 2014/15 to 3,250 in the same period last year.”

Almost quarter of a million (233,697) homeowners have advertised for lodgers since the announcement of the increase to the Rent a Room Scheme tax threshold to £7,500 per year, says 24 dash housing:

“This is an increase of more than 5.2% on the same period a year earlier.

The data also reveals August was the busiest since records began in 2007, with 31,109 people placing ads for lodgers.”

The government is quizzing housing association executives about how it can take action to help them build more homes.

Civil servants from the Cabinet Office and the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) have over the last few weeks been holding confidential meetings with association figures about development.

It is part of a review to find out if associations have the capacity to deliver their existing housebuilding plans – and how government could help them build more.

According to Inside Housing:

Association development directors have been asked how many homes they will build by 2021 and whether they can still build their planned homes given recent policy announcements.

An email from the DCLG to development directors said: “We would also like to find out what further action government could take to help housing associations deliver.”

The findings of the joint review by the DCLG and the Cabinet Office will not be made public and is intended to be “internal advice for the prime minister”, the email said.

Here is the information from the housing budget from a number of housing perspectives an interests:

The full document: HMT_Budget_2016_Web_Accessible

CIH view: What you need to know about the Budget 2016 (1)

NHC view: Read Our Budget 2016 Briefing

AWICS View: budget 2016 – briefing paper

Housing associations and councils across London and the South East could have to repay millions of pounds to tenants in water charges following a landmark legal case.

The High Court case, which could affect as many as 70 local authorities and housing associations covering 375,000 properties, found that a London council had overcharged tenants for their water charges.

According to Inside Housing:

“The decision means Southwark Council will owe tenants millions in water charge repayments unless it wins an appeal. The ruling could also affect the council’s ability to evict tenants for arrears.

Giles Peaker, partner at Anthony Gold Solicitors, said: “If I was a council or housing association with an agreement with Thames Water to collect the water charges, I would now be looking at it very carefully.”

Southwark Council collects payment for water and sewerage services from 37,000 of its tenants on behalf of Thames Water. The court case hinged on whether the council was acting as an ‘agency’ for Thames Water or a ‘customer’ under the Water Resale Order 2006, in which case they were reselling water services and should have passed on savings to tenants.

Under the arrangement, Southwark Council pays Thames Water a quarterly lump sum, which is reduced by 5% to reflect voids and 18% for the council’s commission fee.

However, these reductions were not reflected in tenants’ water bills, with residents charged the full rate. The court found that Southwark Council should have passed this money on to tenants.

As a result, Southwark Council is likely to have to pay 37,000 tenants a total of £2.3m for each year between 2010 and 2013.

Thames Water told the court it has “similar arrangements” with 69 councils and housing associations, although it is not clear if these individual arrangements are likely to lead to a repayment to tenants as a result of the court ruling.

Southwark Council and Thames Water changed the arrangement, to make it clear in the contract it is not re-selling, from 23 July 2013, so Friday’s ruling only applies to water charges before that date. The court will decide on the council’s post-2013 arrangements at a later date.

The council will now decide whether to appeal. .” “

Council planning departments failing to submit Local Plans by March 2017 could be put in ‘special measures’, under proposals being considered by the government.

According to Inside Housing:

“Under the current ‘special measures’ regime for planning, councils that are considered too slow in deciding planning applications can be bypassed by developers, who can go straight to the Planning Inspectorate instead.

A report today by the Local Plans Expert Group, formed by communities secretary Greg Clark and housing and planning minister Brandon Lewis, recommended that these ‘special measures’ should also apply to councils missing the March 2017 deadline for Local Plans.

The report concluded the Local Plans process needs “substantial reform” and estimated “less than half” of the country’s housing need is being met by Local Plans.

The group said it approached its task “aware that there is a difficulty with plan production” but found “the extent of the difficulties… are even more severe than we anticipated”.

Plan-makers face “multiple difficulties” including a complex process and communities are “turned off by the length, slow pace and obscure nature of many Local Plans”.

The group heard an “almost unanimous consensus” that making Local Plans is hampered by “a lack of political will and commitment”, difficulty over agreeing housing needs and too many changes to policy and advice.

Policy changes may be “beneficial in their own right” but have had the “unintended consequences of destabilising plan-making, which needs a solid foundation”, the report found.

In the Budget published on Wednesday, the government said it would “look at the scope to reduce the weight of outdated plans in decision-making”.

If councils have not submitted a Local Plan by March 2017 then any existing housing plans should be considered out of date, the group said.

Similarly, any Local Plan by March 2018 that does not take into account the changes set out in the latest National Planning Policy Framework, which is currently going through consultation, should also be considered out of date. The group recommends the National Planning Policy Framework is only amended every five years, to provide stability in policy.

The government will consult on the recommendations until the end of April. Councils warned earlier this week that a suggested six to 12-month window to review Local Plans in the light of changed definitions of affordable housing is not achievable.”

Open workspaces are places where businesses and professionals share space, facilities or specialist equipment. Over the last 10 years, this new kind of workspace has grown in visibility and importance in London and worldwide. They include coworking office spaces, incubators for start-ups and entrepreneurs, artists’ studios, and so-called ‘makerspaces’, providing specialist equipment for makers and designers.

The larger report is here: start-me-up_March2016

They vary in purpose, business model, and how open they are to different groups. But together, they form a new and growing sector of workspace in London that mirrors shifts in how and where we work.

This interim report explores the value and role of open workspaces in London, the challenges facing these properties and their tenants and users, and the potential role of government in providing support. Our final report in the summer will suggest how the GLA and local authorities can fully assess the benefits of open workspaces, and the question of when and how to intervene.

Open workspaces can help small businesses to survive and thrive, by:

• absorbing some of the risk of starting businesses
• offering additional services to business owners
• improve users’ networks, productivity and wellbeing.

They also provide wider benefits, including by:

• forming part of the ecosystem that makes London a great place to start a business or invest
• helping to address disadvantage
• making London a more attractive place to live.

While open workspaces have proliferated across London, office space for small businesses is under extreme pressure. Reforms to permitted development rights are only intensifying this pressure. If setting up a business becomes too costly, entrepreneurs are likely to look to other cities. The current pressures risk driving out entrepreneurs, creative professionals and small business employers.

In many cases there is no need for national, regional or local government to intervene in the open workspace market, especially at the higher end. But many housing developers are unlikely to provide open workspaces without planning obligations or public-sector encouragement and promotion.

We believe that the case for government intervention may be particularly strong in two instances:

• If an open workspace provides substantial benefits to the public, such as economic growth or local regenerative effects, that are not reflected in the price that its users pay, making the open workspace unviable without public support.
• If an open workspace provides new opportunities for disadvantaged groups, such as the chance to start a business for someone who is unemployed.

Here is their report:

The CIH have produced this useful document on the complex areas of rent reduction.

More detail on exemptions as they are given are on my rent good practice pages.

Reduction_in_social_housing_rent_briefing_fv