Tackling rough sleeping this winter: new actions in Scotland welcomed by Govan Law Centre

Govan Law Centre (GLC) has welcomed new actions announced today by the First Minister to further tackle rough sleeping this winter.  The actions were recommended by the Scottish Government’s Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Action Group (HARSAG).

Today's announcement is backed by an initial £328,000 worth of investment from government and group members, including an additional caseworker/solicitor in Glasgow provided by Govan Law Centre.

Measures include increasing emergency accommodation and support in areas with the greatest numbers of rough sleepers, making personal budgets available to front line workers to meet immediate housing needs, and supporting greater use of the emergency Nightstop service.

HARSAG member, and GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "No-one should have to sleep rough this winter and these additional resources will make a real difference. All public and third sector agencies have a part to play this winter if we are to realise the ambition of making rough sleeping rare and unnecessary in Scotland. This is a key step towards delivering the First Minister’s commitment to eradicating rough sleeping in Scotland".

Further details of the new actions for this winter are available here, and include:

• Increased emergency accommodation in Edinburgh, and increased outreach capacity in Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Aberdeen
• Multi-agency partnership working boosted, adopting ‘by name lists’ and empowering front line workers through direct access to services and dedicated accommodation
• Making personal budgets and/or flexible emergency fund available for front line staff to employ where maximum flexibility is required to meet immediate housing needs
• At times of extreme weather, ensure flexible provision is available in Edinburgh and Glasgow for anyone who will not use winter night shelters, despite all efforts
• Maximise use of Nightstop – which provide young people with emergency accommodation for up to 2 weeks in the homes of approved volunteers – in Edinburgh and support implementation in Glasgow by January 2018

Tackling rough sleeping this winter: new actions in Scotland welcomed by Govan Law Centre

GLC's Principal Solicitor appointed to Scottish Government's Homelessness & Rough Sleeping Action Group

A panel of homelessness experts from across Scotland met for the first time yesterday (5 October 2017)  as work to address the challenges of rough sleeping, and how temporary accommodation can best be utilised, officially got underway.

Announced as part of the Programme for Government last month, the short-term Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Action Group came together with the immediate task of outlining urgent recommendations to minimise rough sleeping this winter.

The group, which draws on expertise from across the sector, will examine how the Scottish Government’s commitment to end rough sleeping can be achieved and how best a new £50 million fund can support this.  Membership of the Action Group includes:

• Jon Sparkes, chief executive, Crisis (chair)
• Russell Barr, former moderator, Church of Scotland
• Maggie Brunjes, Glasgow Homelessness Network
• Mike Dailly, Govan Law Centre
• David Duke, Street Soccer Scotland
• Suzanne Fitzpatrick, Heriot Watt University
• Josh Littlejohn, Social Bite
• Lorraine McGrath, Simon Community Scotland/Street Wise
• Susanne Miller, Glasgow City Council
• John Mills, Fife Council & ALACHO
• Shona Stephen, Queens Cross Housing Association
• Alison Watson, Shelter Scotland

Housing Minister Kevin Stewart said: "The Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Action Group will be recommending immediate steps we can take to minimise rough sleeping, both this winter and for good, as well as ways to transform temporary accommodation. The members bring a wide range of expertise, experience and enthusiasm and I know they will provide invaluable advice".

"The group will be engaging with all partners who deal with homelessness, including in local authorities and the third sector, so we can harness the wealth of knowledge available. We are committed to ending rough sleeping, preventing homelessness, and transforming outcomes for those who experience it. The action group and the new £50m fund are important steps in achieving this."

GLC's Principal Solicitor appointed to Scottish Government's Homelessness & Rough Sleeping Action Group

Why wait five years to reduce poverty in Scotland?

Jeane Freeman, Minister for Social Security

Govan Law Centre is concerned with the current debate on the Scottish Social Security Bill and we are calling on anti-poverty groups to back us to get this debate moving from “techno-speak”, to what is really important for Scots.

The transfer of social security powers to the Scottish Parliament should at very least prompt a national debate on poverty, low incomes, and re-distribution of income. And what we are going to do about it.  To date the debate has been about new government agencies, IT systems, inter-government wrangling, power transfers, and language. 

What poorer families need now, is cash in their pockets.

The working Group on Child Poverty urged ministers to use new social security powers at Holyrood to fund an increase in child benefit. The group said an increase of £5 per child per week would lift 30,000 children out of poverty in Scotland, at a cost of £256m a year.  

This is a start. So let’s do it.  Or at very least let us debate it in the Scottish Parliament. 

We need MSPs from all parties to back an amendment to the social security bill or a private members bill which proposes serious increases to benefits for vulnerable people in Scotland. 

Otherwise what is the point. Scots gain nothing from administering benefits in Stirling rather than Blackpool. It makes no difference to their lives where laws are made, decisions adjudicated or benefits paid. As long as decisions are accurate, quick and without fuss, and benefit rates are increased.

Why, for example, has the Scottish Government not produced a report and recommendations into the inadequacies of the social security system? How we can increase the incomes of vulnerable people in Scotland, as soon as we possibly can. We thought this is what it was all about. Is it because the Scottish Government don’t want to start this debate in Scotland? Is there no appetite to spend money on the poorest and tax the wealthy to pay for it?  This is our chance to start building the Scandinavian social model many say we need and want. 

Any new system needs be efficient to treat people with respect use the right language and make decisions quickly. And it will be complex to set up. It will need an IT system. But the Scottish Government have known this for a long time.

People in poverty cannot wait for years for a central administering agency to be set up in Scotland. We all know this will take years, and we will no doubt get a myriad of IT problems as we always do. But those on low incomes in Scotland need to know we are at least planning to make a step change increase in their incomes. Scottish ministers must get on top of this and lead the debate now. There is no excuse The Scottish Government has had years to prepare. They need to show people what can be done.

We need a substantive government report about how we can administer real increases in benefits in the meantime, while they set up a Scottish Social Security Agency. 

Local government can administer payments, they already administer housing benefit and council tax benefit - even though policy was set centrally by UK statutes. Surely they can do the same for any other benefit using Scottish statutes? They have everyone’s name and address.

Social work has powers under social work acts to make cash payments and arguably to set up benefits. They could be asked to make cash payments to disabled people who come within their care. We can use our imagination to make payments through self-directed care or other social work structures.

GLC’s worry is that rather than having an exciting debate about increasing incomes, redistribution, poverty reduction and inequality, we are having disappointing debate about where powers lie, new government agencies, IT systems and difficulty ministers are having.

If we need to we can phase in benefit increases but let us start on what those increases should be, and how we will pay for them in the interim and long term. When introducing child benefit in the 1970s the UK had similar problems, but they passed legislation and phased in child benefit over a few years.

That is what we need to do this in Scotland.

This is important. We need to set the tone of the debate now. Those who have the powers to improve the lives of the most vulnerable must be held accountable. The Scottish Parliament will have power over at least eleven social security benefits. Much more if they use their imagination and put their minds to it. We can choose a different social model. Our Scottish Government wants the whole social security system, we need to hold them to account and ask if this is the debate we can expect to have then why bother?

It’s not difficult. It’s about political will. Govan Law Centre proposes a campaign that everyone can join to get this into the Scottish Parliament. Here’s one example we’ve thought of that could be done quickly; there are many more which could immediately help the lives of people in Scotland.

A proposed Increase in Child Benefit (Scotland) Act 2016

 

1  Scottish Child Benefit

(1) There shall be a benefit to be known as Scottish child benefit.

(2) Subject to the provisions of this Part of this Act, a person who is treated as responsible for one or more children under the Child Benefit Act 2005 and is resident in Scotland, and whose child is resident in Scotland shall be paid an increase in child benefit called “Scottish child benefit”.

(3) Scottish child benefit shall be paid by Scottish ministers from moneys provided by Scottish Parliament.

2  Meaning of “child” and “person responsible for a child”

(1) For the purposes of this Act a person shall be treated as a child for any week in which he is treated as a child by the Child Benefit Act 2005.

(2) For the purposes of this Act a person shall be treated as responsible for a child for any week in which he is treated as a responsible by the Child Benefit Act 2005.

 

3  Rate of increase for Scottish child benefit

(1) Scottish child benefit shall be payable at such weekly rate as may be prescribed by Scottish Government ministers. 

(2) The weekly rate of child benefit will be no less than £5 per week per child.

(3) Rates may be prescribed in relation to different cases, whether by reference to the age of the child in respect of whom the benefit is payable or otherwise.

(4) The power to prescribe different rates under subsection (2) above shall be exercised so as to bring different rates into force on such day as the Scottish Ministers may by order specify.

(5) The power to introduce Scottish Child Benefit above shall be exercised on such day as the Scottish Ministers may specify by regulations.

Why wait five years to reduce poverty in Scotland?

On World Homeless Day we call on the Scottish Government to ensure homeless people know their statutory rights

It's one of the best kept secret in Scotland: housing options interviews are routinely used to deny homeless people their statutory rights.

 

Housing options interviews are provided when a person presents to a local authority's homelessness service. This is usually the initial interview the applicant receives instead of being offered a full statutory homelessness assessment.

 

This creates a false sense of security in terms of homelessness statistics in Scotland and provides statistics that don't represent the true extent of homelessness in Scotland. It gives a false impression that homelessness is decreasing as a result of housing options.    

 

The reality is that the true extent of homelessness is hidden by the use of housing options, and homeless people are being diverted from being properly assessed as homeless under the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987.

 

Councils in Scotland are telling homeless people to stay where they are; in unsatisfactory and inadequate housing, sleeping on a friends couch, and staying in situations that put them at risk of harm or exploitation. In other words, to go away while other options are considered.

 

The point is that a homeless person and their family have the right to be re-housed now! That statutory right should be implemented, and also recorded as homelessness statistics. 

 

The Scottish Government must act now. Govan Law Centre have been warning about these practices for years.

We need a new drive to enforce peoples rights and end homelessness in Scotland.  We are calling for the use of ‘Housing Options Interviews’ to be clearly set out in the statutory Scottish Code of Guidance on Homelessness. For all people to be given a statement of their statutory rights in the same way that you are with consumer protection rights or public health warnings:

"You have a right to a full homeless assessment. This housing options interview does not effect your statutory rights to a homeless assessment. Your housing options interview will help you look at all your housing options and what other support we might be able to offer you. However, you can make a homeless application and have the right to be treated as an homeless person, with a full assessment, and offered at the very least temporary accommodation while we assess your claim for entitlement to permanent accommodation"

On World Homeless Day we call on the Scottish Government to ensure homeless people know their statutory rights

Financial barriers by housing associations puts prevention of homelessness at risk in Scotland

Govan Law Centre (GLC) is concerned that some social landlords in Scotland have now introduced major financial barriers which are stopping homeless people from accessing their statutory rights to permanent accommodation.  See the Evening Times article on this issue here.

For example, it is now common place in Glasgow for a homeless person - legally entitled to an offer of a permanent tenancy from a housing association - to be told he or she will only be granted a lease by the association if they pay the first month's rent 'up-front'.  This is an insurmountable barrier for many homeless people, who are either in receipt of benefits or low wages - both of which are paid in arrears - and trying to cope with the mental and physical stress and anguish of homelessness.

GLC believes that this change in policy by some registered social landlords has and will undermine the Scottish Government and COSLA's progressive strategies to prevent homelessness in Scotland.  The policy change also demonstrates a failure by some housing associations to properly consider the needs of vulnerable people. 

GLC's Prevention of Homelessness Senior Manager, Alasdair Sharp, said: "While it is standard practice in the private rented sector for one month's rent to be required in advance; Scottish housing associations receive significant public subsidy, enjoy charitable status and numerous statutory powers".

"The reason for is, is because the Scottish Government and Parliament recognises the fundamental need for social housing in Scotland - and that fact it has a different role to play than the private sector. Social landlords enjoy a privileged position to ensure that the most vulnerable and less advantaged in our society are treated justly and fairly. GLC believes that demanding advance rent from homeless households is at odds with the ethos and role of social landlords. More worryingly, it undermines prevention of homelessness and financial inclusion strategies in Scotland".

GLC believes the Scottish Government should give consideration to using its delegated powers to issue statutory guidance (under section 5(7) of the Housing (Scotland) Act 2001) to clarify that it is not acceptable to require an advance payment of rent as a condition of a person being accommodated as a homeless person; as well as putting the issue beyond any doubt by inserting an appropriate ancillary clause in the forthcoming Housing (Scotland) Bill to amend the 2001 Act accordingly.

Financial barriers by housing associations puts prevention of homelessness at risk in Scotland

Govan Law Centre endorses Living Rent campaign and calls for real rights for Scotland's private rented sector tenants

Govan Law Centre's Board of Trustees have agreed to endorse and support the Living Rent campaign in Scotland.

The campaign seeks proper fair rent controls in Scotland's private rented sector (PRS), as well as security of tenure for tenants in that sector.

Govan Law Centre (GLC) is deeply concerned that the greatest rise in 'severe' and 'extreme poverty' in Scotland is amongst PRS tenants.  While the latest annual figures show that severe poverty in other housing tenures have fallen in Scotland, the number in poverty in the PRS rose by 140,000.

Housing costs now amount on average to 24 per cent of the income of private renters - compared with 20 per cent a decade ago - and in comparison to 18 per cent of social renters’ income and 11 per cent for owner-occupiers with a mortgage.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly, set out our calls for  progressive law reform and regulatory change in Scotland at the launch of the Glasgow Living Rent campaign at the CCA in Glasgow on Saturday 28 March 2015.  Mike's speech is available (as a PDF) here. 

Private sector tenants need meaningful legal rights. The current landlord registration schemes needs revamped and strengthened. We need to remove the bad landlords and letting agencies from the register. 

We need a national strategy and co-ordination of enforcement. Proactive enforcement with legal teeth. 

GLC believes we need a Scotland-wide PRS inspectorate with full regulatory powers to set a proper standard of good practice, with the power to prosecute landlords and letting agencies across the country. 

We need a robust statutory mechanism to set rents at a fair and reasonable level. A mechanism that is practical and works for tenants. And most importantly, we need genuine security of tenure for PRS tenants.

Govan Law Centre endorses Living Rent campaign and calls for real rights for Scotland's private rented sector tenants

Iain Nisbet appointed Convener to School Closure Review Panel in Scotland

The appointment of Govan Law Centre's Iain Nisbet as the first Convener of the School Closure Review Panel in Scotland has been confirmed.  Until now, school closure proposals that have been called in under the Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Act 2010 have been determined by the Scottish Ministers.  

Amendments made by the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 will change that process so that  school closure proposals that are called in by Scottish Ministers will be referred to the Convener of the School Closure Review Panels.  The Convener will be required to constitute a School Closure Review Panel to determine each individual case.

Mr Nisbet - is the Head of Education Law at Govan Law Centre, where he advises and provides training for parents, schools and education authorities on all aspects of education law.  He is the Chair of the advisory group on Additional Support for Learning, and a former Non-Executive Director with Education Scotland.  He was until recently, a member of the Parent Council of his local school.

This appointment will be for five years and will run from January 12, 2015 to January 11, 2020. This appointment is regulated by the Commissioner for Ethical Standards in Public Life in Scotland.

Iain Nisbet appointed Convener to School Closure Review Panel in Scotland

Back to the future? Scottish private sector tenancy reforms would leave tenants in a worse position than those in 1980

Govan Law Centre (GLC) has expressed dismay that the Scottish Government's proposed private sector tenancy reforms are considerably more regressive for tenants than the then Conservative Government’s introduction of the short assured tenancy in Scotland some 34 years ago.

The Government's proposals are set out in its document, 'Consultation on a new tenancy for the private sector'. The proposals appear progressive at first glance, with the suggestion of abolishing the 'no-fault ground' for eviction in short assured tenancies, however, when one reads further it becomes apparent the provision of greater security of tenure for tenants is wholly illusory as the Scottish Government set out eight new mandatory grounds of eviction that would enable landlords to choose to evict on the flimsiest of reasons.

In GLC's response to the consultation response we argue that the mandatory repossession grounds undermine the entire policy exercise:

In relation to rent arrears, the proposed ground 6 (three months’ arrears of rent) is in direct conflict with the will of the Scottish Parliament in legislating in the Homelessness etc., (Scotland) Act 2003 to provide a reasonableness defence for the current three months arrears of rent (ground 8, schedule 5, Housing (Scotland) Act 1988). Where is the evidence now that this defence should be repealed in relation to rent arrears which may be due to housing benefit errors or delays."

"The proposed new mandatory grounds 1 to 3 are couched in very weak language: the use of the word ‘want’ sets the bar very low. For example, it would not be necessary to provide evidence that a house was being marketed for sale, or that the mortgage lender had required a sale to repay the lending secured over the property.  Instead, all that would be required to evict a tenant in the private sector is that the landlord ‘wanted’ to move back in, or sell, or that their lender wanted to sell. In other words, there would be no need to establish an actual sale was taking place or that the landlord really did need to and was moving back into the property".

"Ground 4 is even more open to exploitation by landlords to the detriment of tenants: all that a landlord need say is that he or she intended to ‘refurbish’ to evict a tenant/family. What is ‘refurbish’? It might never materialise, or indeed it could be as little as painting a wall or installing a new sink. Why should this be a mandatory ground of eviction?"

"Ground 7 makes provision for a mandatory ground of repossession for ‘anti-social behaviour’. If the anti-social behaviour was a symptom of an illness or behaviour that had since been modified why should the tenant be subject to mandatory repossession? The requirement on the court to consider reasonableness is an essential requirement to ensure fairness and justice."

"Ground 8 enables a mandatory ground of eviction where the tenant has otherwise breached the tenancy agreement. Without the common sense protection of a defence of ‘reasonableness’ will tenants be evicted for the most minor contractual breaches?

Finally, we note PRS evictions will no longer be dealt with by the Sheriff Court and instead will be dealt with by the First Tier PRS Tribunal. This change in policy (for reasons of cost savings) does concern us because losing the roof over your head is such an important issue that it should be dealt with by an experienced and more senior judge.  We also question how can PRS Tribunals be seen to be genuinely impartial when their chairs are often part-time judges employed or engaged by landlords in private practice to undertake eviction actions?"

Back to the future? Scottish private sector tenancy reforms would leave tenants in a worse position than those in 1980

GLC statement on the effective abolition of the bedroom tax in Scotland

Govan Law Centre welcomes the recent intervention from the Scottish Government in relation to effectively abolishing the bedroom tax in Scotland. We attended a series of public meetings in 2012 where we called for a prevention of homelessness fund to be created by the Scottish Government and for tenants facing bedroom tax arrears to be prevented from eviction. These were not mutually exclusive and we felt that both measures would protect Scotland's most vulnerable.

Our calls were listened to by Johann Lamont MSP and Humza Yousaf MSP who both agreed to consider our proposals with their respective parties in November 2012. Shelter Scotland furthered the argument for a prevention of homelessness fund by requesting that £50m was found by the Scottish Government in order to plug the gap in peoples ability to pay their rent after their bedroom tax deductions, which Govan Law Centre fully endorsed.

In February 2013 we launched a petition at the Scottish Parliament in order to protect all tenants in social housing from being evicted for the bedroom tax. Our petition was supported by Oxfam, the STUC, Shelter Scotland, Money Advice Scotland and over 5,000 individuals. Many councils across Scotland agreed with our premise and stated they would not evict any tenants who were affected by the bedroom tax. Our petition ultimately took us to Holyrood where we argued for its implementation and was also brought forward by Scottish Labour's Jackie Baillie MSP as a Private Members bill, which also included the demand for a prevention of homelessness fund.

In April 2013 we launched the bedroom tax toolkit available free to download from our website. The  GLC tool is essentially a step by step guide which tells you how to go about appealing any decision made against you with regards to the bedroom tax, to your local authority. GLC's toolkit contains a number of untested legal arguments which tenants can select and insert into a pro forma ‘Dispute Form’. Some of these relate to court challenges taking place in England and Wales, and if these are successful tenants can only benefit from them for past deductions if they have lodged an appeal with their council because of the 'anti-test case rules'.

In March 2013 GLC attended another public meeting on the bedroom tax where much anger and disillusionment was brought to the floor. We were able to advise those in attendance about what could and could not be done from a legal perspective with regards to the bedroom tax. GLC were concerned that a mass campaign on non-payment would develop which in essence could make people lose their homes. Our advice was that if you could pay, then you should, however if you could not afford to and eviction proceedings were brought against you, that we would defend your home in the courts. 

We then felt that we should get out to communities and try to raise awareness of the bedroom tax and what could and could not be done in response to it. Taking our message to the communities of Scotland was vital as there was much confusion and misinformation about the bedroom tax which we felt had to be addressed. It was also essential that we let communities know that there was a way to fight back and defend their homes from the threat of eviction. We informed about our petition, our toolkit, the process of eviction and to answer any technical questions which came about in relation to the bedroom tax as well as dispel some of the myths which were around at the time.

We also attended a rally in Glasgow where 5,000 people marched against the bedroom tax. The march was organised by what went on to become the Scottish Anti Bedroom Tax Federation who continue to offer support to those affected. It was felt by our organisation that if we oppose the bedroom tax then we should also have a presence at the march and were invited to speak to those present.

As the bedroom tax came into existence in April 2013 we became inundated with calls from across the United Kingdom. We directed most callers to our toolkit and helped people to fill them out as best we could, even for those outwith our own catchment area. In many cases we were able to empower families to challenge the bedroom tax when it was in place for them erroneously. We spoke at many conferences across Scotland advising people to challenge their decision through using our toolkit. At this point we have successfully won the first Human Rights Act unlawful discrimination bedroom tax appeal, with many more awaiting tribunal dates.

We would like to thank the Scottish Government for taking this bold step in stopping the most regressive social policy in Scotland since the poll tax. In particular, we are grateful to Jackie Baillie MSP for working tirelessly and securing the right to introduce the Protection from Eviction (Bedroom Tax) (Scotland) Bill. Without the pressure of Jackie's Member's Bill we wouldn't be where we are today.

We would also like to thank those organisations and people who supported our campaign from the beginning whether it is facebook groups, homeless organisation or politicians. With the combined efforts of all campaigners we have convinced the Scottish Government to kick the bedroom tax out of Scotland. Govan Law Centre will continue to watch events with the bedroom tax and we will now move on to our next campaign and hope you will join us in that too.

GLC statement on the effective abolition of the bedroom tax in Scotland

75% of Scottish Government consultation responses against 'four year bankruptcies' in Scotland

In a news statement to Money Saving Expert (MSE) yesterday, the Scottish Government suggested its proposal to make Scots pay more over a longer period in bankruptcy had support from its public consultation on the draft Bankruptcy and Debt Advice (Scotland) Bill.

A Scottish Government spokesperson told MSE: "We consulted on this proposal and the majority of stakeholders who expressed a preference preferred a longer contribution period for bankruptcy of five years".

What the Scottish Government statement singularly failed to do was explain how the majority of consultation responses to this question - 75% of all responses - believed there was no need for change at all  (para 5.64, page 54 of the Accountant in Bankruptcy's analysis of consultation responses).

The Scottish Government had originally proposed a multiple range of 'products' within bankruptcy with different conditions and criteria which was ultimately viewed as an over-complication of the remedy.

Extrapolating support for 'four year bankruptcies' from Question 10.41a when 75% of respondents were either against the proposal or in favour of the status quo would suggest the Scottish Government is not prepared to listen to its own public consultation. There is an overwhelming majority of civic Scotland against making poor people pay more.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "The underlying rationale of this Bill is regressive and draconian. It changes bankruptcy from a well understood last resort of debt relief, into a vehicle to extract as much money as possible from all debtors in order to pay for the administration costs of the Accountant in Bankruptcy - an agency of the Scottish Government - and to swing the pendulm in the favour of creditors regardless of the impact on vulnerable debtors. In so doing, the Bill takes us back to 1913 Scotland".

75% of Scottish Government consultation responses against 'four year bankruptcies' in Scotland

Scots face postcode eviction lottery from Scottish Government approach; 150,000 Scots denied protection from bedroom tax evictions

Scotland's Housing Minister has written to the Scottish Parliament's Petitions Committee rejecting GLC's call for legislation to prevent bedroom tax evictions in Scotland, and instead has suggested the approach of Dundee City Council (DCC) is to be preferred.

The temporary one year approach of DCC involves not evicting council tenants for bedroom tax arrears 'where the Director of Housing is satisfied that affected tenants are doing all they can be reasonably expected to in order to avoid falling into arrears'.

GLC believes DCC's approach is a step in the right direction - albiet we prefer an independent and impartial court based solution  - but remain puzzled as to how the Scottish Government can on the one hand support DCC's approach to no evictions for bedroom tax arrears, yet fail to ensure that all tenants of social landlords enjoy the same approach in Scotland? 

Only a handful of Scotland's councils have agreed to the approach embraced by the Housing Minister, which means there are approximately 150,000 Scots who reside in tenancies in the social rented sector exposed to a postcode eviction lottery from the bedroom tax. Many of these Scots are particulary vulnerable through disabilities, physical or mental ill-health, or financial exclusion.

None of the half a million or so Scots who reside in housing association properties are being offered any protection against bedroom tax eviction from the Scottish Government DCC approach, nor are the vast majority of council tenants in Scotland offered any hope - despite the fact, the Scottish Government could easily legislate to provide the same protection for all Scots in the social rented sector, which the Housing Minister believes is right and proper for a handful of council tenants to currently enjoy.

GLC believes that the Scottish Government has a responsibility to ensure that all tenants of social landlords in Scotland enjoy the same equality of protection against eviction for bedroom tax arrears; and that at the very least, the Scottish Ministers should use their powers to ensure all such tenants have the same equality of protection which the Housing Minister's supports in her letter to the Petitions Committee.

Scots face postcode eviction lottery from Scottish Government approach; 150,000 Scots denied protection from bedroom tax evictions

Scottish Government provide flawed reasoning and no evidence to reject the principle of 'No evictions for bedroom tax arrears'

Addressing a packed roundtable meeting of Scottish community groups, trade unionists and representatives of civic Scotland bodies organised by the Scottish Trade Union Congress (STUC) tonight, Govan Law Centre set out why it believed the Scottish Government had based its decision to reject the 'No evictions for bedroom tax arrears' campaign on flawed reasoning and without any evidence.

The Scottish Government set out its position on why it would not amend section 16 of the 2001 Housing (Scotland) Act to prevent evictions caused by under-occupancy deductions to housing benefit during General Question Time in the Scottish Parliament today (the BBC Scotland video of GQT is below).

Govan Law Centre's analysis of the reasoning put forward by the Scottish Government today can be read here, and these points were discussed at the STUC this evening, where all participants very strongly rallied around the principle of 'No evictions for bedroom tax arrears' in Scotland.

GLC hopes that the Scottish Government will reconsider its position here, and take the opportunity to ingather empirical evidence, as well as taking evidence on the proposal from Scottish community representatives, trade unions, disability rights campaigners, advice agencies and civic Scotland.

Scottish Government provide flawed reasoning and no evidence to reject the principle of 'No evictions for bedroom tax arrears'

GLC calls for Scottish Government to deploy its powers to mitigate the scourge of payday lending in Scotland

GLC has prepared a Scottish Parliamentary briefing for all MSPs in advance of this afternoon's debate on payday lending in Scotland ('Cost of Living' debate). Our briefing is available here as a PDF.  We believe that the UK payday loan market is predatory, usury, dysfunctional and immoral. 

In our briefing we address the powers that the new Financial Conduct Authority will have, which we think will be central to tackling the undisputed serious consumer detriment caused by payday lending in the UK.  However, the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament have a number of powerful levers at their disposal which we believe are equally central to tackling the scourge of payday lending in Scotland. 

GLC has made the following recommendations to improve consumer protection against payday lending in Scotland: 

> Investment in Scottish credit unions to enable them to offer equivalent products to ‘payday loans’ on a fair and affordable rate of interest.  HM Treasury is currently consulting on raising the 2% per month interest cap on credit unions, and we support an increase to enable credit unions to offer a fairer alternative to payday loans in Scotland.[1]

> Improving our debt relief remedies so that Scots entrapped in a cycle of dysfunctional payday loan interest and charges can be untangled swiftly and fairly – Govan Law Centre has proposed a Fast Track or enhanced Debt Arrangement Scheme for this purpose.[2]  This could be done quickly by Scottish statutory instrument under existing legislative powers.

> Education is a key part of the solution, and we believe the Scottish Government should deploy resources to mount an educational campaign to help Scots avoid the pitfalls of payday loans. Such a campaign could be tied in to awareness raising of alternative forms of short-term credit (e.g. through credit union products) and the availability of enhanced forms of debt relief.

 > We would conclude by noting that if no action is taken on these issues in Scotland, then the consumer detriment caused by payday loans will escalate from April 2013 with the introduction of the bedroom tax.  Scottish tenants faced with eviction from the effect of UK Government under-occupancy charges to housing benefit will turn to payday loans, which will exacerbate their problems.  Govan Law Centre has advocated a ‘no eviction for bedroom tax arrears’ policy, with bedroom tax arrears being treated as an ordinary debt. This could be achieved by a minor amendment to the Housing (Scotland) Act 2001.[3]

---

[1] http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/consult_creditunion_cap.htm

[2] http://govanlc.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/new-fast-track-debt-arrangement-scheme.html

[3] http://govanlc.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/cross-party-agreement-to-consider-no.html

 

GLC calls for Scottish Government to deploy its powers to mitigate the scourge of payday lending in Scotland

Scotland lags behind the rest of the UK in protecting consumers against claims management companies

The Claims Management Regulation Unit shut down 209 claims management companies (CMCs) in England and Wales between April and November in 2012. Three more rogue firms were suspended and a further 140 were warned. 

The unit, which is part of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) for England and Wales, is also working with the UK's data watchdog to tackle firms who break the law with unsolicited calls and texts. The MoJ has now shut down over 900 CMCs over the last five years, meanwhile CMCs operating in Scotland remain wholly unregulated and free to rip-off Scottish consumers with impunity.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "Scotland is now seriously lagging behind the rest of the UK when it comes to protecting consumers from the rogue practices of claims management companies. CMCs have a licence to do as they please in Scotland, with no regulation, minimum standards or consumer friendly rights of redress. In short, CMCs can rip off Scottish customers without fear of any sanction. It is troubling indeed that the Justice Secretary in Scotland does not feel it important to give Scottish consumers the same quality of protection that exists in England and Wales".

CMCs frequently engage in high pressured cold-calling or texting, taking up-front fees from customers through credit and debit card payments over the phone. This year CMCs in England and Wales will be obliged to provide written contract in advance of taking fees, with the Legal Ombudsman being empowered to regulate complaints and award compensation where appropriate. 

Claims firm advertise widely on TV, newspapers and the internet and are not solely concerned with PPI (payment protection insurance claims), for example they encourage people to sue for personal injury compensation, and for other losses. Some firms also use improper cold-calling, by phone or text, to procure clients.

Scotland lags behind the rest of the UK in protecting consumers against claims management companies

Northern Rock drops appeal as Scottish Government promises law reform for lenders

Northern Rock (Asset Management) plc (NRAM) has asked the Court of Session to dismiss its appeal against the decision of Sheriff Deutsch in the NRAM plc v. Millar GLC test case. NRAM's appeal was dismissed on Friday, 7 September 2012 (the procedural hearing date of the case) with judicial expenses awarded in favour of the defender.

The reason given by NRAM for abandoning its appeal to the Inner House was because it had become aware the Scottish Government was now willing to bring forward law reform to amend its 2010 Pre-Action Requirements Order (PAR) so that 'default' would mean a simple missed mortgage payment. The ruling in Millar meant that key information - and a final last chance to remedy mortgage 'default' - had to be provided on or after the expiry of the calling up notice, generally served before court proceedings were raised.

It is understood* (see update below) the Scottish Government will amend the definition of 'default' in the PAR, so that there will be no need to provide key PAR information prior to proceedings being raised.

GLC's Principal Solicitor, Mike Dailly said: "We believe the Millar judgment was fantastic news for Scottish consumers because it meant they would always get an extra and final chance to avoid court proceedings after a calling-up notice.  Govan Law Centre is dismayed to hear that the Scottish Government will now scrap this final last chance for Scottish homeowners, and in so doing render the Pre-Action Requirements toothless, and in effect a duplication of the FSA's existing equivalent MCOB rule. The Scottish Government should be backing struggling homeowners and not legislating for lenders".

GLC notes that Sheriff Deutsch had eloquently explained the logic of PAR information being sent after the expiry of a calling up notice in his judgement in Millar (at paragraph 84, which is reproduced below).

The first public mention of the Scottish Government legislating for lenders was raised in an article in the industry magazine, the Mortgage Finance Gazette, where Mr Rob Aberdein of Aberdein Considine & Co., Solicitors (a Scottish firm who act for a number of lenders in repossession proceedings in Scotland) said in relation to the NRAM v Millar case:

"Should an appeal not be forthcoming or be unsuccessful then I did meet the Scottish Government at the start of the year on the matter of the impending Glasgow cases decision and have exchanged correspondence with Alex Neil MSP, the cabinet minister for infrastructure and capital investment, on the topic.  Both are supportive of corrective secondary legislation as they believe the decision is not consumer friendly and potentially damaging to their goal of avoiding repossession and resultant homelessness".

GLC is not aware of evidence whatsoever to support the assertion by Mr Aberdein, which he ascribes to the Scottish Government.  We note that lenders have already changed their practice since earlier this year to comply with the legal reasoning in Millar. Further, we note that any proposed law reform cannot be retrospective.

Note
NRAM plc v. Millar &; RBS plc v. McConnell judgment:
[84] Regardless of whether those responsible for managing the bill which gave rise to the 2010 Act operated under a misunderstanding as to whether non-payment constituted a default for the purposes of section 19 of the 1970 Act, now that the position has been clarified, it appears to me that the required information will actually be sent to debtors at a time when, given the recent expiry of the calling up notice, they might be more inclined to pay that information some serious regard. At that point the debtor should be in no doubt that the creditor may apply to the Sheriff court for warrant to repossess and to sell the property. That level of understanding on the part of the debtor might be less likely to exist if, in accordance with the pursuers' interpretation, the default which triggers the requirement to provide information, need be no more than one month of arrears. The possibility must exist that there will be debtors with a tendency to pass in and out of an arrears position on a regular basis. One corollary of that situation might be that such persons would receive a regular stream of correspondence providing the required information. Such a volume of similar correspondence might be expected to be ignored. It might also be expensive for creditors.

* Update from 24 September 2012: Scottish Government confirms it has not made any decision to amend the 2010 Order: link to letter confirming same.

Northern Rock drops appeal as Scottish Government promises law reform for lenders