Cycling UK Forum

cycle tramp wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 1:28pm

pete75 wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 11:08am[...] Many local authorities will do their best(worst?) to classify people presenting homeless as intentional. Saves them money.

..not if I'm staffing my council's reception desk!
Given my lack of funds at the moment, I've returned to work part time for the council's reception desk. Which includes dealing at first point of contact all those who present as homeless... [...]

cycle tramp wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 1:28pm

pete75 wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 11:08am

Jdsk wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 8:48am
We know how to approach homelessness, and we know that it's possible to reduce the numbers. And how to increase them: vote for a government like this one.


https://fullfact.org/economy/homelessness-england/

There have been some improvements, but as Crisis puts it:

"The Government target of ending rough sleeping by 2024 has been supported by substantially increased investment, including via the Rough Sleeping Initiative. Progress against this target has been radically accelerated by responses to the pandemic. But there is little confidence in the Government’s ability to achieve this objective without a clear definition of what ‘ending rough sleeping’ means in practice, an agreed approach to measurement, an updated strategy, a wider focus on rough sleeping prevention and move-on, and a willingness to address the clear tensions between the target and immigration policy."
https://www.crisis.org.uk/ending-homele ... land-2022/

This government still won't use the approach with the best evidence that it works: support the homeless into settled accommodation, not hotels or similar, and support them into work. Which is exactly what we should also be doing for refugees.

Jonathan

That graph shows the number of unintentionally homeless. A local authority has a duty to re-house them. Many homeless people are classed as intentionally homeless and there is no such duty towards them. Intentional homelessness is where it's considered to be the person's own fault eg eviction for anti social behaviour, damaging rented property, failing to pay rent, failing to pay mortgage, deliberately giving up a tenancy, police house closure order etc. Many local authorities will do their best(worst?) to classify people presenting homeless as intentional. Saves them money.

..not if I'm staffing my council's reception desk!
Given my lack of funds at the moment, I've returned to work part time for the council's reception desk. Which includes dealing at first point of contact all those who present as homeless...

..there is a higher percentage than most people think of those fleeing domestic violence, then we have a percentage, who have be let go from custody without any hand-over and actual don't want to return to their old life style, we also see those who have left military service without support...

As soon as one looks into the whole homeless provision situation, one sees that not only is there a complete lack of provision, but there is also a complete lack of engagement at organisational level.

The best advice I can give to anyone is 'don't become homeless - seek advice if you think you will be, seek advice from your council should you get a section 21 and keep your local council in the loop - don't worry about Pete 75's list of 'intentionally homeless' - all cases are dealt with on a case by case basis, and there is no one size fits all rule.

pete75 wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 2:11pm
And I speak from 30 years working experience in local government, much of it involving contact with the housing department. It's not generally the receptionist who makes these decisions nor has much say in the matter. Decisions are made by housing officers

roubaixtuesday wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 1:32pm

yakdiver wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 12:51pm

437 migrants on ten boats were brought to Dover yesterday by the Border Force and RNLI. There has been one crossing this morning.

There goes the first barge - FULL
Do you want any more ???

The question isn't what you want.

It's how best to deal with reality.

Looking in the mirror and shouting "There is another wrinkle. Do you want to get OLDER??" does not do anything to make you any younger.

Trying to instil as much hatred of these people as possible does nothing to manage the issue.

yakdiver wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 4:07pm
It's not about hatred, the numbers are unsustainable for our economy, the numbers last year and this year if you multiply by 7, (each migrant is allowed to 10 family member to come to the UK if they are excepted) 45,000 last year 4,428 this year = 345,996 that is a lot of social housing and it all has to be paid for.
A lot of them have only basic skills, a lot can't even speak English, they are not the doctors engineers, or even tradesman that we want, “YEAH but we can train them” at more expense to the economy, why don't we train our own first, why don't we house the homeless first ???.
We should only take the people that we need, just like the Aussies did in the 60s 70s ( I was one of them) and just like the West Australians are doing now.
My prediction for what it's worth, if these migrants are not stopped or even slowed down the welfare in this country will end along with the NHS, we just can not afford to take all the people around the world who are looking for a change of scenery.

yakdiver wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 4:07pmIt's not about hatred, the numbers are unsustainable for our economy, the numbers last year and this year if you multiply by 7, (each migrant is allowed to 10 family member to come to the UK if they are excepted) 45,000 last year 4,428 this year = 345,996 that is a lot of social housing and it all has to be paid for.

yakdiver wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 4:07pmMy prediction for what it's worth, if these migrants are not stopped or even slowed down the welfare in this country will end along with the NHS, we just can not afford to take all the people around the world who are looking for a change of scenery.

mjr wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 2:08pm

cycle tramp wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 1:28pm

pete75 wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 11:08am[...] Many local authorities will do their best(worst?) to classify people presenting homeless as intentional. Saves them money.

..not if I'm staffing my council's reception desk!
Given my lack of funds at the moment, I've returned to work part time for the council's reception desk. Which includes dealing at first point of contact all those who present as homeless... [...]

You're not the final decision-maker on their intentional/unintentional classification, surely?

roubaixtuesday wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 4:19pm

yakdiver wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 4:07pm
It's not about hatred, the numbers are unsustainable for our economy, the numbers last year and this year if you multiply by 7, (each migrant is allowed to 10 family member to come to the UK if they are excepted) 45,000 last year 4,428 this year = 345,996 that is a lot of social housing and it all has to be paid for.
A lot of them have only basic skills, a lot can't even speak English, they are not the doctors engineers, or even tradesman that we want, “YEAH but we can train them” at more expense to the economy, why don't we train our own first, why don't we house the homeless first ???.
We should only take the people that we need, just like the Aussies did in the 60s 70s ( I was one of them) and just like the West Australians are doing now.
My prediction for what it's worth, if these migrants are not stopped or even slowed down the welfare in this country will end along with the NHS, we just can not afford to take all the people around the world who are looking for a change of scenery.

It is exactly about hatred, and fearmongering.

As your post shows.

Facts: we take less immigrants than almost any other country in Europe. Europe shows no sign of collapsing, and most of developed Northern Europe has better public services than we do.

Yet you blame the migrants.

You've been played.

yakdiver wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 4:25pm

roubaixtuesday wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 4:19pm

yakdiver wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 4:07pm
It's not about hatred, the numbers are unsustainable for our economy, the numbers last year and this year if you multiply by 7, (each migrant is allowed to 10 family member to come to the UK if they are excepted) 45,000 last year 4,428 this year = 345,996 that is a lot of social housing and it all has to be paid for.
A lot of them have only basic skills, a lot can't even speak English, they are not the doctors engineers, or even tradesman that we want, “YEAH but we can train them” at more expense to the economy, why don't we train our own first, why don't we house the homeless first ???.
We should only take the people that we need, just like the Aussies did in the 60s 70s ( I was one of them) and just like the West Australians are doing now.
My prediction for what it's worth, if these migrants are not stopped or even slowed down the welfare in this country will end along with the NHS, we just can not afford to take all the people around the world who are looking for a change of scenery.

It is exactly about hatred, and fearmongering.

As your post shows.

Facts: we take less immigrants than almost any other country in Europe. Europe shows no sign of collapsing, and most of developed Northern Europe has better public services than we do.

Yet you blame the migrants.

You've been played.

LAND MASS come to mind

cycle tramp wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 3:54pm

pete75 wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 2:11pm
And I speak from 30 years working experience in local government, much of it involving contact with the housing department. It's not generally the receptionist who makes these decisions nor has much say in the matter. Decisions are made by housing officers

Generally speaking your right - receptionist shouldn't get involved.. however if a receptionist has access to the complaints records suddenly the receptionist might find previous complaints which have been have been upheld against the housing team and whether its applicable to the situation the current customer.....

If the receptionist is a member of a union which campaigns for social justice, suddenly they might have access to an independent legal team which can help word the customer's requirements more.... in a way that requires a reponse

If the receptionist keeps a note book of different cases, the problems and the obstacles, together with the names of housing officers which are more sympathetic then their counterparts then the receptionist can suggest to the customers certain names.

If the receptionist happens to be a member of shelter then they may also pick up legal advice which may not be widely advertised.

If the receptionist advises a customer to see their doctor and go and get all their health history together and present it at the same time they are homeless then that might be helpful too and to contact social services if their children are at risk.

But you're right receptionist have no say whatsoever as to who should be housed...
However as a receptionist, I can tell the customers to quote different parts of the housing and safeguarding acts if it is appropriate for me to do so, along with how the complaint system works.
I also have several complaints templates prepared should the customer want to save time and just sign and date the bottom

....you're right tho. Receptionists have no power what-so-ever

pete75 wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 4:39pm

cycle tramp wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 3:54pm

pete75 wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 2:11pm
And I speak from 30 years working experience in local government, much of it involving contact with the housing department. It's not generally the receptionist who makes these decisions nor has much say in the matter. Decisions are made by housing officers

Generally speaking your right - receptionist shouldn't get involved.. however if a receptionist has access to the complaints records suddenly the receptionist might find previous complaints which have been have been upheld against the housing team and whether its applicable to the situation the current customer.....

If the receptionist is a member of a union which campaigns for social justice, suddenly they might have access to an independent legal team which can help word the customer's requirements more.... in a way that requires a reponse

If the receptionist keeps a note book of different cases, the problems and the obstacles, together with the names of housing officers which are more sympathetic then their counterparts then the receptionist can suggest to the customers certain names.

If the receptionist happens to be a member of shelter then they may also pick up legal advice which may not be widely advertised.

If the receptionist advises a customer to see their doctor and go and get all their health history together and present it at the same time they are homeless then that might be helpful too and to contact social services if their children are at risk.

But you're right receptionist have no say whatsoever as to who should be housed...
However as a receptionist, I can tell the customers to quote different parts of the housing and safeguarding acts if it is appropriate for me to do so, along with how the complaint system works.
I also have several complaints templates prepared should the customer want to save time and just sign and date the bottom

....you're right tho. Receptionists have no power what-so-ever

If a receptionist had tried that at our place they'd have been up the road. Spending time on it would mean not spending time on the job they're paid to do, being a receptionist. We had a housing advice centre which would advice folk on their rights, represent them in court in cases against the council etc. Professionals at representing tenants and other folk needing housing help. God help them in court if they were relying on a bit of "legal advice" from a receptionist.
Nevertheless what I said holds true. If someone fails to pay their mortgage or rent when they have the means to do so, they are intentionally homeless. If they are evicted for anti-social behaviour they are intentionally homeless. If the police puta closure order on the property, generally for dealing and other drug related stuff, they are intentionally homeless. Obviously if someone is evicted for rent arrears due to financial problems they are not intentionally homeless.
If the housing officers where you worked regarded folk with health problems or children at risk as not to be housed then they were not making the correct decisions.

cycle tramp wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 5:24pm

pete75 wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 4:39pm

cycle tramp wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 3:54pm

Generally speaking your right - receptionist shouldn't get involved.. however if a receptionist has access to the complaints records suddenly the receptionist might find previous complaints which have been have been upheld against the housing team and whether its applicable to the situation the current customer.....

If the receptionist is a member of a union which campaigns for social justice, suddenly they might have access to an independent legal team which can help word the customer's requirements more.... in a way that requires a reponse

If the receptionist keeps a note book of different cases, the problems and the obstacles, together with the names of housing officers which are more sympathetic then their counterparts then the receptionist can suggest to the customers certain names.

If the receptionist happens to be a member of shelter then they may also pick up legal advice which may not be widely advertised.

If the receptionist advises a customer to see their doctor and go and get all their health history together and present it at the same time they are homeless then that might be helpful too and to contact social services if their children are at risk.

But you're right receptionist have no say whatsoever as to who should be housed...
However as a receptionist, I can tell the customers to quote different parts of the housing and safeguarding acts if it is appropriate for me to do so, along with how the complaint system works.
I also have several complaints templates prepared should the customer want to save time and just sign and date the bottom

....you're right tho. Receptionists have no power what-so-ever

If a receptionist had tried that at our place they'd have been up the road. Spending time on it would mean not spending time on the job they're paid to do, being a receptionist. We had a housing advice centre which would advice folk on their rights, represent them in court in cases against the council etc. Professionals at representing tenants and other folk needing housing help. God help them in court if they were relying on a bit of "legal advice" from a receptionist.
Nevertheless what I said holds true. If someone fails to pay their mortgage or rent when they have the means to do so, they are intentionally homeless. If they are evicted for anti-social behaviour they are intentionally homeless. If the police puta closure order on the property, generally for dealing and other drug related stuff, they are intentionally homeless. Obviously if someone is evicted for rent arrears due to financial problems they are not intentionally homeless.
If the housing officers where you worked regarded folk with health problems or children at risk as not to be housed then they were not making the correct decisions.

Just to clarify the legal advice would come from Shelter, and not myself... I've only did business law and advertising after school....

Ah, in your original statement you indicated that the council would try and class as many people as intentionally homeless as possible in order to save costs...

..I'm merely pointing out that as a receptionist I should assist the customer in helping them place their strongest case forward to the council, and thus help the council avoid making any costly errors, and it comes across as good customer services. Everyone gets to win.

Now it appears that you've taken some personal offence to this - have we met? Have I accidentally ended your career at some point? Have I served a grievance policy against you? Helped a customer make a well worded complaint, perhaps using the words 'cold' 'unfeeling and unsympathetic' 'more concerned with finances than actual people'?

pete75 wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 5:58pm

They do, and increasingly so as the government continues to cut local authority finance. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, merely pointing out that it's what happens. In many cases there's a fine line between the two.

As for your last paragraph, pure fantasy.

cycle tramp wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 6:31pm

pete75 wrote: 6 Apr 2023, 5:58pm

They do, and increasingly so as the government continues to cut local authority finance. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, merely pointing out that it's what happens. In many cases there's a fine line between the two.

As for your last paragraph, pure fantasy.

Oh, that's okay then.... : D

As for the former... I'll be the one pointing out that it's wrong then. For households to spend so much on their council tax and to be denied a roof when they are homeless and need the support in their time of need, on the grounds that they 'might' have made themselves homeless by choice and that the 'might' is influenced by the timing of the financial year , that's wrong. That is wrong. And you know it.

And so do I, which is why put as much effort in my new job as I can, and help assist all my customers get the service they deserve as promised by our customer services charter.

Tax without representation, is of course, tyranny.