A council that is often outspoken in its criticism of rogue private landlords has been slammed for literally thousands of health and safety failings on its social housing.
The Regulator of Social Housing has concluded that the London Borough of Camden has breached standards with over 9,000 fire safety actions overdue in social homes owned by the authority.
The regulator also found that over 9,000 homes do not have a smoke alarm installed and around 4,000 homes do not have a carbon monoxide detector fitted.
A statement from the regulator says: “The evidence demonstrates a failure by the Council to complete all fire safety actions in a timely manner and to mitigate the risks to tenants in the meantime.
“The regulator expects the Council to take urgent action to address these failings. The council is now engaging with the regulator as it works to return to compliance.”
And Kate Dodsworth, Chief of Regulatory Engagement at RSH, says: “Through our investigation, we found that Camden Council has failed to address thousands of fire safety actions in its tenants’ homes.
“This is unacceptable and has put tenants at potential risk of harm. The Council needs to act urgently to put things right, and we will scrutinise it closely as it does this.
“Our findings send a clear message to all social landlords that meeting health and safety requirements is of paramount importance. Tenants deserve to live in safe and decent homes, and we will take action when landlords breach our standards.”
Want to comment on this story? Our focus is on providing a platform for you to share your insights and views and we welcome contributions.
If any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.
Please help us by reporting comments you consider to be unduly offensive so we can review and take action if necessary. Thank you.
.jpg)
%20(002).png)
.png)
Join the conversation
Jump to latest comment and add your reply
Camden Council introduced an additional licensing scheme for private landlords in 2020 when they had not sorted out the fire safety issues in the properties that they owned! They were not fit to operate any scheme which involved fire safety concerns.
Riddled with double standards. Clearly they are not fit to run a Council.
This article should tell us something we don't know. Ealing council has now introduced selective licencing at £750 a pop. I'll bet very similar statistics in Ealing.
Ealing Council was recently criticised by the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman for leaving a young homeless family in a 10th floor flat with faulty windows for nearly 18 months.
The council acknowledged that the flat was unsuitable and had disrepair issues which included leaks, damp, mould, and exposed electrical cables.
How much will they choose to fine private landlords for probably much less serious repair issues?
And any Landlords in the PRS would face huge fines, threatening letters and banned from renting.
GOOD. Councils giving us loads of stick and crap. Shows they are no way their hands are clean. Wonder how many more councils are similar. Uk review on all of them. !!
Councils should be suffering huge fines too and the money raised split and shared amongst landlords with EPC D or less properties to help get the EPC up to C.
Problem is that Camden Council are predicting themselves that they will have a budget deficit of 40 million pounds by 2025/2026. However, due to inflation etc. that budget gap - according to Camden Council - could be significantly higher.
Fine the overpaid incompetent managers and staff, not the Council Tax Payers.
The sickening thing is it’s the public that pick up the tab for the fines. Directors should be personally responsible! Absolutely no accountability.
Nottingham City Council have just had their £1118 SL scheme approved whilst the are hiring extra lawyers to deal with all the disrepair claims from their own tenants!
SL is simply a way to fund housing depts after all the cuts from central Govt. Unfortunately it is the private tenants who have to foot thee bill!
That sums it up Tricia.
A case of do as I say and not as I do
No surprise whatsoever. Hull city council ordered me to replace new interior doors with solid wood doors. When I asked why my friend's council house had hollow interior doors, I received no reply; no recognition of my email.
Stunned to hear 9000 homes don’t have smoke alarms!
And in the main social tenants are smokers, very likely to be smoking in bed while drunk, disasters waiting to happen
Great points!
Andrew you are right about the association between being a social housing tenant and smoking.
Research indicated that adults living in social housing were twice as likely to be a smoker and the smoking prevalence in the social housing group showed a lower decline than in other housing types. Those trying to quit in social housing were less likely to remain abstinent (BMJ Smoking in social housing among adults in England, 2015–2020: a nationally representative survey)
Also, cigarettes were the most common cause of deadly fires in council housing in the seven years preceding the Grenfell Tower fire (Inside Housing).
Now we can't say No DSS, we can simply avoid the low life by saying No Smokers.
Smokers stink so they can't hoodwink us.
Social housing should charge Smokers extra as they increase risk of fire for neighbours and cost more to clean up after them.
Absolutely stunned!
Don’t forget removing fire doors
Ken. Ealing re-introduced Selective Licensing in July 2022 for 3 areas of the Borough for another 5 years as they had done for previous 5 year periods although some areas Selected were different, so that should have been it for another 5 years but no Mr Michael Gove moved in on that just months later in the same year and made it Borough wide, some interference and corruption by a Home Secretary.
it was found last year that many of Norwich's rented homes didn't have valid gas safe or electrical wiring certificates
Quite right Andrew. Norwich City Council was found to have breached its requirements to keep council homes safe
The Regulator of Social Housing said Norwich City Council had failed to meet health and safety requirements "in relation to fire, electrical, asbestos and water safety" (BBC News 2021)
Was any official fined or fired?
Everyone deserves a decent roof and the right to feel safe in there homes..
There's no excuse for this albeit private social or councils.
Only those that pay their way Sandra and ckearly doesn't apply to social housing providers
Like Andrew says. The problem is you have to pay for the roof over your head, it's not free.
For once Sandy B I have to agree with you.
Hand on face emoji...
I am lost for words.
what is Yuno?
You would think having been given social housing you would be able to afford £8 for a smoke alarm and £10 for a carbon monoxide alarm. I am not on the councils side ,but why does society have to wipe peoples backsides. These are adults who we treat like children.
Hypocrite Councilors? Who’d have thought! - People in glasshouses & all that.
SMH
Hi Guys, Lets sue the councils. That is where the money is nowadays. I started up, "have you had an accident, in the last three years" back in 1997. Now I am going to set up "council tenants, have you suffered from disrepair, damp, mould .... " Then no win no fee come to daddy.
Councils don't have money of their own. It all comes from the public.
It's incompetent managers and staff who should be fined and fired.
Robert. Under HHSRS councils make millions of pounds by suing the landlords. The fines do not end up in the government treasury. Local authorities supposed to ,I repeat supposed to keep and uses that money to go after more rogue landlords who provide sub standard properties for their tenants. By suing the councils, the local authorities have to cough up compensations and legal costs out of those funds. So, Mr. John Smith, the tax payer will not have to foot the compensation bills.
Sandra I don’t necessarily agree why does everyone deserve a roof over their heads and all the rest of it.
It depends what they have done to deserve it, if they done nothing they don’t deserve it.
I had to get my own and provide for my family its certainly not my duty to House others and been born is not enough to claim entitlement.
I like the system in Bhutan. Apparently if you are destitute you can go to the king and he will give you a small plot of land. You are then expected to build your own house and make your own income by farming, trading or similar.
Why is it these rogue councils are not fined and banned from managing property or at least imprisoned
Please login to comment