Introductory and starter tenancies

Introductory and starter tenancies are two similar types of tenancy offered by Local Authorities (LAs) and Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) to new tenants for a limited period. LAs can end the Introductory Tenancy within the first 12 months without having to prove grounds for possession. (See Introductory Tenancies: Guidance for Local Authorities Association of Metropolitan Police Authorities/ Association of London Government. Copies can be obtained free of charge from the Local Government Association).

Introductory Tenancies cannot be used by RSLs. However, some RSLs have developed an equivalent to the Introductory Tenancy by using assured Starter Tenancies. RSLs can let on an agreed shorthold tenancy for the first 12 months, with the courts granting possession during the term if the tenant breaches the Starter Tenancy Agreement. The use of Starter Tenancies is strictly regulated by the Housing Corporation who will only permit an RSL to use assured shorthold tenancies if, "steps are needed to prevent or reverse social conditions in an area threatening the housing rights of most residents or the value of the stock". See Performance Standards: Performance Standards and Regulatory Guidance for Registered Social Landlords, Housing Corporation (1998)

Research suggests that Starter and Introductory Tenancies can contribute to reducing anti-social behaviour as part of wider regeneration and anti-social behaviour strategies. The use of Introductory and Starter Tenancies varies greatly between regions. Only 30 per cent of LAs and 13 per cent of social landlords are currently using them. Starter Tenancies & Introductory Tenancies: An Evaluation, Housing Corporation, Source Research Report No. 36,1999)

(See also N. Smith & C. George (1997) ‘Introductory Tenancies: A Nuisance Too Far?’, Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law, Vol. 19:3, pp 307-320).

See also Performance Standards, Addendum 4 to the Social Housing Standards for General & Supported Housing: Anti-Social Behaviour, Housing Corporation (1999), outlining policies & procedures for dealing with anti-social behaviour; requirements for all tenancy agreements, including Starter Tenancies, to have a racial harassment clause, & RSLs to be included in Crime & Disorder Partnerships.

Evictions

The Housing Act gave social landlords more powers against anti-social tenants through strengthening the grounds for possession to include:

• behaviour likely to cause nuisance (which enabled professional witnesses to be used);
• anti-social behaviour in the locality of the tenant’s property;
• the anti-social behaviour of visitors to the property; and
• conviction for an arrestable offence in the vicinity of the property

In 1997-98, 59% of possession cases taken to court by Local Authorities (LAs) on grounds of anti-social behaviour resulted in outright Possession Orders and 28 % in Suspended Orders. Registered Social Landlords were granted an outright Possession Order in 52% of cases, with a further 31% resulting in a Suspended Order. These statistics come from a sample survey of Las and RSLs. The methodology involved sending questionnaires to 200 Las and 168 to RSLs. The combined response was 269 organisations.

(For further information on evictions see C. Hunter, J. Nixon, & S. Shayer, Neighbour Nuisance, Social Landlords & the Law, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, (2000), pages 60-66)

Witnesses & victim support

The Housing Act, 1996 made it easier for housing staff, or professional third party witnesses  to give evidence. These measures are thought by practitioners to have considerable potential in improving enforcement action.

Witness intimidation remains a major obstacle. Recent research has found that around six out of ten landlords said that on at least one occasion witnesses in neighbourhood nuisance cases had been subject to intimidation. Of these landlords, over half had had to withdraw cases because of lack of evidence. (See J. Nixon. C. Hunter, S. Shayer (1999) The Use of Legal Remedies by Social Landlords to Deal with Neighbour Nuisance, Sheffield Hallam University (1999))

Some courts may not always be responsive to the problems of witness intimidation; in four out of five cases where landlords sought a Witness Protection Order it was denied.

The Government is increasing the annual grant to Victim Support from £12.7 million in 1997-98 to £19 million in 2001-02. Part of this grant will enhance existing local community services but most will be used to enable Victim Support to replicate in Magistrates’ Courts the witness support service they have already established in all 86 Crown Court Centres. The grant is not applicable to the civil courts.

Extra equipment if being installed in the courts to enable vulnerable adult witnesses to give their evidence via television links and a whole range of guidance and training materials is being developed, and are currently subject to consultation.

See Action for Justice: Speaking up for Justice: Implementing the Speaking up for Justice Report on Vulnerable or Intimidated Witnesses in the Criminal Justice System in England & Wales (1999) http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/cpd/pvu/actjust.pdf

Further information regarding implementation will be issued shortly.

See also Achieving the Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance for Vulnerable & Intimidated Witnesses, including Children - Consultation Paper, Issued Oct 2000. http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/cpg/vuln.pdf

Injunctions

Injunctions can be an effective means of preventing anti-social behaviour on estates, either as a stand-alone measure, or in conjunction with possession proceedings.

The Housing Act 1996 enables local authorities to seek injunctions to prevent anti-social behaviour, both by and to their tenants, where violence has occurred or is threatened. The courts may attach a power of arrest to such injunctions. The Act also allows the court to attach a power of arrest, where there is violence or a threat of violence, to injunctions taken out by local authorities and other social landlords to prevent breaches of tenancy agreement.

A person reasonably suspected of breaching either injunction can be arrested without a warrant and taken to court. The remand provisions set out in the 1996 Act are, however, not currently in force, so the court must consider the case immediately, or the person must be released. DETR are working with the Lord Chancellor’s Department with a view to implementing the remand provisions during 2001.

Many LAs and RSLs have been reluctant to use injunctions. A recent study found that there were widely contradictory perceptions about using them, including that injunctions were very expensive when in fact information suggests that they are cheaper than beginning possession action. (C. Hunter, J. Nixon S. Shayer Neighbour Nuisance, Social Landlords & the Law, Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2000) pp.67-71).

(See also J. Nixon, C. Hunter & S. Shayer (1999) The Use of Legal Remedies by Social Landlords to Deal with Neighbour Nuisance. Sheffield Hallum University)

Exclusion Policies

The Housing Act, 1996 required LAs to set up local housing registers and offer permanent housing only to applicants on the register. Around half of all social landlords exclude people from their waiting list on the grounds of their previous involvement with neighbour nuisance incidents in the area. (See J. Nixon, C. Hunter & S. Shayer (1999) The Use of Legal Remedies by Social Landlords to Deal with Neighbour Nuisance. Sheffield Hallum University). See also C. Hunter, J. Nixon S. Shayer Neighbour Nuisance, Social Landlords & the Law, Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2000) Chapt. 13. Pages 101-105.

The Homes Bill, currently before Parliament, contains provisions to remove the scope to impose blanket restrictions preventing groups of people from applying for social housing. Legislation will facilitate choice-based lettings approaches, in particular, through:

• removal of the requirement for local housing authorities to maintain a housing register;
• a right for existing, and aspirate, tenants to apply for housing accommodation, subject to certain exceptions;
• allowing local authorities greater discretion to determine lettings policies appropriate to their localities while continuing to meet housing need

In a recent study, only 3% of exclusions monitored were justified as part of strategies to tackle anti-social behaviour. There are also worrying anecdotal accounts of ‘blanket’ exclusions being adopted, for example excluding all ex-offenders. Criteria and time limits on exclusions have also been found to vary greatly between areas. See Access Denied, the Exclusion of People in need from Social Housing, Shelter (1998)