This report summarises the responses to the Scottish Government's consultation document The Housing (Scotland) Act 2006: Consultation on Draft Guidance and Regulations. The Act gives local authorities a new set of tools to assist and, where necessary, compel private owners to take action to improve the condition of their houses. It also opens the way to a new approach to helping owners adapt their houses to suit disabled occupants. The new powers and duties aim to improve the living conditions in the privately owned housing stock in Scotland. The consultation exercise was launched in April 2008, with a closing date for responses of 1 July 2008. The consultation invited responses to 66 questions which sought views on the guidance that the Scottish Government should give local authorities about how they implement the powers and carry out duties in the Act
Main Theme
- There was support for the proposed point of transition to the new powers (publication of the section 72 statement) but respondents were worried about the 'lead in' preparation time available and the match with timescales for producing Local Housing Strategies ( LHSs). Consultees did not feel that a six month transition period would be sufficient.
- Most of those responding to the consultation felt that the guidance strikes the right balance between national consistency and local flexibility.
- The guidance on Housing Renewal Areas ( HRAs) was generally found to be helpful and comprehensive. However, there were concerns about having the right resources and strategic framework in place to make best use of the powers.
- Respondents broadly felt that the guidance on Maintenance was appropriate. However, many local authorities raised concerns about the potential costs of delivering the new powers in relation to maintenance and stressed that the administrative costs of maintenance orders and plans should be passed on to owners.
- Most respondents felt the guidance on the Tolerable Standard struck the right balance between national consistency and local flexibility / professional judgement. The level of guidance was seen as appropriate, although some gaps and issues were identified.
- There was general support for the proposed blend of national and local information and advice provision under the Scheme of Assistance.
- There was strong support for the creation of a National Lending Unit ( NLU) and a clear view that it should be led by the Scottish Government, delivered centrally, and available to all local authorities.
- There was strong support behind the proposal to regulate for adaptations to attract mandatory grant. A majority supported the proposal to regulate for 80% minimum grant for grant-aided works related to a disability (increasing to 100% for people in receipt of specific benefits).
- Most respondents supported the idea of restricting mandatory grant in cases where additional living accommodation is being provided - but several disability organisations were strongly opposed.
- There was strong support for a national trusted trader framework but respondents disagreed on who should lead on the development and delivery of this.
Response
Responses were received from a total of 84 organisations and individuals. Twenty-nine of the 32 local authorities in Scotland responded. Not all respondents answered every question, with local authorities most likely to answer the questions.
Preparing and Delivering
Respondents broadly agreed that the publication of the section 72 statement was the best point of transition to the new powers. However, there were concerns about having a sufficient 'lead in' period and the match with timescales for preparation of Local Housing Strategies ( LHSs). Most of the respondents did not feel that the proposed six months transition period would be sufficient: most local authority respondents said that a 12 month transition period would be more appropriate.
Most respondents felt that the guidance strikes the right balance between national consistency and local flexibility. Among those expressing concerns, there were mixed views on whether there was too much prescription or too much local flexibility.
The majority of respondents agreed with the proposed approach to the Scottish Housing Quality Standard ( SHQS) since it is "aspirational" in the private sector and not a statutory requirement for owners. However, there was concern that the need for voluntary participation from owners would make the SHQS very difficult to achieve across tenures and in mixed tenure properties specifically.
There was strong support for the idea that non-local authority interests should be involved in training. There was also broad support for the idea of developing a qualification focusing on private sector housing issues. However, some felt that there was no need for a "separate" qualification and that private sector issues should be appropriately covered within existing programmes.
Housing Renewal Areas and Repair, Improvement and Demolition
Respondents broadly supported the guidance on Housing Renewal Areas ( HRAs) and found it helpful and comprehensive.
Whilst appreciating the freedom to interpret the legislation at a local level, there was a very strong sense that clear definitions should be specified at a national level to ensure consistency of interpretation. In particular, the use of terms like "serious state of disrepair" were seen to be confusing - respondents didn't understand how these fitted with clearly defined terms like "Below Tolerable Standard".
There was some confusion about how the various pieces of legislation relate to one another. Respondents called for clarity on issues such as demolition (and the way in which enforcement varied across different legislation). All respondents supported the idea of an annex which set out the various pieces of legislation and how they relate to one another.
Respondents stressed that appropriate resources and the right strategic framework would need to be in place for them to make best use of the new powers. Respondents felt that this would take time, and that the challenges needed to be recognised. Some respondents called for the guidance to recognise the need to work in partnership.
Maintenance
Respondents broadly felt that the guidance on maintenance was appropriate and would help them to implement the new powers. However, there were concerns about the lack of a definition of "reasonable standard" and the potential for inconsistent approaches across the country.
Many local authorities raised concerns about the potential costs of delivering the new powers in relation to maintenance. Several stressed that the administrative costs of maintenance orders and plans should be passed on to the owner.
Several respondents were concerned about the practical implementation of maintenance orders and plans including issues around timescales and the delivery of maintenance accounts.
The Tolerable Standard
Most respondents felt the guidance on the Tolerable Standard was helpful and struck the right balance by encouraging national consistency while retaining scope for flexibility / professional judgement. The level of guidance was seen as appropriate, although some gaps and issues were identified. For example, there were concerns about guidance on natural light and ventilation.
Whilst there was support for thermal insulation and electrical installations being included in the guidance, a significant number of respondents felt these sections needed further clarification. Roughly half of the respondents found the guidance on assessing rising and penetrating damp useful - the other half disagreed with the approach taken or the definition of terms.
Scheme of Assistance
Respondents were supportive of the proposed blend of national and local information provision on the Scheme of Assistance. Disabled organisations stressed the importance of information, advice and assistance being accessible across impairment groups - and designed in consultation with disabled people.
The focus of advice provision through a One Stop Shop ( OSS) was supported although there were some concerns about the funding of this model and the potential timescales required to establish such a service.
In terms of practical assistance, many respondents noted the level currently being provided, particularly through Care and Repair services - and sought further guidance on an expanded role for Care and Repair.
In addition to the lending products proposed in the guidance, respondents felt that further consideration should be given to: products available through credit unions (particularly for smaller amounts); Sharia compliant loans; and insurance based products.
Most respondents agreed that a minimum amount of an owner's wealth should be disregarded when assessing affordability of work. It was felt that the minimum amount to be disregarded should be in line with current benefits regulations.
The majority of respondents thought that it was unlikely that the commercial market would develop a Home Appreciation Loan ( HAL).
There was broad support for the creation of a National Lending Unit ( NLU). Many respondents felt that "top-slicing" was the best approach to funding the new NLU. However, several felt this should only happen if there was no other alternative and others preferred the idea of central funding - without the need to change Private Sector Housing Grant ( PSHG) budgets. There was strong support for the NLU to be led by the Scottish Government, establishing the NLU centrally and making its services available to all local authorities in Scotland (Option Five in the guidance).
A majority of respondents supported the creation of a publicly funded financial advice service. Most respondents said that the advice service should be delivered as part of the NLU to ensure a consistent approach across the country and provide the appropriate level of control.
A strong majority of respondents supported the proposal to regulate for adaptations to attract mandatory grant. Most respondents supported the idea of restricting mandatory grant in cases where additional living accommodation is being provided. However, several disability organisations were strongly opposed on the grounds that additional living space is often required due to disability and in order for a family to remain in their home.
A strong majority supported the proposal to regulate for 80% minimum grant for grant-aided works related to a disability (increasing to 100% for people in receipt of specific benefits).
There was strong opposition to the idea of a national tendering exercise for permanent adaptations mainly on grounds that it would be detrimental to local contractors who are perceived as often providing a better service, value for money and having detail local knowledge.
Respondents felt that up-front grant would be a necessary tool in facilitating repair and improvement work to support strategic decisions and deliver local priorities and: where owners have low income and there are high costs for essential repairs; to encourage owners in common blocks / tenements; and where a subsidised loan is insufficient encouragement for householders to improve their properties.
A small majority agreed that a nationally prescribed test of resources would no longer be necessary under the Scheme of Assistance. However, many respondents felt a national test was necessary to provide consistency and fairness.
Most consultees agreed that a national expense limit (and the requirement to seek Ministerial approval) was unnecessary. There was also strong support for local flexibility with several local authorities stating that they would probably keep a local expense limit.
Proposals for a National Trusted Trader Framework
Respondents disagreed on who should lead on the development and delivery of a trusted trader framework. Overall, there was support for a trusted trader framework with some degree of central coordination and a degree of local delivery. Local authority respondents were less supportive of a role for the CLE as it currently exists. Trade bodies were very supportive of a central role for CLE, and were concerned that too much focus on local schemes could lead to inconsistencies for customers and traders.
Most respondents supported (or were not opposed to) more than one level of accreditation. However, there were a significant number of respondents who felt this could be confusing for the public, and could lead to two tiers of quality.
Respondents thought a successful trusted trader framework should deliver:
- a "critical mass of businesses" to offer enough choice;
- an accessible information source;
- a sound complaints process and action where the framework is breached;
- positive outcomes for the businesses in the scheme;
- link to industry standards and not be burden to businesses; and
- a recognised brand, badge or mark and a strong commitment to marketing.
This document, along with "The Housing (Scotland) Act 2006: Consultation on draft guidance and regulations. An analysis of responses" the full research report of the project, and further information about social and policy research commissioned and published on behalf of the Scottish Government, can be viewed on the Internet at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch. If you have any further queries about social research, please contact us at socialresearch@scotland.gsi.gov.uk or on 0131-244 7560.