A complaint has been made after councillors refused to hear a question from a tenant wanting to know how many others, like her, had been placed in housing that was unfit for human habitation.
Brighton and Hove City Council would not let Julie Ash, who is in temporary housing, ask her question when the council’s cabinet met at Hove Town Hall on Thursday (26 September).
Her question was published with the formal agenda papers on Wednesday 18 September and was prompted in part by an official report that criticised the council as a landlord.
She cited the conditions that she lives in to ask how many others were living in similar sub-standard conditions.
The council said that her question was about an individual matter and the cabinet meeting was not “the appropriate forum” to deal with it.
Ms Ash’s question was headed: “Improving housing services: Responding to the Regulator of Social Housing’s judgment.”
Her printed question said: “In relation to the recent report from the social housing regulator: My family of five adults – four with severe disabilities and health issues – has been housed in temporary accommodation since 2018 that is riddled with damp and mould from day one.
“This has severely impacted our health and the property is deemed unfit for human habitation.
“The council has known about this, yet no action has been taken. How many other families are living in such conditions?”
Ms Ash turned up to ask her question at the cabinet meeting but it had been removed from the online version of the agenda.
Housing campaigner Daniel Harris, who has been supporting Ms Ash, criticised the move when asking his own question at the meeting, saying: “That’s completely inappropriate. We’ve raised a formal complaint.”
He has asked for the question to be reinstated at the next cabinet meeting in public – scheduled for Thursday 17 October – and for a review of the way that the council handles public questions.
Mr Harris said: “The question addressed not just personal issues but highlighted systemic failures in the council’s housing services, particularly the ongoing poor conditions in temporary accommodation.
“By dismissing this question as an ‘individual matter’, the council is avoiding necessary public scrutiny of broader policy failures.
“Additionally, the recent intervention by the social housing regulator raises serious concerns about maladministration within the housing department.
“This intervention underscores a pattern of neglect and poor governance which Julie Ash’s case clearly illustrates.
“It is unacceptable that her voice—and by extension the voices of many others—has been dismissed without full consideration of the broader implications.”
Mr Harris also tweeted a video filmed by Ms Ash of the council’s acting monitoring officer Elizabeth Culbert saying that the question had not been not accepted despite appearing on the agenda.
More on the housing & council scandal that happened yesterday and picture evidence of the household living conditions the family live in. Liz misled councillors and should be investigated for his breach of the Nolan principles & solicitor regulation Authority STANDARDS OF CONDUCT pic.twitter.com/7ymP86EMDI
— Brighton & Hove Housing Advocate & Activist (@HousingDAN) September 27, 2024
In the formal complaint submitted to the council on behalf of Ms Ash, Mr Harris said that the social housing regulator had raised concerns about the housing department.
The Regulator of Social Housing report, published in August, said that there were “serious failings” in the way that the council operated as a landlord “significant improvements” were needed.
More than 600 homes required a water risk assessment which had not been completed and 500 were at least three months overdue for water safety repairs and improvements.
In addition, more than 1,700 medium and low-risk fire-related repairs and improvements were overdue by a minimum of two years.
There was a reported backlog of about 8,000 low-risk, low-priority repairs that were raised in 2023 – with some dating back to 2021.
The regulator said that, out of about 12,000 council homes, some 3,600 were without an electrical condition report.
The Labour leader of the council Bella Sankey said: “Public meetings are a key part of this council’s commitment to openness and transparency of decision-making and a fundamental tool in allowing residents to engage in the democratic process.
“In this case, one of the questions put forward by a member of the public concerned an individual matter and, as such, cabinet was not the appropriate forum for this to be discussed.
“The council did publish the question initially which was an error. I am very sorry for the confusion caused by this.
“This does not mean the resident’s question will go unanswered. The council will respond directly to them shortly.”
Over to you, Benjamin…..