The HA i work for is considering a Welfare Rights Adviser post. The post would look mainly at new tenants, maximising income, securing Housing Benefit from Tenancy start date, informing tenants of approximate HB and therefore amount of rent to pay, etc etc

A case has to be made confimring what the business benefits would be against cost. The service to customers is obvious, all positive from customers point, the cost to the association is of concern as the post would not bring in any direct revenue. The post would of course reduce rent arrears, although our performace in this area is already quite good, and maximise customers income and help sustain tenancies etc etc.

My question is, has any other associations been through this type of exercise of justifying the post finacially, and would anybody be willing to share their thoughts.

My contact details are:
paul.smith@bromford.co.uk
01902 393732

Many thanks

Thu 27-Oct-05 05:13 PM by shawn

Hello Paul,

just to point you in the direction of the policy resources area of rightsnet, which contains research reports demonstrating the impact of independent advice work on areas such as health, financial management, poverty, as well as the beneficial effects for specific groups of people from the young to the old.

Additionally, under the monitoring information section, there are details of how to measure the impact of services such as your HA are considering.

Paul,

My solution is a bit of a double-edged sword, but it might in some way give you an alternate avenue to explore...

The thread on changes to the HB O/P regs discussed on a thread on rightsnet, (link at bottom of page), discusses changes to the HB regs from April 2006. However, whilst that discussion focus on what is a substantial tightening of the law, the reg changes go further than discussed, but in the alternate direction, (what the government takes with the one hand...)...

The HB regs have now been changed to give landlords the right of appeal regarding all matters of overpayment recovery, (not just those of JR as set out in CH/5216/03 aka R(H) 3/04). Not too sure if the accompanying DWP explanation of the regs is on the rights net news pages, (I have re-produced the link at the bottom of the page), but the explanatory notes confirm that this right is to be given back to landlords. You will therefore be able to challenge the amount of the O/P as well as the recovery.

Now for the double edged sword part...Obviously challenging and reducing any O/P (whether by actual entitlement or U/E) is going to be good news for the tenant, and in the long run you, as they will have more cash, and it will be 'harder' for them to get into arrears.

However, in cases where the O/P remains unchanged (or the smaller percentage where it is increased), you stand a better chance of challenging the recovery from you. This makes sound financial sense for you and your organisation, as it reduces your debt, (possibly considerably if your LA's use schedule deductions at present). However, if you are successful in passing responsibility to re-pay back to the tenant, the O/P will have to be re-paid by the tenant, and that will leave them in greater debt (which is not really the role of a WRO!)... Though a WRO will again be then able to advocate and make sure that the LA sticks to the guidance on O/P recovery from tenants’ and not causing them hardship!!!

I would make an educated guess that from April 2006 in O/P recovery cases alone, a small RSL could do with an additional officer just to challenge the O/P recovery decisions from April, let alone conduct outreach WRO work, and advocacy....

You might also want to factor the progression to LHA's and direct payment into any argument, as someone will not only have to draw up a list of your 'vulnerables' to ensure you continue to receive their HB after LHA's go national, but also to keep on top of that for your new sign ups, so that they do not fall into arrears immediately after sign up until you can then have the HB switched to you!!

Anyway, here endith the sermon... Good Luck!!!

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2359&mesg_id=2359&page=

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/em2005/uksiem_20052904_en.pdf