A nightmare neighbour threw an axe at an elderly woman’s home and climbed into another neighbour’s child’s bedroom, a panel heard this week.
Resident Mitch Watkinson flagged the two shocking incidents to highlight how the council is still placing people with a history of serious anti-social behaviour in housing next to vulnerable people.
He said the alleged axeman had not been moved and was now “a bigger menace” to the community.
Mr Watkinson was speaking at Brighton and Hove City Council’s north area housing management panel yesterday (Tuesday 18 November), adding to a written question which stated North Moulsecoomb residents have suffered for years and yet nothing seems to happen.
Tenants representatives from the council’s north area housing panel – which includes residents, councillors and housing officers – want to see a task and finish group formed to review housing allocations.
Mr Watkinson said the council does have a duty to house people but questioned whether due diligence is carried out during the process.
He said: “The issue is certain people that are housed in the community. An idea moving forward is for a panel to be put in place.
“We know persons have got to be placed, but it’s a case of where we place them so they don’t pose a risk to tenants.”
The elderly resident he cited had also experienced anti-social behaviour from a previous neighbour.
Mr Watkinson said: “There is an 82-year-old lady frightened for her life.
“We were led to believe there is a process the council has to follow, we understood there was a court date, but it’s back in another direction now and he’s still there being a bigger menace than he was already.”
Panel co-chair, Donna James said: “We know there are people that have criminal records, are known to have anti-social behaviour, are known to the police, they’re put into an area where there are vulnerable tenants.
“They’re given a secure tenancy before they move. It’s common, it’s happened on Bates Estate, on Sylvan Hall, in Moulsecoomb.
“We had to go and remove an axe from an 82-year-old lady’s house, from her shed.”
Mr Watkinson took the axe from the shed and contacted the police, but the force did not want to collect the weapon.
Ms James added: “The question is at what point to other tenants become less or more important than the person that’s causing all the destruction.
“It causes significant distress to all the people involved.”
Council officers acknowledged the trauma of the on-going situation and the fact that allocations are “not always right”.
When people apply for a place on the housing register as a resident or through the homelessness team, people’s backgrounds are checked for anti-social behaviour, fraud and evictions from previous tenancies.
The residents were told that not everyone who applies receives a place on the housing register, especially if they are not ready to live in society without support services.
The council has confirmed it is in the process of setting up a group for residents to discuss housing for those with a history of anti-social behaviour and breaching tenancies.
“persons have got to be placed” is actually not correct, if the offending person continues to offend then the offender loses their entitlement, the council or whoever places them again and again are then part of the offending by not fullfilling their “duty of care” to the other vulnerable residents. Councils should be obliged to explain to the offenders that housing entitlement is gone if they keep offending, I’m pretty sure that if they feel that result of their idiocy makes them non eligible for housing then attitudes will change, pretty pointless of councils just dumping problems on other people and hoping that’s a solution.
Alternatively just rehouse them a few hundred metres off the end of the pier
It’s difficult. Morally, I would be absolutely fine with people in these cases, if there’s nothing else for consideration, to lose a tenancy, and allow more deserving people to have them. Unfortunately, the law doesn’t really support that, and punitive downgrading tends to increase disorder, according to research.
Supervised accommodation may be a touch better…but I’m looking at various options, and none of them are great. Feels like a perhaps a deep-dive with some live cases into how tenancies, particularly high-risk ones, are given oversight, might be useful in understanding what needs to be done for the council to do better.
Meanwhile In Kemp town, you have men hanging around with kids round the back of the council flats at night, has been reported, Brighton council are a joke.
That might be one for Social Services and the Police, highly unlikely the Council will intervene.