Victims of geography

But an initiative meant to empower people has become a lottery with homeless people barred from the private rented sector in one borough and able to access it in another.

A local authority’s interpretation of the housing allowance guidance can stop people being housed. The guidance allows the local authority to pay the allowance direct to the landlord if the tenant is vulnerable – without clearly defining vulnerability.

The rules say direct payment can be made if the authority decides that the tenant will have difficulty managing their finances, if the tenant has outstanding arrears of eight weeks or more, or where the authority believes the tenant probably won’t pay the rent.

Other criteria also apply – for example, when a tenant has learning disabilities, is escaping domestic violence or is getting help from a homelessness charity, although the level or type of help is not specified.

One ex-homeless tenant who doesn’t even have a bank account was extremely worried to receive around £900 worth of rent cheques, despite having specified on his allowance application form that he didn’t have a bank account and wished the rent to be paid directly to the landlord. The fact that he couldn’t cash the cheques or pay them into his landlord’s account had apparently escaped the person making the decision.

Some local authorities were proactive and thorough in their preparation for the allowance. Landlord forums, staff training, email bulletins and free telephone advice ensured a smooth transition from housing benefit to local housing allowance – with voluntary sector organisations consulted and welcomed.

Elsewhere, however, local authorities have used a rigid interpretation of the rules, alienating landlords and restricting homeless people’s entry to the private sector. Landlords have expressed their frustration to us at an apparent local authority policy never to pay the allowance direct to landlords. Lettings agents have explained to us that their landlords had become unwilling to take the risk of housing the homeless. One agent turned down properties we could have used to house our clients, and returned the keys, because the local housing allowance was costing landlords too much.

When we write to local authorities, some accept our recommendation that the allowance be paid direct to landlords because the tenant is vulnerable. Others almost automatically reject our advice, resulting in more time being spent making appeals, and more time for the prospective tenant on the street and attending the benefits office.

Last year, we placed 225 homeless people in the private rented sector across London. This year we are likely to house even more. Two staff and a couple of volunteers work hard to achieve this.

On our own, we can’t get local authorities to change their understanding of the rules, yet we have made considerable effort on the phone and in writing to get local authorities to agree that they would pay allowance direct to landlords if we considered the clients to be vulnerable.

Why shouldn’t all 33 London boroughs agree to a similar procedure? Are we not all supposed to be working towards the same goal, that of independence for service users? How can personal responsibility be enhanced by a process which makes getting settled accommodation more difficult?

Guidance to local authorities needs to be made clearer to ensure they are able to make decisions that benefit all parties, so that the private rented sector can continue to be a viable route out of homelessness.

Wil Horwood is chief executive of HOPE worldwide.