Decision

1.    
that the acquisition of four residential properties in Torbay,
supported by £551,500 of Local Authority Housing Fund Round 3
(LAHF3) grant awarded by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and
Local Government (MHCLG) be approved;
 

2.    
that the specific acquisition of the first three identified units,
being three 3-bedroom houses as outlined in Exempt Appendix 1
(subject to the satisfactory conclusion of all necessary due
diligence).  Such properties to be used
as either Temporary Accommodation, or for families that would
otherwise be living in Temporary Accommodation that have a local
connection to Torbay and require this type of assistance, be
approved; 
 

3.    
that authority be delegated to the Director of Finance, in
consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Finance, to
identify a suitable 4-bedroom home, and to approve the purchase of
such a property (subject to the satisfactory conclusion of all
necessary due diligence) to support the Afghan Resettlement
Programme (ARP), as outlined in Exempt Appendix 1 (and as a
condition of the LAHF3 grant);
 

4.    that authority be
delegated to the Head of Strategic Housing and Delivery, in
consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing and Finance to
agree and finalise the terms to acquire all of the homes and
procure all necessary support services to facilitate the
acquisitions, including any necessary legal and financial
arrangements; and
 

5.    
that Council be recommended that:

 

The Capital Programme be uplifted by a maximum of £1,301,500
to acquire the four properties, part-funded by a grant of
£551,500 from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local
Government.  The remaining balance of
£750,000 to be funded by a combination of: prudential
borrowing; revenue savings from existing Temporary Accommodation
budgets; or any other relevant internal subsidy or receipts that
may be appropriate.  With delegated
authority to the Director of Finance, in consultation with the
Cabinet Member for Housing and Finance to agree the precise balance
of funding sources to be deployed.

Reasons for the decision

The acquisition of
additional homes would directly contribute to achieving the
Council’s goal of increasing emergency housing placements
within the Bay, reducing reliance on costly and less suitable
out-of-area or hotel accommodation.  It
would also help reduce the occurrence of families with children
being forced to live in unsuitable bed and breakfast style
accommodation, which was not suitable for long-term
occupation.  The first three homes
proposed for purchase were modern, well-insulated and efficient
– providing a stepping stone for vulnerable families on a
pathway towards settled housing.

Alternative options considered

In developing the
proposal, the Council had considered two principal options:

 
Option 1 - proceed
with the purchase of four homes, including the first three
identified in Exempt Appendix 1, prioritising new build homes where
possible. In the longer term, these homes would be retained as part
of the social housing stock and let through Devon Home Choice to
eligible local households.  It would
also meet LAHF3 grant conditions and secure £551,500 of
external investment that would otherwise be lost.  This option would also provide immediate and
long-term benefits, with permanent use as social rented homes once
temporary accommodation need
subsided. 
 
Option 2 - not to
proceed with the purchase.  This option
would involve returning the LAHF3 grant and continuing to manage
housing need through existing arrangements, including temporary
accommodation placements in hotels and bed and breakfast.
 Whilst this option would avoid capital
outlay and associated financial risk. 
It would not support additional households, and no revenue savings
would be derived.  As such, the Council
would continue to rely upon high-cost, often inappropriate nightly
lets, leading to worsening budget pressures.  It would also be reputationally damaging for the
authority and mean Torbay misses an opportunity to increase its
temporary accommodation provision and social housing stock, through
a significant subsidy allocation. 
 
On the balance of
considerations, the preferred option was Option 1.