Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for September, 2009

hrm – Mr Brown

From Mr Brown’s speech today –

And I do think it’s time to address a problem that for too long has gone unspoken, the number of children having children. For it cannot be right, for a girl of sixteen, to get pregnant, be given the keys to a council flat and be left on her own.

From now on all 16 and 17 year old parents who get support from the taxpayer will be placed in a network of supervised homes.

These shared homes will offer not just a roof over their heads, but a new start in life where they learn responsibility and how to raise their children properly. That’s better for them, better for their babies and better for us all in the long run.

hrm…

Read Full Post »

Another head banging day for House dealing with a Social Services department who eventually reveal that only their senior manager can give them the ok to give  Bed and Breakfast accommodation to 16 / 17 year olds who might be Children In Need because their Budget has run out.

Few emails back and forth and House’s homeless client is accommodated.

Note to Social Services – One understands the difficulties you face but please stop advising that you can’t accommodate a Child in Need under section 20 of the Children Act 1989 because they are ‘difficult’… 

Note to important people – Please do more to support kids, sticking them unsupported into B&B isn’t great. Please don’t then wonder why said kids don’t behave in the B&B.

Read Full Post »

West Sussex County Council have just invited tenders for the proposed new CLAN. The specification is here.

House believes there will be one bidder which would all be rather farcical, in House’s humble opinion.

House thinks the following part of the specification is rather scarey indeed!

E.5 Working in partnership with us

The CLAs will be required to develop a partnership working approach with us, sharing ideas and suggestions for improving the CLAs and delivery of its services. To achieve this we expect to develop an open working relationship between all parties, where opinions can be voiced and ideas welcomed.

We also expect the Service Provider to be prepared to test new ways of working and to pilot different ideas to find solutions to problems and to improve client satisfaction and value for money.

Read Full Post »

Benefit in 192?

House recently IFR’d a housing case for a worker who works in a different organisation than House as a favor for said organisation. The case involved a homeless single man with no priority need (not enough for even a may). The adviser assisted the client in making a homeless approach and even rather kindly pointed out that the client was eligible, not in priority need, not intentionally homeless and so then asked the LA to exercise their discretion, after reaching a conclusion as to what duty was owed to the client, by accommodating the client as per section 192 (3) which states – The authority may secure that accommodation is available for occupation by the applicant

House initially wanted to laugh and suggest there was no sufficient benefit in assisting the client in making such a request. House still sort of thinks this but House wonders if he should as the adviser wasn’t really wrong as such and the LA could, but didn’t, do as he asked (unsurprisingly they appear to have convinced the LA not to even make an approach…)

Has anyone actually seen this power used?! Was there sufficient benefit in assisting the client in making a Homeless application in the hope that the LA exercise said power?!

House would welcome any comments.

Read Full Post »