More homeless now vulnerable, councils cannot just say, "go away, die"

[chem1st]

The average life expectancy of a homeless person in the UK is just 47.

 

The 'disease' that is homelessness is one that that can be very easily cured, for very little, in a very cost effective way. By building housing - it's very simple and side effects include, more jobs, a booming economy, better living standards for all, and so on.

 

The NHS would be better off spending money building decent affordable housing (which would generate the NHS a profit over the longer term and be self financing), than it would treating cancer - and I say this as two members of my family are passing away with cancer(they are going to die, there isn't much we can do, not even to prolong life, but we could use the money to save other people, and to give them long and healthy lives).

 

Anyhow, how are the homeless tret?

 

It depends. Are you vulnerable?

 

If a homeless person presents to their council they are asked a lot of questions and the questions determine if a person is 'vulnerable' and in need of help.

 

Single? GTFO and go and die on the streets.

 

Essentially, the homeless system has not been fit for purpose and people who are homeless and by definition 'vulnerable', have been denied help on a large scale. They have been left to fend for themselves and die in the streets.

 

A new ruling has been made today which makes it easier for people to be declared vulnerable. Many will still be denied help, but many who would have previously been denied help will now be able to get it.

 

 

http://blog.crisis.org.uk/how-vulnerable/

 

How vulnerable?

Today we’ve had some very good news. The Supreme Court ruled that councils will have to provide housing to people who are vulnerable and homeless . Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it? But up until now they’ve only had to do this if they decide someone is more vulnerable than the average homeless person.

If you’re homeless you are by definition vulnerable. Over a sustained period, homeless people without accommodation are far more likely to suffer physical or mental health problems than the general population. Both schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder are reported at a rate at least double that of the general population. Most starkly, the average age of death for a rough sleeper is 47. The test therefore has created an almost insurmountable hurdle for single homeless people to overcome in order to access the real support and protections they need.

Crisis has long campaigned against this injustice and this is why we, alongside Shelter, intervened in this case to provide specialist evidence, based on the experiences of the people we work with every day, to argue that this test of vulnerability simply isn’t fair.

What does the judgment mean exactly?

Councils must now consider how vulnerable someone is compared to the ordinary person facing homelessness, not someone who is actually already homeless. This is an important distinction that will help ensure more single homeless people are considered a priority for housing.

The Supreme Court is clear that while councils are often under huge financial strain, a lack of resources should not in any way affect their decision about whether or not someone is considered a priority for housing.

Local authorities will no longer be able to rely on statistics relating to the overall homeless population to help them to assess that someone is more vulnerable than the ordinary person facing homelessness.

The vast majority of people who are found to be homeless and owed a duty by the local authority to find them settled accommodation are families with dependent children. For single homeless people you have had to demonstrate that you are vulnerable as a result of: a mental or physical health problem; learning difficulties; time spent in care, the army or prison; or because you are fleeing violence. And importantly that this makes you more vulnerable than the average homeless person. Only then have you been able to access housing. Over the past decade the proportion of people who have been accepted as homeless because they are vulnerable has fallen dramatically. It’s not a coincidence that as housing and resources have become more scarce local authorities have been using this extremely narrow definition of vulnerability, which allows them to exercise their discretion, as a way of gatekeeping access to their services.

The experiences of the three single homeless people at the centre of the Supreme Court’s judgment demonstrated just how shockingly extreme the test of vulnerability had become. Mr Hotak, for example, has learning difficulties affecting his ability to cope with life on a day to day basis. When he and his brother were evicted, he was told that he was not considered vulnerable because if he was street homeless his brother could look after him.

This judgment is a huge step forward in ensuring that single homeless people get the help and support they need to get back on their feet. But we know that there is so much more to do. For many people, they will not qualify as vulnerable at all. For this group of people councils have to provide them with meaningful support and advice as a minimum. Our recent research, however, found that this just doesn’t happen. The majority of people were simply turned away to sleep rough.

[Mister M]

The ruling is good news for the single homeless person, and I salute you for bringing this important issue to the attention of others.

What also concerns me is that according to recent legislation, councils are now partly responsible for providing services for those with mental health difficulties. Based on their treatment of the homeless, I fear for those with enduring mental health difficulties.

I am aware that councils are currently facing really tough times regarding funding from central government, but even when times weren't as tough as they are now, there were still many vulnerable people falling through the net.

[Berberis]

The average life expectancy of a homeless person in the UK is just 47.

 

Is this because they are homeless or more to do with the reason why they are homeless, such as alcohol or substance abuse?

[onewheeldave]

Is this because they are homeless or more to do with the reason why they are homeless, such as alcohol or substance abuse?

 

How is that in any way relevant?

 

Some who are homeless became so as a result of alcohol issues.

 

Most who are homeless, if they didn't have an alcohol issue, will develop one as a direct result of being homeless, as alcohol is used to combat the relentless cold that accompanies sleeping rough.

 

Even if a person could somehow endure long term homelessness without acquiring an alcohol issue, they are clearly going to have a lower life-span, due to the cold, poor diet, lack of access to basic medical care and depression caused by the social exclusion, amongst many other factors.

Edited May 13, 2015 by onewheeldave

[psynuk]

"In making its decision, the respondent applied the definition of “vulnerability” set out by the Court of Appeal in R v Camden LBC, ex p Pereira [1998] 31 HLR 317. This test asks if the individual when street homeless would be less able to fend for him or herself than an ordinary homeless person so that injury or detriment will result which would not befall the ordinary homeless person." http://ukscblog.com/13605/

 

Nice, we have enough homeless to be able to categorise them, and how callous do you have to be to create a 'ordinary homeless' label as a benchmark of any kind.

surely homeless of any kind deserves shelter.

[-Boomer-]

What's not good new is the government is planning maximum council tenancies of 5 years

[Snapshot]

What's not good new is the government is planning maximum council tenancies of 5 years

 

Evidence please. Or I will assume you just made that up as part of your usual propaganda. (As will anybody else who is familiar with the Mecky/Boomer agenda)

[charmer]

What's not good new is the government is planning maximum council tenancies of 5 years

 

Why do you just lie on the internet? Does it make you feel good about yourself? Genuine question.

[Berberis]

How is that in any way relevant?

 

Its relevant as the inference is homelessness causes early death, but I remember reading about how its other factors that cause early death. In fact its usually other factors that cause people to become homeless in the first place and keep them there. Mental illness combined with substance abuse is the major cause of homelessness in the UK.

[harvey19]

What's not good new is the government is planning maximum council tenancies of 5 years

 

I wonder if this to make tenants look after the property and garden plus pay what is owed and act in a responsible way. otherwise the tenancy agreement would not be renewed.