evaluating the use of introductory and starter tenancies · landlords provide the housing...

Evaluating the Use of Introductoryand Starter Tenancies

Housing Research Report HRR 3/04 - August 2004

Welsh Assembly Government – Evaluating the Use of Introductory and Starter Tenancies

Further copies of this document can be obtained free of charge from:

Louise Millard

Strategy, Research & Innovation Branch

Housing Directorate

Welsh Assembly Government

Cathays Park

Cardiff CF10 3NQ

Tel: (029) 2082 3887

E-mail: [email protected]

Website: www.housing.wales.gov.uk

August 2004 ISBN 0 7504 3483 X © Crown Copyright 2004

Contents

Acknowledgements

1 Introduction 1

2 Context 5

3 Findings 15

Introduction 15Rationale for using introductory/starter tenancies 16Starting to use introductory/starter tenancies 20Impact and effectiveness 23Providing information 27Housing management during the introductory/starter tenancy 31What happens at the end of the tenancy 38Monitoring outcomes and impact 42Suggestions for improvement 44

4 Overall conclusions and recommendations 47

Appendix 1: Bibliography 54


AcknowledgementsWe would like to thank the many organisations and individuals that have contributed to theresearch, in particular, the case study organisations and other social landlords whocontributed their experiences:

• Cadwyn Housing Association• Cardiff City Council• Carmarthenshire County Council• Cymdeithas Tai Clwyd• Eastern Valley Housing Association• Gwalia Housing Group Ltd• Mid Wales Housing Association• Monmouthshire County Council• Newydd Housing Association• North Wales Housing Association• Pontypridd and District Housing Association• City and County of Swansea• Torfaen County Borough Council• Wrexham County Borough Council

Tamsin Stirling and Monica Keeble, Rowan Associates, project consultants.


Chapter 1: IntroductionBackground to the ResearchThe commissioning of this researchemerged from concerns about howintroductory/starter tenancies are beingused in some cases and by some landlords.Although introductory/starter tenancieswere originally introduced by the UKGovernment as a tool for tackling anti-social behaviour, the Welsh AssemblyGovernment (Assembly Government) andsome umbrella organisations wereconcerned that they were being used as arent arrears management tool by somelandlords. In addition, there were concernsabout inconsistency of use and questionsabout the level of tenants’ knowledgeabout their rights, in particular their right toa review of the decision not to make anintroductory/starter tenancy permanent.

A further issue was the increasing level ofpossessions and evictions carried out byWelsh social landlords. Court Service datashowed that social landlord possessions inWelsh courts rose from 3,400 in 1996 to5,400 in 2001, a rise of 60%. Thesefigures, in conjunction with evidencegathered by Shelter Cymru and themagazine Roof, led the AssemblyGovernment to start its own monitoring ofpossessions and evictions for the first timein 2001/02. This monitoring is now carriedout annually.

Aims and objectives of the researchThe main aim of the research was toexamine the extent to which, and how,introductory/starter tenancies are beingused by Welsh local authorities andhousing associations. The research alsoaimed to develop good practice guidancesuitable for issue by the AssemblyGovernment to Welsh social landlords.

Specifically the research set out to:

• assess the effects of introductory/starter tenancies on the way thatlandlords provide the housingmanagement service

• assess their effect on the behaviour oftenants and the wider community

• highlight good practice to advise onthe further development,implementation and management ofintroductory/starter tenancy schemes.

The research did not cover the use byhousing associations of assured shortholdtenancies as an alternative to excludingindividual applicants from rehousing.However, it did cover the use, by a smallnumber of housing associations, of assuredshorthold tenancies as ‘starter tenancies’targeted on certain geographical areas orfor certain client groups. However, thesecannot be defined as a starter tenancyregime as they are not used for all newtenants, nor is this use within the scope ofRegulatory Requirements.

MethodologyThe research was carried out between July2003 and February 2004 and involved anumber of stages. Initially, a review of thepublished evidence of the use ofintroductory/starter tenancies in the UnitedKingdom, and examples of positive andeffective practice was undertaken.Organisations that provide validatedsources of good practice were contactedincluding the Social Landlords Crime andNuisance Group, HouseMark and theHome Office Crime Reduction website.Relevant material from these sources isincluded in the findings section of thisreport.


1

At an early stage in the project, telephonecontact was made with all Welsh sociallandlords to ascertain which organisationswere using introductory/starter tenancies.Those doing so were asked to providecopies of relevant policies, informationleaflets and tenancy agreements whichwere analysed against an agreed proforma.

From this overview, four landlords (twohousing associations and two localauthorities) that were not usingintroductory/starter tenancies wereselected. An interview with a seniormember of staff from each was carried outto find out why they were not usingintroductory/starter tenancies, and theprocess that had led to this decision.

Four local authorities and four housingassociations using introductory/startertenancies were selected to be case studies.The eight organisations were selected torepresent different types of landlord, i.e.rural, urban and valley-based. In the caseof housing associations, the researchincluded one association that used assuredshorthold tenancies as starter tenancies in atargeted way (for specific geographicalareas). In each case study, the researchersaimed to undertake:

• an interview with a senior member ofstaff

• focus groups with front-line staff,tenants with introductory/startertenancies and secure/assured tenants

• telephone interviews with therelevant social services departmentand an independent advice agency,either Citizens Advice Bureau orShelter Cymru

• telephone interviews with ex-introductory/starter tenants.

The issues explored in the case studiesincluded:

• the perceptions of staff, tenants andother organisations of theeffectiveness of introductory/startertenancies

• how they are used in practice

• how they are monitored

• tenants’ understanding of theimplications and rights of this form oftenancy

• ways in which their use could beimproved.

A variety of information was collected fromeach case study, including monitoringinformation for 2002/03.

The case studies were carried out betweenNovember 2003 and January 2004. Acrossthe eight organisations, 65 tenants and 30front-line staff took part in focus groupsand a total of 16 senior staff wereinterviewed. One focus group with staffwas carried out in each of the eightorganisations. In six of the organisations,one focus group was held withintroductory/starter tenants and a secondone with permanent tenants. In oneorganisation, only one focus group washeld comprising both introductory/starterand permanent tenants. In anotherorganisation, a focus group was held withrepresentatives of the tenants’ federation.

Attempts to carry out interviews with therelevant social services departments in thecase study areas were not successful. The


2

eight departments consistently referred theresearchers to the housing departmentwithin the same local authority as the pointof information for dealing withintroductory/starter tenancies. Attemptswere made to contact Citizens AdviceBureau in four case study areas and ShelterCymru local advice services in the otherfour case study areas. In total, four adviceworkers were interviewed, one from aCitizens Advice Bureau, two Shelter Cymruadvisors and one welfare benefits adviceofficer.

In each case study organisation, an attemptwas made to identify, and then contact viathe landlord, tenants that had previouslyhad an introductory/starter tenancy whichhad not been made permanent, or wherethere had been major problems with thetenancy. A total of seven telephoneinterviews were carried out with this group.None of the individuals had been evicted.Of the seven:

• two had voluntarily left their tenancybecause of unresolved harassment

• two were still in their tenancy withadjourned court orders

• one had left because he/she feltunsafe in their home after it wasvandalised

• one had moved into supportedhousing

• one had been nominated by thecouncil to a housing association.

These individuals were identified with thehelp of one of the case study landlords andan independent advice agency.

Two mini case studies were carried out withhousing associations that were usingassured shorthold tenancies as startertenancies in a targeted way. A telephoneinterview with a senior member of staffexplored why they were used in this wayand how effective they were.

Discussions were held with eight nationalorganisations:

• Chartered Institute of Housing Cymru

• Citizens Advice Cymru

• Mediation Wales

• Shelter Cymru

• Tenant Participation Advisory ServiceCymru

• Welsh Federation of HousingAssociations

• Welsh Local Government Association

• Welsh Tenants Federation.

These interviews focused on views aboutthe purposes of introductory/startertenancies and their effectiveness. They alsoexplored any evidence of the effective use,or misuse, of introductory/starter tenanciesas well as suggestions for how their usecould be improved.

The research was carried out by TamsinStirling and Monica Keeble of RowanAssociates.

Report structureThe next chapter of this report sets out thelegal and regulatory context forintroductory/starter tenancies, findingsfrom previous research and past and


3

current use of introductory/startertenancies in Wales. The findings of theresearch are outlined in Chapter 3, andoverall conclusions and recommendationsare set out in Chapter 4. A good practicenote for social landlords is publishedseparately.

Note on terminologyThe term introductory tenancy is used toindicate an introductory tenancy regimeoperated by a local authority.

The term starter tenancy is used to denotethe use by housing associations of assuredshorthold tenancies as introductory tenancy regimes.

Where assured shorthold tenancies areused as starter tenancies in a targeted way rather than for all new tenants, thesetenancies are referred to as assuredshortholds.

In addition, throughout the report:

• the term housing association is usedrather than registered social landlord

• the term social landlord is used as acollective term for local authoritiesand housing associations.


4

Chapter 2: ContextLegal and regulatory contextThe legal and regulatory context thatsurrounds introductory/starter tenancies isundergoing significant change. The currentlegal framework for local authorities isprovided by Section 124 of the HousingAct 1996 under which authorities havediscretionary powers to establishintroductory tenancies. If an authoritydecides to establish an introductorytenancy scheme, all new tenants aregranted introductory tenancies. This doesnot apply to existing secure tenants andany tenancy where one of the tenants wasa secure tenant.

The current regulatory context for housingassociations is provided by RegulatoryRequirements and Tai Cymru Circular7/98 Assured Shorthold Tenancies forUse as Introductory Tenancies. Thiscircular notes that the board of a housingassociation may decide to use assuredshorthold tenancies as starter tenancies.The circular emphasises that startertenancies will apply to all new tenants,with the same exceptions as for localauthorities. Both local authorities andhousing associations are expected toconsult with tenants before establishing anintroductory/starter tenancy scheme.

The regulatory framework for housingassociations in Wales is under review. Adraft Regulatory Code was consulted on inearly 2003. This sets out a fundamentalobligation for tenants’ occupancy of theirhomes to be as secure as possible. Allcirculars issued by the former Tai Cymru arealso under review.

Two pieces of legislation will bring changesto the current legal framework. TheHousing Bill makes provisions for

introductory tenancies to be extended forsix months. To do this, a local authority willneed to serve a notice of extension on thetenant at least eight weeks before theoriginal expiry date of the introductorytenancy. This notice will need to givereasons for the extension and inform thetenant of their right to request a review ofthe decision. In addition, any review of thedecision to extend the introductory tenancyrequested by the tenant needs to haveupheld the original decision to extend thetenancy. At the time of writing, thetimescale for implementation of thisprovision of the Housing Bill is unknown,but is likely to be late 2004 or early 2005.The Assembly Government will keep sociallandlords informed of implementationrequirements. The provisions of the Bill arelikely to be extended to housingassociations through regulatory guidance.

The Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 gives anew power for social landlords to apply foran order for the demotion of a tenancy,where a tenant or resident of, or visitor to,the dwelling is guilty of anti-socialbehaviour. On demotion, housingassociation tenants will become assuredshorthold tenants. Demoted secure tenantsof local authorities will be in a similarposition to introductory tenants. Thecommencement date for most of thepowers in the Act in Wales is likely to besummer 2004. To obtain possession of aproperty let under a demoted tenancy, thelandlord will need to serve a notice ofproceedings and obtain an order from thecourt. The court must make an order forpossession unless it considers that therequirements in relation to the notice ofproceedings have not been met and/or therequired procedure on review has not beenfollowed by the landlord. Since the orderwill be mandatory and there is no provisionfor postponement, delay or suspension, the


5

court will only have discretion to delaypossession for up to 42 days under Section89(1) of the Housing Act 1980.

In addition to these legal changes, the LawCommission’s review of tenure law sets outproposals for changes to the whole oftenure law. These would create two typesof tenancy for all social landlords:

• a Type I longer-term tenancy intendedto replace current assured and securetenancies, the securest form oftenure. It is intended that all sociallandlords will be required, subject todefined exceptions, to use the Type Iagreement. It is envisaged that theAssembly Government will be givenspecific powers to vary thisrequirement in Wales, if feltappropriate. Type I tenancies wouldlimit the ability of landlords to recoverpossession by use of discretionarygrounds only. The court would onlyaward possession if it was reasonableto do so

• a Type II short-term tenancy intendedto replace current introductory/startertenancies and the assured shortholdin the private rented sector. Bydefinition, Type II agreements will beless secure than Type I. Sociallandlords will have the ability to evictfor mandatory grounds where thecourt has no discretion to suspendpossession, as well as for the groundsfor Type I tenancies. There will also bea power to extend any introductory/starter period by an additional sixmonths.

As yet, there is no clear timescale for theimplementation of the proposals set out bythe Law Commission.

These legal changes will mean differencesto the detail of how introductory/startertenancies are used and what they arecalled. However, the principle will remainthat many new tenants of local authoritiesand housing associations will haveintroductory-type tenancies. Therefore thefindings of, and recommendations from,this research will continue to haverelevance after these changes have beenimplemented.

Introductory/starter tenancies wereintroduced with the clear intention ofassisting landlords to deal with increasingproblems of alleged anti-social behaviour.They were introduced at the same time asother provisions designed specifically forthis purpose such as the extension ofgrounds for possession for nuisance againstsecure tenants. The legal and regulatoryframework permits local authorities andhousing associations to bring introductory/starter tenancies to an end for both anti-social behaviour and rent arrears.

There are a number of legal differencesbetween the rights of introductory tenantsand those of secure tenants. The main onesare that introductory tenants do not havethe right to assign their tenancy, cannotexercise the right to buy during theintroductory/starter period and do nothave the right to take in lodgers, sub-let,improve their property or exchange.Similarly, there are differences betweenassured shorthold tenancies used byhousing associations as starter tenanciesand assured tenancies, including no right totake in lodgers, sub-let or exchange.

Where proceedings are taken againstintroductory/starter tenants using thecorrect procedures, possession by the courtis mandatory. However, housingassociations have the option of using


6

grounds 10 and 11 of the Housing Act1998 for starter tenants who have rentarrears. By doing so, they can obtain asuspended possession order rather thanusing the shorthold provisions which leadto outright possession.

Findings from previous researchThere has been little research examiningthe effectiveness of introductory/startertenancies. A small amount of researchexists that suggests that they cancontribute to reducing anti-social behaviouras part of wider regeneration and anti-social behaviour strategies. However, it isclear from the literature that considerablequestions over their effectiveness remain,particularly when used in areas of lowdemand.

These concerns are well exemplified by thediscussion forum on the HouseMarkwebsite (an online good practicesubscription service). Over the past fewmonths, a number of officers have postedquestions asking for information aboutother organisations’ experiences of usingintroductory/starter tenancies to informdecisions about whether to use them intheir own organisations.

Those that advocate the use ofintroductory/starter tenancies to tackleanti-social behaviour do so as one of arange of tools. Some practitionersacknowledge that a proportion of thebenefit of introductory/starter tenanciesmay simply come from tighter control andmanagement of tenancies during their firstyear. A posting on the HouseMarkdiscussion forum from the City ofWestminster demonstrates this point:

‘The use of introductory tenancies shouldbe seen as an additional tool in the localauthority’s strategy for tackling anti-social

behaviour. The requirement to visitperiodically throughout the year is a usefulmeasure to nip potential problems in thebud before they reach a serious level. Also,this gives an opportunity to involve supportagencies where tenants are finding itdifficult to manage. It is a similar situationfor dealing with rent arrears. However, thescheme depends on those operating itdoing so efficiently and ensuring that thenecessary actions are followed.’

The most comprehensive research to datewas commissioned by the HousingCorporation in the mid 1990s andpublished in 1998 as Starter Tenanciesand Introductory Tenancies: AnEvaluation. In 1995, the HousingCorporation gave permission to twohousing associations working in NorthManchester to use assured shortholdtenancies as starter tenancies in tworelatively small geographical areas. At theend of the pilot scheme, a number ofquestions were asked:

• did starter tenancies contribute to areduction in anti-social behaviour?

• did starter tenancies contribute tocreating greater stability?

• did starter tenancies increase tenants’awareness of their responsibilities?

• did starter tenancies displaceproblems to other areas?

• what were tenants’ views of startertenancies?

The research found that levels of anti-socialbehaviour reduced in both areas, and thenature of incidents became less serious.Although the situation improved to someextent, one of the areas witnessed less of a


7

reduction in anti-social behaviour than theother. Throughout the pilot period, nostarter tenancies were terminated andneither landlord had decided not to converta starter tenancy to an assured tenancy.Where tenants had received warnings,these were usually sufficient to preventincidents from recurring. However, sometenants with complaints against them hadchosen to move out before any actioncould be taken against them.

Housing professionals working in the pilotareas generally believed that one of theareas had stabilised to a greater extent.Demand for social housing had increased,there had been a reduction in turnover, andabandoned tenancies had also reduced. Inthe other area, some officers believed thatdemand had improved, while othersthought that it was still a problem.Turnover appeared to have reduced in theparts of the area that had undergoneregeneration. Tenancies were still beingabandoned, but with less damage toproperty than in the past. In addition,active residents’ groups had beenestablished.

Officers within the pilot areas felt thatstarter tenancies had successfully sent amessage to new and existing tenants thatanti-social behaviour would not betolerated and that the landlord would takeit seriously. They also reported that tenantshad generally become more aware of theirresponsibilities.

Many officers working in and around thetwo pilot areas believed that some of theproblems witnessed prior to regenerationand the starter tenancy pilot had beendisplaced to neighbouring areas. However,as it was difficult to disentangle the effectsof starter tenancies from the other policyinitiatives taken to tackle anti-social

behaviour in the two areas, it was not feltpossible to fully answer this question.

The majority of tenants in the pilot areas,both new and existing, supported the useof starter tenancies. Just under 40% oftenants felt that starter tenancies had madea contribution to reducing levels of anti-social behaviour in their area. In general,new tenants were not particularlyconcerned about the impact of startertenancies on their security of tenure. It islikely that in areas such as those of thepilot, security of tenure may not be asignificant concern for tenants. This isbecause the area was one of low demandand a surplus of rented accommodationmade it relatively easy to find alternativeaccommodation.

Neighbour Nuisance, Social Landlordsand the Law, published by the CharteredInstitute of Housing in 2000, includes abrief chapter on introductory and startertenancies. The publication notes that, atthat time, 30% of local authorities wereusing introductory tenancies and 13% ofregistered social landlords were usingstarter tenancies. Responses to the surveycarried out to develop the publicationshowed that:

• there were mixed views as to theeffectiveness of introductory/startertenancies

• introductory/starter tenancies couldresult in larger caseloads for housingofficers, with extra visiting and workassociated with a review

• there were concerns about howofficers were being trained for therole


8

• there was some confusion about theeviction process and standards ofproof required

• officers were very aware of the powerthat they were exerting overindividuals’ lives

• the majority of evictions (68%) werefor rent arrears and only 19% forneighbour nuisance. The study didnot differentiate between the extentto which local authorities and housingassociations used introductory/startertenancies for rent arrears

• there was some scepticism about theireffectiveness in relation to neighbournuisance. Landlords operating in areasof low demand had particularconcerns.

There is existing good practice guidance onthe use of introductory tenancies for localauthorities, published by the LocalGovernment Association in 2001. Goodpractice guidance on the use of startertenancies for housing associations waspublished by the Housing Corporation inNovember 1999. Since then, there havebeen significant changes in the policy andlegal context, with a much greater focus onstrategies to prevent and tackle anti-socialbehaviour as well as new duties andrequirements on social landlords. TheAssembly Government will be publishingguidance to support the requirement in theAnti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 to have ananti-social behaviour policy. In addition, theAssembly Government distributed TheLiving in Harmony Toolkit in April 2004to all social landlords in Wales. Thispublication is intended as a resource forlandlords to help them meet therequirements of the Act and forthcomingguidance.

Past and current use ofintroductory/starter tenancies in WalesEvidence set out in the Chartered Instituteof Housing Cymru report The Law: AnAdequate Response to Anti-SocialBehaviour?, showed that 23 of the 35landlords who responded to a survey statedthat they were committed to usingtermination of an introductory/startertenancy in principle and eight landlords haddone this up until the end of 2000.

The telephone survey of all social landlords,carried out as part of this research,indicated that the majority of both Welshlocal authorities (14 local authorities, 67%)and housing associations (18 associations,62%) were using introductory/startertenancies as at August 2003. This figureincludes three housing associations thatwere using assured shorthold tenancies asstarter tenancies targeted on specificestates or areas and/or with specific clientgroups.

The charts below show the extent of use ofintroductory/starter tenancies by Welshsocial landlords as at August 2003. The‘decision to use’ category means that, as atAugust 2003, the organisation had taken aformal decision to start using introductory/starter tenancies, but had yet to implementthis decision.

Chart 1: Use of introductory tenanciesby Welsh local authorities, August 2003

[Source: telephone survey]


9

don’t use

decision to use

14

4

3

use

Chart 2: Use of starter tenancies byWelsh housing associations, August 2003

[Source: telephone survey]

As noted earlier, the Assembly Governmenthas been monitoring possessions andevictions by Welsh social landlords since2001/02. In that year, there were 68 caseswhere anti-social behaviour was the maincause of possession action, irrespective ofthe type of tenancy. This compared tomandatory outright possession ordersagainst 383 introductory tenants by localauthorities and against 155 starter tenantsby housing associations.

In 2002/03, the 14 local authorities usingintroductory tenancies let homes to 9,611new tenants, out of a total of 14,348lettings made by Welsh local authorities tonew tenants that year. In the same year,there were 71 cases where anti-socialbehaviour was the main cause ofpossession action, irrespective of the typeof tenancy. There were 361 mandatoryorders against introductory tenants by localauthorities and 120 mandatory orders byhousing associations against starter tenants.

The conclusion is that the majority ofpossessions against introductory/startertenants during 2001/02 and 2002/03 werefor rent arrears. This conclusion issupported by evidence from Shelter Cymrucasework and has been presented inbriefings such as Introductory Tenancies:A Denial of Rights.

The monitoring for both years found thatintroductory/starter tenants were muchmore likely to leave their home prior toeviction than non-introductory/startertenants, as indicated in Tables 1 and 2below.


10

use targeted

don't use

decision to use

use

15

3

9

2

Table 1: Proportion of local authority introductory and non-introductory tenantsleaving their home prior to eviction, 2001/02 and 2002/03

[Source: Welsh Assembly Government statistical bulletins SB 104/2002 and SB 96/2003]

Year Local Authorities

Eviction warrantsagainst

introductorytenants

Introductorytenants leaving

their home prior to eviction

Non-introductorytenants leaving


2001/02 250 71% 35%

2002/03 260 93% 32%

Monitoring information from AssemblyGovernment RSL5 and WHO16 returns forthe eight case study landlords for 2002/03is provided in Tables 3 and 4 below. Theyshow the varying scale and levels ofpossession against introductory/startertenants amongst the eight landlords. Thisvariation in part reflects the differentnumbers of properties owned andmanaged by the landlords. However, thereis no direct correlation between the size ofstock and the number of possession ordersand eviction warrants made againstintroductory/starter tenants.

The monitoring information from the eightlandlords indicates that, of all thepossession orders against introductory/starter tenants included in the tables:

• only one of the suspended possessionorders and three of the outrightpossession orders by the four housingassociations were primarily for anti-social behaviour

• only four of the outright possessionorders by the four local authoritieswere primarily for anti-socialbehaviour.

In this respect, the case study landlordsreflect the Wales-wide trend, noted above,that the majority of possessions againstintroductory/starter tenants were for rentarrears rather than anti-social behaviour.

Tables 3 and 4 compare possession actionsagainst introductory/starter tenants withthose against non-introductory/non-startertenants within the eight case studylandlords. These tables show that, for allfour local authorities, the number ofeviction warrants suspended was muchlower for introductory tenants than fornon-introductory tenants. The tables alsoshow that during 2002/03, possessionaction against a significant number ofstarter tenants was suspended, while nopossession action against introductorytenants was suspended.


11

Table 2: Proportion of housing association starter and non-starter tenants leaving theirhome prior to eviction, 2001/02 and 2002/03

[Source: Welsh Assembly Government statistical bulletins SB 104/2002 and SB 96/2003]

Year Housing Associations

Eviction warrantsagainst starter

tenants

Starter tenantsleaving their home

prior to eviction

Non-startertenants leaving


2001/02 34 70% 44%

2002/03 49 67% 43%


12

Table 3: Number of starter (S) and non-starter (NS) tenancies resulting in possessionorders and eviction warrants, four case study housing associations, 2002/03

[Source: 2002/03 RSL5 returns for case study housing associations]

Table 4: Number of introductory (IT) and non-introductory (NI) tenancies resulting inpossession orders and eviction warrants, four case study local authorities, 2002/03

[Source: 2002/03 WHO16 returns for case study local authorities]

Eviction warrants granted

Warrants not executed

Landlord Suspendedpossession

orders

Outrightpossession

orders

Evictionwarrants

suspended

Evictionwarrantsresulting

in eviction

Tenant leftpropertybefore

eviction

Tenant didnot leavepropertybefore

eviction

S NS S NS S NS S NS S NS S NS

HA1 3 26 1 3 0 7 0 12 0 1 0 0

HA2 0 13 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 1 0 0

HA3 29 105 17 55 12 41 12 34 1 6 0 0

HA4 1 29 0 9 0 6 0 6 0 0 0 0

Eviction warrants granted

Warrants not executed

Landlord Suspendedpossession

orders

Outrightpossession

orders

Evictionwarrants

suspended

Evictionwarrantsresulting

in eviction

Tenant leftpropertybefore

eviction

Tenant didnot leavepropertybefore

eviction

IT NI IT NI IT NI IT NI IT NI IT NI

LA1 0 153 15 88 0 40 11 56 1 1 6 60

LA2 0 64 30 52 1 30 9 25 0 0 0 15

LA3 0 125 62 66 0 76 48 54 5 3 7 91

LA4 0 137 97 79 0 229 52 33 16 60 0 0

These statistics do not include all thoseintroductory/starter tenancies that are notsuccessful. It does not, for example, includethose that do not get to the stage of legalaction, but where tenants abandon thetenancy. One of the case study localauthorities monitors the outcome of allintroductory tenancies. During 2003, itfound that 16% of introductory tenanciesthat were not made permanent werebecause the tenant had abandoned thetenancy.

This chapter has looked at previousresearch and available data about the pastand current use of introductory/startertenancies by Welsh social landlords. In thenext chapter, we set out the detailedfindings of the research.

Key points: context • The legal and regulatory framework

for introductory/starter tenancies isundergoing significant change

• There has been little previousresearch examining the effectivenessof introductory/starter tenancies

• Research that has been undertakenfound mixed views on theeffectiveness of introductory/startertenancies

• Given the extent of change in thepolicy and legal context forpreventing and tackling anti-socialbehaviour, existing good practiceguidance on the use ofintroductory/starter tenancies isbecoming dated

• In August 2003, 14 Welsh localauthorities and 18 housingassociations were using introductory/starter tenancies and another 5 sociallandlords had taken a decision to usethem

• The majority of possession ordersagainst introductory/starter tenantsby all Welsh social landlords, and theeight case study landlords, wereprimarily for rent arrears

• Introductory/starter tenants are muchmore likely to leave their home priorto eviction than non-introductory/non-starter tenants.


13


14

IntroductionThis chapter of the report draws on all theelements of the research, including casestudies, mini case studies and telephoneinterviews. Good practice examples areincluded from the literature review and thecase studies. Those included from theliterature review are from validated sourcesof good practice.

The findings are structured around thefollowing themes:

• rationale for using introductory/starter tenancies

• starting to use introductory/startertenancies

• impact and effectiveness

• providing information

• housing management during theintroductory/starter tenancy

• what happens at the end of thetenancy

• monitoring outcomes and impact.

For each of these themes, a number ofsub-themes have been identified. Relevantfindings from the different stakeholdergroups that took part in the research areset out under each sub-theme. Thestakeholder groups are shown in Table 5below with numbers of individuals/organisations involved.


15

Chapter 3: Findings

Table 5: Summary of stakeholder groups

Stakeholder group Number and type of individuals/organisations

Tenants 65 introductory and secure/assured tenants7 ex-tenants

Case study landlords 8 organisations – 4 local authorities and 4 housingassociations

Other landlords 6 organisations – 2 housing associations usingstarter tenancies in a targeted way and 2 housingassociations and 2 local authorities not usingintroductory/starter tenancies

Non-landlord organisations 8 national organisations4 advice agencies in the case study areas

The views of tenants expressed in thissection are the views of the 65 tenantswho took part in the focus groups andseven ex-tenants who were interviewed byphone. The tenant focus groups included arange of participants representing differenthousehold types, ages, gender and ethnicorigins.

At the end of this section of the report,suggestions from the various stakeholdersfor improving the use of introductory/starter tenancies are summarised.

Rationale for using introductory/startertenancies Whether introductory/starter tenancies

should be used

TenantsAll tenants in all but two of the focusgroups felt strongly that introductory/starter tenancies were a good idea for bothlandlords and existing tenants, and thatthey should be offered to all new tenants.

‘Nice to feel if I did complain someonewould do something about it…. there’snothing worse than living next to someonewho’s a pain.’

Case study landlordsAll of the staff that took part in the studywithin the eight organisations said thatthey wanted to continue usingintroductory/starter tenancies.

Non-landlord organisationsShelter Cymru, Tenant ParticipationAdvisory Service Cymru and the WelshTenants Federation opposed the use ofintroductory/starter tenancies in principleas they represented a reduction in, ordenial of, tenants’ rights. This was incontrast to the views expressed by the 65tenants and 46 staff that took part in theeight case studies.

The Welsh Federation of HousingAssociations believed that starter tenanciesshould remain as a tool for associations touse in managing tenancies. Similarly, theWelsh Local Government Associationconsidered that the use of introductorytenancies by local authorities was a matterfor local discretion. The Chartered Instituteof Housing Cymru, Mediation Wales andthe National Association of Citizens AdviceBureau Cymru did not express a specificview as to whether introductory/startertenancies should or should not be used bysocial landlords.

Reasons for using introductory/starter

tenancies

TenantsTenants taking part in the focus groupswere asked to identify the reasons whytheir landlords used introductory/startertenancies. The following reasons were mostcommonly given:

• the landlord can take effective andprompt action if there are problemswith new tenants

• the tenancy is for a trial period so thelandlord can see if the tenant is agood tenant

• the trial period protects other tenantsfrom having anti-social neighbours

• it provides a chance for the landlordand tenant to get to know each other.

Some tenants said that having anintroductory/starter tenancy could be goodfor the individual tenant as it gave themthe option of moving out if they did notlike their home. One group identifiedadvantages for applicants waiting forhousing, who might benefit if the landlordterminated an introductory/starter tenancy:


16

‘There will be more vacancies for deservingpeople.’

Several tenants said that the use ofintroductory/starter tenancies only had anadvantage for the landlord by making iteasier to evict tenants causing problems.

Case study landlordsAmongst the eight organisations, theearliest use of introductory/startertenancies was autumn 1997 and the mostrecent April 2002. There was noconsistency in organisations’ reasons forstarting using introductory/startertenancies:

• two organisations (one local authorityand one housing association) sawthem as an additional tool to tackleanti-social behaviour

• two organisations (one local authorityand one housing association) citedpressure from tenants

• one association noted that they werethe last landlord in the area not usingthem

• one local authority specificallyintroduced them because, at the time,it was felt that there was too much ofa delay in the rent arrears possessionprocess. However, this authoritynoted that they were now seen ashaving a key role in relation to anti-social behaviour

• the remaining two organisationsintroduced them specifically as part ofa package of measures. Oneintroduced them across the wholeorganisation, to ensure that homesand estates were well managed. Theother introduced them as part of a

community sustainability strategy fora small number of ‘non-performing’estates.

Non-landlord organisationsThe original purpose of introductory/startertenancies was seen by all nationalorganisations as dealing with and/orresponding to anti-social behaviour, but itwas acknowledged that they are clearlyused for rent arrears too. They were oftenseen as being symbolic and for sending amessage to tenants.

The Welsh Federation of HousingAssociations noted that there are differentresponses to starter tenancies fromassociations working in similar areas withsimilar groups of people. The WelshFederation of Housing Associationsconcluded that their use does not thereforesimply relate to the housing context withinwhich organisations work, it is also relatedto the culture of individual organisations.

How introductory/starter tenancies should

be used

TenantsAll the tenants in all but two of the focusgroups felt strongly that all tenants shouldbe treated equally. They felt that all newtenants should receive an introductory/starter tenancy and that it would bediscriminatory if they were only given tocertain groups or in certain areas.

‘There should be no stigma of categories ofpeople or estates.’

‘Should be used for everyone. Shouldn’tdiscriminate against young people or beracist. Should treat everyone the same.’

One group of tenants from a localauthority sheltered housing scheme feltthat introductory tenancies should not be


17

given to tenants in shelteredaccommodation, but that they should begiven to all other new tenants. They feltthat tenants in sheltered accommodationdid not cause anti-social behaviour and sothey should receive a permanent tenancystraight away.

Some tenants in another local authoritygroup thought that introductory tenanciesshould only be used for problem areas andestates.

Other landlords Two housing associations that took part inthe research have successfully used assuredshorthold tenancies in a targeted way toturn round specific estates which havecaused management difficulties. Bothestates had high levels of arrears andincidences of anti-social behaviour andwere hard to let because of theirreputations. In both cases, the housingassociation consulted existing tenants whosupported the use of assured shortholdtenancies for all new tenants on the estate.Both associations used assured shortholdtenancies as part of an overall strategy toimprove the estates. The strategy alsoincluded intensive housing managementand a scheme supervisor or caretakerpresence.

One of the associations had gone on toextend the use of assured shortholdtenancies to other areas where tenantscomplained about new tenants. At the timeof the research, tenant representativeswere ‘pushing strongly’ for the associationto use starter tenancies for all new tenants.

Non-landlord organisationsSome advice workers felt thatintroductory/starter tenancies could bepositive if properly used. This wouldinvolve:

• the landlord clarifying that they areused to control anti-social behaviourand not rent arrears

• well thought-out monitoringprocedures before a decision to takecourt proceedings is made

• an effective review mechanism ofwhich tenants are aware

• policies and procedures that link tothe local authority’s homelessnessstrategy.

The national organisations also noted anumber of prerequisites for the positive useof introductory/starter tenancies:

• consistency with other aspects of thelandlord’s approach to tenancymanagement and strategy for dealingwith anti-social behaviour

• treat them as a positive initiative, i.e.make it clear to tenants what needsto happen to progress to a permanenttenancy, and provide support toenable this to happen

• regular review of their use and impact

• a robust review process, includingoral hearings

• quality training for all relevant staffand board members or councillors.

There was a shared view amongst thenational organisations that the use ofintroductory/starter tenancies for rentarrears is poor practice.


18

Reasons for not using introductory/starter

tenancies

Other landlordsThe two local authorities and two housingassociations that were not usingintroductory/starter tenancies expressed anumber of reasons and concerns which hadcontributed to the decision not to usethem:

• Against their use in principle

In both housing associations, staff andboard members expressed concern aboutprotecting tenants’ rights to security, andthe need to ensure equality of rightsamong tenants. One of the local authoritiesfelt that a two-tier system was not ‘morallyor ethically appropriate’ and noted thatcertain vulnerable tenants could bevictimised and exploited.

• Questions about their effectiveness

Staff in three of the organisations felt thattenancy problems often did not occurduring the first 12 months. Problems weremore likely to arise later on in the tenancybecause of life changes such as job lossresulting in arrears, problems with growingteenagers or friends coming round andmarital or relationship breakdown.

• Difficult to implement

Staff in one organisation were concernedabout the difficulties of developingimpartial criteria to make judgements onwhether a tenancy was successful. Theywere also worried about the extra time andresources required to monitor, review andgenerally administer introductory/startertenancies. Staff in one authority noted thepossibility of officers coming underpressure from tenants and councillors toterminate tenancies.

• Inappropriate for stock

One organisation felt that having a ruralscattered stock and small estates had apositive impact on levels of anti-socialbehaviour. In addition, newly built propertyis secure by design with no back alleyways,which helps reduce anti-social behaviour.One of the local authorities workingpredominantly in rural areas noted thatanti-social behaviour was not a significantproblem in the areas in which it hadproperties.

Non-landlord organisationsSome housing advisors in the case studyareas gave the following reasons for notusing introductory/starter tenancies:

• they were an ineffective way ofresolving anti-social behaviour or rentarrears problems. The emphasis forlandlords should be to work withtenants to resolve problems, ratherthan to evict them and pass theproblem on

• they were particularly unsuitable forvulnerable groups such as thoserequiring additional support or whosuffer from mental illness, as theinsecurity of having a temporarytenancy increased people’s anxiety.

As noted earlier, three of the nationalorganisations oppose the use ofintroductory/starter tenancies on principlebecause they reduce tenancy rights.


19

Key points: rationale for usingintroductory/starter tenancies

• The majority of tenants were infavour of using introductory/startertenancies for new tenants

• All the case study landlords wantedto continue using introductory/startertenancies in the future

• In contrast to the views of tenantsand case study landlords, somenational organisations were opposedto the use of introductory/startertenancies in principle

• The majority of tenants would likeintroductory/starter tenancies to beused for all new tenants in a non-discriminatory way

• The case study landlords started usingintroductory/starter tenancies for avariety of reasons

• Tenants saw introductory/startertenancies as a tool for landlords totake effective and prompt actionagainst anti-social behaviour

• There was evidence thatintroductory/starter tenancies can beused successfully as part of an overallstrategy to improve problem estates

• A range of prerequisites for thepositive use of introductory/startertenancies were identified

• Some landlord and non-landlordorganisations expressed concern thatintroductory/starter tenancies are noteffective in resolving anti-socialbehaviour. They also considered thatthey erode tenants’ rights and causeanxiety for vulnerable tenants

• Some landlords that were not usingintroductory/starter tenanciesexpressed concern that using themwould require extra time andresources and would be difficult toimplement fairly

• Some landlords were not usingintroductory/starter tenancies becausethey considered that they were notnecessary due to the rural nature ofthe area, low level of anti-socialbehaviour and/or the design and sizeof estates.

Starting to use introductory/startertenanciesHow landlords decide

Case study landlordsThe eight landlords varied in how theyreached the decision to use introductory/starter tenancies. In one authority, theprocess had been stimulated by a visit fromstaff from Manchester City Council.Another authority was putting together anew way of delivering tenancymanagement. It was creating a specialistanti-social behaviour unit and ‘re-badging’the rights and responsibilities of tenants. Inthis case, introductory tenancies were anintegral part of this overall approach. Theother two authorities simply decided totake the opportunity provided by theprovisions of the Housing Act 1996. Onefocused on the concept of earning a securetenancy, while the other wanted swifteraction to deal with rent arrears. The finaldecision on use of introductory tenanciesby local authorities rests with the relevantcommittee or cabinet.

One of the associations identified potentialpositive and negative factors for usingstarter tenancies and consulted widely onthe basis of this information. The mainfactor for one of the associations deciding


20

to use starter tenancies was that they werethe last landlord operating in the area notusing introductory/starter tenancies. Thisresulted in pressure from tenants. The casestudy association that used assuredshorthold tenancies as starter tenancies onspecific estates identified a number ofestates that had problems as part ofcommunity sustainability strategies. Startertenancies formed part of a package ofmeasures on these estates. This associationalso wanted to see how effective startertenancies were on specific estates beforedeciding to use them across the wholeorganisation. The final decision about theuse of starter tenancies by housingassociations rests with the board.

Other landlordsBoth of the housing associationsinterviewed that did not use startertenancies made the decision some yearsago when Tai Cymru first issued guidanceon the use of starter tenancies. Bothassociations discussed the issue, first withstaff and then at board level. Oneassociation analysed noise and nuisancecomplaints and incidences of anti-socialbehaviour, and cross-referenced these tothe length of time that those causing theproblems had been tenants. Oneassociation consulted its tenants’ panel.The other did not have formal tenantparticipation structures in place at the time.

One local authority had a debate at officerand councillor level, while the decision inthe other was made at officer level. Two ofthe four organisations interviewed that didnot use introductory/starter tenancies hadreviewed their original decision, but hadcome to the same conclusion.

‘We haven’t seen anything at all thatwould make us change our minds aboutthe use of introductory tenancies.’

None of the four organisations felt thatthere was any link between not usingintroductory/starter tenancies and theeffectiveness of their response to anti-socialbehaviour.

‘Our decision not to use them means thatthere is not a conflict with the council’s aimof preventing homelessness.’

Who is consulted?

Case study landlordsAll eight landlords had informally soughtthe views of staff as part of the process ofdeciding whether to start usingintroductory/starter tenancies. Someorganisations noted that there weredifferences of opinion between staff, withsome supporting and some against the useof introductory/starter tenancies.

All eight landlords had consulted withtenants in some way before starting to useintroductory/starter tenancies. One of thelocal authorities noted that it had hadresponses from about 10% of tenants, with96% in favour of the introduction ofintroductory/starter tenancies. One casestudy association consulted with its tenants,partner local authorities and Shelter Cymru,while another association consulted withformal tenants’ groups rather than with alltenants.

Example 1: Consultation with tenants

One association held a number ofconsultation events for tenants to givethem the opportunity to ask questions andgive their views.

A presentation was made which set out:

• the regulatory and legal basis forstarter tenancies


21

• who they would apply to

• when a permanent tenancy wouldnot be given

• how the association would ensurethat vulnerable tenants did not loseout, including liaising with relevantagencies

• the safeguards for all tenants –notice, review and full hearing

• a clear list of reasons in favour of theuse of starter tenancies – resolve anti-social behaviour, part of approach totackle nuisance, set a standard,quicker and more effective process,not discriminatory, no problem iftenant keeps to tenancy conditions

• the reasons not to use them – morebureaucracy, discriminates againstnew tenants, treated unfairly byneighbours, no security for the future,does not deal with the cause.

Tenants were in favour of using startertenancies which were then implemented bythe landlord.

[Source: case study]

A number of case study organisationsnoted that some tenants’ and residents’organisations had unrealistic expectationsof what introductory/starter tenancieswould mean in practice when the landlordwas responding to anti-social behaviour.These expectations included the belief thatintroductory/starter tenants could be askedto, and would have to, leave their homeimmediately without going to court. Thelandlords tried to address these issuesduring consultation.

Other landlordsBoth housing associations using assuredshortholds as starter tenancies on targetedestates with high levels of anti-socialbehaviour consulted existing tenants onwhether to use these for new tenants.Tenants unanimously agreed that theyshould be introduced, and this wassubsequently agreed by the board.

One association, not currently using startertenancies, said that when they reviewedtheir existing policy, they would beconsulting with their tenants’ panel, andthe local authority. Another association saidthat they discussed the issue with otherassociations to find out what they weredoing. Staff and the tenants’ consultativecommittee then discussed the issue, and apaper went to the board recommendingthat starter tenancies were not used. Theboard made the decision not to use them.

Non-landlord organisationsThe advice agencies in the case study areaswere not consulted by landlords beforethey introduced introductory/startertenancies. All non-landlord organisationssaid that they should have been consulted,for two reasons. Firstly, because it wouldhave given the opportunity for them tofeed in their views, and secondly, becauseorganisations would then have had priorwarning that they may have clientspresenting with problems concerningintroductory/starter tenancies.

Key points: starting to useintroductory/starter tenancies

• Landlords consulted with tenants andstaff when considering introducingintroductory/starter tenancies eitherin a targeted way or across theorganisation


22

• In housing associations, the boardmade the final decision

• In local authorities, the relevantcommittee or cabinet made the finaldecision

• The majority of landlords did notconsult non-landlord or adviceorganisations operating in their areawhen considering starting to useintroductory/starter tenancies

• Non-landlord and adviceorganisations would like to beconsulted by landlords consideringstarting to use introductory/startertenancies.

Impact and effectivenessEffectiveness of using introductory/starter

tenancies

TenantsSome tenants in the majority of the focusgroups said that having an introductory/starter tenancy did not make a differenceto how they acted in their home. However,four of the groups comprised tenants whodid not know that they had an introductorytenancy. Some of these tenants said theywould have been more conscious of howthey acted, had they know they were ‘onprobation’.

The majority of tenants who knew thatthey held an introductory/starter tenancy,said that the tenancy had had an effect onhow they acted in their homes. Many saidthat they were more aware of theirneighbours and more anxious not to causenuisance or to provoke complaints.Concerns about causing a nuisance fromnoisy music, TV or children were the mostcommonly identified.

‘When the children made a noise I had totell them to stop. Tenants could reportme…I’d be in trouble.’

‘If a neighbour complains about my dog, Iknow I’m out (of my tenancy).’

‘I crept around. I was afraid to make anoise. I had wooden flooring and had totiptoe across the floor.’

Some said that the need to be quiet duringthe introductory/starter period has had alasting effect on their behaviour:

‘After a year it feels normal. What youpractice at the beginning (being quieter)becomes normal.’

‘I couldn’t play my music as loud as Iwanted to. It has affected the way I act. Ikeep the music at moderate sound andturn it off at about 11.30pm.’

‘Friends asked me for parties in my homeand I said no, I’d get chucked out. Now I’mpermanent I would ask (landlord) before Ihad a party.’

Case study landlordsStaff in most of the case study landlordsfelt that introductory/starter tenancies didnot have an impact on the overall level ofanti-social behaviour or, in most cases, onthe behaviour of individual tenants.However, most could cite individual caseswhere they had been able to persuadeintroductory/starter tenants to engage insupport which helped address theunderlying problems. They could also citecases where legal action had been takenand the tenant had left or been evicted.Introductory/starter tenancies were seen asbeing useful in very serious cases anduseful to have as one of many tools totackle anti-social behaviour. The impact


23

that they could have in helping to resolve aserious case was significant, particularly inrelation to the positive impact on thecommunity.

There were varying opinions as to whetherintroductory/starter tenancies increasedtenants’ awareness of their responsibilities.Most staff felt that they did not until thelandlord started to take action, in thosecases where landlords took action.However, some examples were given oftenants who had not put carpets down ordecorated because they were worried thatthey would be evicted.

Two local authorities noted theeffectiveness of introductory tenancies inrelation to rent arrears. They felt theyenabled a quicker response than withsecure tenancies. One association notedthat starter tenancies could be useful inengaging other agencies, such as socialservices, as they were aware that thehousehold could lose its home. Thisassociation also noted that they could alsobe useful when holding public meetingsabout new developments, as a reassuranceto the wider community.

Most of the organisations considered themessage given out by using introductory/starter tenancies was important, even iftheir effectiveness was limited. A numberof organisations noted that it was difficultto separate what impact introductory/starter tenancies had, from other measuresthat had been put in place such as locallettings and/or restructuring of staffresponsibilities.

Introductory/starter tenancies were viewedpositively by staff, even where theyidentified lots of ways in which their usecould be improved. Staff also thought that,where tenants and the wider community

were aware of their use and implications,they viewed them positively.

Other landlordsExample 2: Starter tenancies provingeffective

On one estate owned and managed byBromford Housing Group, starter tenancieswere used for new tenants who had notbeen previously housed by a local authorityor a housing association. Starter tenanciesenabled Bromford to quickly terminate thetenancy of a drug dealer who was causingproblems on the estate. They also helpedto identify tenants who were vulnerableand provide them with additional support.

[Source: Audit Commission positivepractice]

The two housing associations using assuredshortholds on estates with high levels ofanti-social behaviour both found that theiruse was effective in helping to turn theestates around:

‘The use of shorthold assured tenancies hashad a great effect on this block. On acouple of occasions tenants have causedproblems during their introductory periodand were asked whether they thought theirtenancy should be made permanent. Theshorthold tenancy was an effective tool inmaking people stop, think and start tobehave reasonably.’

The landlords pointed to the change inperception of the estates over a number ofyears. Both had previously been associatedwith difficult people and were hard to let.One landlord explains:

‘Today those problems have disappeared,there is effective and active tenantinvolvement supported by the tenants’


24

panel, it is well looked after, incidences ofanti-social behaviour are few and farbetween, it is a popular block and easy tolet.’

Non-landlord organisationsNational organisations expressed a numberof concerns about the general effectivenessof introductory/starter tenancies:

• they can mean that tenancies start offon a negative note

• they can make vulnerable peopleeven more vulnerable

• if tenants do not know what type oftenancy they have and do not have aproper transition at the end of theintroductory/starter period, how canintroductory/starter tenancies changethe behaviour of tenants?

• they are not an effective response toanti-social behaviour as this should beabout long-term constructivesolutions, rather than moving theproblem around

• they are potentially in conflict withcreating sustainable communities.

Problems resulting from

introductory/starter tenancies

TenantsThe most common problem withintroductory/starter tenancies identified bytenants in the focus groups was their lackof security. A number of tenants said thathaving a temporary tenancy made themfeel very insecure and anxious:

‘It’s niggling in the back of your mind allthe time “am I being a bad boy?”’

‘I will be glad when the 11 months is up. Itwill make me feel secure in my mind.’

One tenant pointed out that having anintroductory/starter tenancy could beparticularly difficult for those with mentalhealth problems who have a strong need tofeel stable and secure.

Several introductory/starter tenants saidthat the fact that they felt they were ‘ontrial’ as a tenant made them reluctant tocomplain to their landlord about problemsthey experienced from tenants withpermanent tenancies. Other tenants saidthat they were scared to make a fuss totheir landlord about outstanding repairsduring the introductory/starter period incase they were labelled as troublemakersand were not granted a permanenttenancy.

Several tenants said that they were awareof being ‘on probation’ and worried aboutneighbours complaining about theirbehaviour. Some tenants were concernedthat, as new tenants, they might not betreated fairly by other tenants during theprobationary period:

‘Someone could take a dislike to you andmake a complaint and get you out.’

While the majority of tenants said that theyhad experienced no problems withneighbouring permanent tenants, and thatmost neighbours were not even aware thatnew tenants had temporary tenancies, aminority felt that because they were newtenants, they were blamed by neighboursfor any problems:

‘I feel I’m being watched.’


25

‘The girl upstairs is a permanent tenant.She makes this thumping noise. She usedto say it was me with my TV when peoplecomplained.’

During the research, only one example wasfound of an introductory tenant beingtreated unfairly by neighbours. Themalicious complaint was investigated andproved to be unfounded.

Example 3: Landlord action following acomplaint by neighbours against anintroductory tenant

X was a council tenant with an introductorytenancy. She experienced a lot of troublewith her neighbours, who were young drug users making a lot of noise anddisturbance, especially late at night. Theyhad been council tenants for about 3 years and held permanent tenancies. Xcomplained to the council on severaloccasions but to no effect.

Several neighbours got to hear that shehad made complaints. She says this wasbecause some were friendly with a housingofficer who told them. Consequently, herrelationship with the neighboursdeteriorated. The neighbours then startedcomplaining to the council that she wasplaying loud music and disturbing them.

The council sent her two warning letterssaying she was in breach of herintroductory tenancy. She went to see thecouncil and after discussions, they madefurther investigations of the complaintsagainst her, including contacting theneighbours next to her previous home tosee if she had caused disturbance there.The result of this was that ‘they (thecouncil) saw that I was ok, and that theneighbours had it in for me.’

[Source: telephone interview]

Case study landlordsA number of officers in the case studyorganisations noted that there was a needto be careful about publicising the use ofintroductory/starter tenancies in the widercommunity as this might result inmalicious/discriminatory complaints againstintroductory/starter tenants.

The main issue raised by staff in a numberof organisations which reduced theperceived effectiveness of introductory/starter tenancies was the length of thelegal process, particularly where there wasa reliance on external solicitors or aseparate legal department. A related issuefor some organisations was the need to puttogether an extremely detailed andcomprehensive package of evidence aboutthe anti-social behaviour. This could meanthat the tenancy had become secure by thetime the evidence was deemed sufficient totake action.

Two case study landlords noted that thecourts sometimes granted a suspendedpossession order to introductory tenants,even though legally, they were not able todo so. This was felt to undermine theintention of introductory/starter tenancies.

Non-landlord organisationsThe Shelter Cymru briefing IntroductoryTenancies: A Denial of Rights notes thatintroductory tenancies are not being usedfor their original purpose, i.e. to deal withanti-social behaviour. Shelter Cymrubelieves that introductory tenancies areincompatible with policies and aspirationsin Wales to prevent homelessness andprovide people with stable and securehousing options.


26

Key points: imp act and effectiveness• The majority of tenants said that

introductory/starter tenancies hadhad an effect on how they acted intheir home and that they were moreanxious not to cause a nuisance toneighbours

• Some said that this had had a lastingeffect on their behaviour after theend of the introductory/starter period

• This contrasts with the perceptions ofthe majority of staff who felt thatintroductory/ starter tenancies did nothave an overall impact on thebehaviour of most tenants

• Landlords felt that the message givenby introductory/starter tenancies wasimportant

• Most staff felt that introductory/starter tenancies were effective asone tool amongst many available toprevent and tackle anti-socialbehaviour

• There was evidence that the use ofassured shorthold tenancies can beeffective when used as part of anoverall strategy to turn roundproblem estates

• Some landlords felt that it wasdifficult to separate out the impact ofintroductory/ starter tenancies fromthat of other initiatives

• Some tenants were anxious andinsecure about having a temporarytenancy

• Some tenants were worried thatneighbours might complain about

them and cause their tenancy to notbe made permanent

• One tenant had been unfairlycomplained about by neighbours, butthe complaints were dismissed afterthe landlord investigated them andfound them to be false accusations

• The research found no evidence tosuggest that introductory/startertenants are at risk of losing theirtenancy due to unfair complaints byother tenants

• Some staff felt that the effectivenessof introductory/starter tenancies wasreduced by the length of the legalprocess and the requirement tocollect evidence over a period of timeabout cases of anti-social behaviour

• Shelter Cymru believes thatintroductory/starter tenancies areincompatible with preventinghomelessness.

Providing informationProviding information at the start of the

introductory/starter tenancy

TenantsTenants taking part in all the housingassociation focus groups and in one of thelocal authority focus groups said that therights and responsibilities of theirintroductory/starter tenancy had beenexplained to them fully at the start of theirtenancy. They said that they had a goodunderstanding of what anintroductory/starter tenancy is.

‘They went through it very clearly….highlighted the important things.’


27

However, introductory tenants in two localauthorities were not aware that they heldintroductory tenancies, and did not knowwhat introductory tenancies were. Themajority of tenants in these authorities saidthat they had had no explanation of theirtenancy rights and responsibilities whenthey signed their agreement.

‘I didn’t know there was such a thing (asan introductory tenancy). Thought it wasjust a permanent tenancy.’

Several older tenants were very upset bythe news that they only had a temporarytenancy:

‘I wouldn’t have sold my house if I’d knowmy tenancy was not permanent. I’veforked out for new carpets, furniture to fitmy flat.’

Most tenants said that the landlord shouldprovide more information for new tenantsabout what having an introductory/startertenancy means. They felt that this shouldbe explained carefully to tenants beforethey sign the tenancy:

‘People should be made aware at the startof their tenancy that they are getting anintroductory tenancy.’

‘They should provide information in plainEnglish, with no small print or long words.’

Although most tenants were aware of thereasons why their introductory/startertenancy might be terminated, there was alack of clarity about the issue of rentarrears.

Case study landlordsNot all of the eight landlords includedinformation on introductory/startertenancies and what they mean in the

written information that they madeavailable to applicants. Nor wasinformation consistently included in offerletters sent to prospective tenants. Not allof the eight landlords had a stand-aloneleaflet on introductory/starter tenancies,but relevant information was included in alltenants’ handbooks. Staff in all case studylandlords stated that they explained theterms of the tenancy to tenants when theysigned for their new home.

Example 4: Provision of information toapplicants

All starter tenancies will be for a 12-monthtrial period during which time tenants willhave an assured shorthold tenancy. Thiscan be ended during the 12 months by thelandlord giving the tenant two monthsnotice, where there has been a breach oftenancy conditions. Compared to a fullassured or secure tenancy, a starter tenancymakes it easier for the landlord to regainpossession and evict the tenant(s).

[Source: housing association informationleaflet for applicants and tenants]

Staff in all eight organisationsacknowledged that providing the rightamount of information to new tenants wasdifficult to achieve. The policy of seven ofthe organisations was to carry out visits tonew tenants within the first weeks of thetenancy. This provided a secondopportunity to provide information andanswer tenants’ queries. A number ofofficers noted that, in practice, due topressure of work, these visits were notalways carried out. One local authoritynoted that this visit was not used to remindtenants about their introductory tenancyand the implications of this type oftenancy.


28

Other landlordsOne housing association that had taken thedecision not to use starter tenancies sentout information to applicants via acommon housing register held by localhousing associations and the localauthority. Some landlords on the registeroffered introductory/starter tenancies,while others offered permanent tenanciesto new tenants. However, the informationsent to applicants did not mention whatsort of tenancy was offered by eachlandlord.

Example 5: Provision of information atthe start of the tenancy

The 'sign up checklist' used by ConwyCounty Borough Council estate officers atthe start of the tenancy is clear andcomprehensive. It includes:

• explaining the terms and conditionsof the introductory tenancy

• identifying vulnerability, andforwarding the results to theSupporting People team

• a discussion on rent paymentmethods and identifying the mostappropriate for the tenant


Providing information during the


TenantsWith the exception of one housingassociation, tenants of the other sevenlandlords said that they received noinformation on how their tenancy wasprogressing during the introductory/starterperiod. Although most introductory/startertenants had regular contact with their

landlord for reporting repairs and generalqueries, they were given no informationabout how their tenancy was going. Anumber of tenants said that they wouldhave welcomed some contact from theirlandlord during the introductory/starterperiod, to reassure them that the tenancywas going satisfactorily, and to let themknow if there were any problems thatneeded to be addressed:

‘If they need you to make changes, theyshould tell you during the 12 months.’

Case study landlordsA minority of case study landlords carriedout visits to tenants later in theintroductory/starter period than the initial‘courtesy visits’ mentioned above. Most ofthe landlords operated on the basis thattenants would receive letters or visits ifthere were problems. Officers noted that ifvisits were carried out to tenants becauseof rent arrears or anti-social behaviour,they would be reminded that they wereintroductory/starter tenants.

Providing information on what happens at

the end of the tenancy

TenantsThe majority of tenants were not clearabout how the landlord would decide onwhether to make their tenancy permanent.

‘I don’t know how it will be decidedwhether my tenancy is made permanent.’

‘I think it’d have to be reviewed, I’m notsure how. They might ask you how itsgoing.’

Most current introductory/starter tenantssaid they had not been told what wouldhappen at the end of the tenancy.Comments from housing associationtenants included:


29

‘I didn’t think to ask. I don’t know whatwill happen at the end.’

Many tenants were unaware of the correctlegal procedures their landlord must followin order to evict an introductory/startertenant from their home. Many thoughtthat it was sufficient for the landlord togive the tenant notice, and that it was notnecessary for a landlord to obtain a courtorder for possession of an introductory/starter tenancy.

‘They can get you out there and then – nocourt proceedings are necessary.’

‘They can just evict you, they don’t needto take you to court.’

‘The landlord can give you two months’notice.’

‘They have to give a verbal and writtenwarning. If it (anti-social behaviour) carrieson, you’re out.’

Case study landlordsMost of the leaflets on introductory/startertenancies provided by case study landlordsincluded general information on why anintroductory/starter tenancy would beended, citing rent arrears and anti-socialbehaviour or nuisance. They also includedvariable levels of information about thelegal process that landlords have to gothrough to end the introductory/startertenancy. One case study local authority hada handbook specifically for introductorytenants. It included clear information onwhy an introductory tenancy would beended, the process of ending the tenancy,the tenant’s rights if the council decided toend the tenancy and the tenant’s right toreview.

Example 6: Provision of informationabout what happens at the end of thetenancy

After nine months, we will contact you tomake an appointment to visit you andinspect your property. After this visit, wewill then decide whether to:

• award an assured tenancy

• start action to take the property backif you have broken the terms if yourtenancy agreement.

[Source: housing association informationleaflet for tenants]

Example 7: Provision of informationabout what happens at the end of thetenancy

Your tenancy could be ended if you breachany term of your tenancy agreement. Themost common reasons for the council totake action to end a tenancy are rentarrears, a tenant acting in an anti-socialmanner or a tenant causing nuisance toothers. Other possible reasons are:

• violence or a threat of violence

• a risk of violence or any kind of injury

• damage or threat of damage to theproperty

• harassment of any kind

• a number of minor incidents thatcarry on happening.

[Source: local authority handbook forintroductory tenants]


30

Non-landlord organisationsAdvice agencies suggested that there was alack of understanding among manyhousing staff about the legal position ofintroductory/starter tenancies. Adviceagencies pointed out that at the noticestage to terminate an introductory/startertenancy, landlords had a statutory/regulatory obligation to include informationon the tenant’s rights to a review.However, the reality was that many tenantsdid not take up this right as it was ‘tooscary’.

Key points: providing informationThe majority of tenants had a goodunderstanding of introductory/startertenancies and of their rights andresponsibilities. However, tenants in aquarter of the case studies did not knowthat they held an introductory/startertenancy until they were told in the focusgroups

• All tenants thought it important thatclear information is provided at thestart of the tenancy on:

- their rights and responsibilities asan introductory/starter tenant

- reasons for having an introductory/starter tenancy

- reasons for not makingintroductory/ starter tenanciespermanent

- what happens at the end of theintroductory/starter period

• Not all the case study landlordsincluded information on introductory/starter tenancies in letters toapplicants or on application forms

• Not all the case study landlords had aspecific leaflet on introductory/startertenancies

• Most case study landlords carried outvisits to new tenants in the earlyweeks of the tenancy

• There was some confusion amongtenants about whether rent arrearswas one of the reasons for notmaking an introductory/startertenancy permanent

• The majority of tenants received noinformation from their landlord duringthe introductory/starter period onhow the tenancy was progressing.Most tenants would welcome this

• The majority of tenants were not sureabout what would happen at the endof their tenancy, including proceduresfor deciding whether the tenancywould be made permanent or beterminated

• The case study landlords providedinformation on these issues

• A large number of tenants - and, it issuggested, some staff - were unawareof the correct legal procedures forterminating an introductory/startertenancy, and of tenants’ rights to areview and to get advice and help.

Housing management during theintroductory/starter tenancyThe significance of anti-social behaviour

Case study landlordsAll eight case landlords saw anti-socialbehaviour as a significant issue, of keyimportance to tenants and residents. Theysaw it as an issue that took a lot of officertime to respond to effectively, and one that


31

could leave organisations open to criticismfrom communities and councillors.

Most of the organisations identified specificgeographical areas or estates where anti-social behaviour was much more prevalentthan in the majority of their stock. A smallnumber of organisations felt that anti-socialbehaviour was more prevalent in theirstock than for other landlords operating inthe same geographical area. The reason forthis was noted as the larger scale of stockownership overall and the size of estatesmanaged.

Issues commonly raised about the type ofanti-social behaviour included theprevalence of lifestyle clashes and noisenuisance, the transient nature of somecommunities and the increasing supportneeds of those being housed by housingassociations and local authorities. Two localauthorities specifically noted the extensionof priority need groups under homelessnesslegislation as having had an impact on thelevel of anti-social behaviour.

Some of the organisations noted specificreasons why anti-social behaviour wasparticularly significant for them. Theseincluded:

• the type of property such asconverted flats with poor soundinsulation (housing association)

• high rise blocks where it can bedifficult to identify precisely wherenoise is coming from (local authority)

• historical lettings policies which haveresulted in older people in groundfloor flats and younger people in firstfloor properties (local authority)

• a greater mix of household types inblocks of flats, in particular anincrease in the number of youngpeople (local authority).

Trends in anti-social behaviour were seenlargely as seasonal, although a minority oforganisations felt that it was increasingoverall. This increase was seen asassociated with rising expectations thatlandlords would respond to the problemand an increasing profile of anti-socialbehaviour in the media. One local authoritynoted that anti-social behaviour haddecreased. They felt this was linked tochanges in the role of officers responsiblefor the management of estates, havingcreated specialist posts to deal with anti-social behaviour. One local authority notedthat the seriousness of incidences of anti-social behaviour had increased.

A number of the case study organisationsnoted that having a proactive approach toanti-social behaviour could mean morecomplaints. One organisation that hadintroduced a specialist team to deal withanti-social behaviour had anticipated, andexperienced, a surge of complaints.

Housing management overview

Case study landlordsThere were significant variations in thedetail of the way that introductory/startertenancies were being used by the eightlandlords. Some of these variations weredue to the organisational structure, the roleof housing officers and the presence ofspecialist anti-social behaviour units. Threeof the four local authorities had aseparation between the rent collection andtenancy and estate management functions.None of the housing associations had sucha split. Two local authorities and onehousing association had specialist anti-social behaviour units or teams which were


32

seen as an overall resource to be drawn onby housing officers and colleagues, as wellas taking on the function of taking casesthrough to court action. In organisationswhere functions are split, it may be moredifficult to obtain an overview of theprogress or problems, both with individualintroductory/starter tenancies and with allintroductory/starter tenancies.

The tenancy agreement

TenantsSeveral local authority introductory tenantssaid that their homes had been let to themin a bad condition. This resulted in theirhaving to do a lot of work and spend a lotof money to make them satisfactory. Thiswas seen as particularly unfair when theinitial tenancy granted was only temporary.Some tenants pointed out that the tenancyagreement was a two-way contract andthat if they were to be expected to behavein an acceptable way during theintroductory/starter period, then it wasonly fair that landlords should be requiredto uphold their responsibilities by providinga home that is in good and clean condition.

Case study landlordsThere were significant differences betweenthe eight landlords in the approach totenancy agreements for introductory/starter tenants. Two of the housingassociations required tenants to sign a newtenancy agreement after the introductory/starter period. This was acknowledged asbeing resource intensive and, at the time ofthe case studies, one of the associationswas reconsidering this practice. The otherassociation acknowledged that if startertenancies were used across theorganisation, they would not get tenants tosign a new tenancy agreement.

Two of the four local authorities hadtenancy agreements that set out thedifference between introductory and securetenants. These clearly identified the rightswhich introductory tenants did not haveand also the date on which the tenancybecame secure. The tenancy agreement ofone of the two housing associations thatdid not require starter tenants to sign newagreements at the end of the starter periodclearly identified the date on which thetenancy would become assured, but theother did not.

Introductory/starter tenancies and anti-

social behaviour

TenantsTwo ex-tenants taking part in the researchhad left their council accommodationduring the introductory period due toserious harassment which they hadrepeatedly reported to their landlord. Thelandlord did not resolve the situation oroffer the tenants a transfer. When thetenants could no longer cope with theharassment, both made the decision toterminate their tenancies and move intoprivate rented accommodation. Bothtenants informed their landlords that theywere giving up their tenancies and thereasons why. Neither was given any help,or information about organisations whichmight provide advice, or offered alternativeaccommodation.

One ex-tenant aged 18 with a pregnantgirlfriend had also left his councilaccommodation during the introductoryperiod, following an incident where thewindows were broken in his flat. He leftbecause he and his girlfriend felt unsafe inthe area. He did not ask the council for atransfer, as he did not think he was entitledto; he was in rent arrears which hadaccrued when he was wrongly advisedabout the amount of Housing Benefit he


33

would get. When he handed back the keysto the council, he was offered noinformation about organisations whichmight provide advice, but was given aleaflet on crime in the community. He, hisgirlfriend and new baby are now livingwith friends.

Case study landlordsStaff in four of the case study housingassociations stated that they dealt withcomplaints of anti-social behaviour againststarter tenants in the same way as theywould deal with complaints against assuredtenants. The only difference was that theyreminded tenants that they are in theirstarter period. Staff in one local authoritynoted that there was a slight difference inthe approach to introductory tenants inthat the neighbour nuisance did not haveto be proved. Staff did, however, need toprove that they had followed the processset out in the procedure. Staff in anotherlocal authority explained that they hadsome discretion in issuing Notices ofTermination in relation to anti-socialbehaviour. Senior officers needed to besatisfied that sufficient evidence had beengathered in each case. Staff in theremaining two local authorities used thesame processes for responding to anti-social behaviour for introductory andsecure tenants.

Staff in two organisations specifically notedthat procedures were too rigid in definingwhat constituted anti-social behaviour onwhich action could be taken. This led toonerous requirements for collectingevidence and lengthy processes. It couldmean that the tenancy had becomepermanent by the time court action wasreached. Staff in one organisation notedthat the support of senior staff was crucialin difficult cases.

The majority of staff in all eightorganisations felt that the policies andprocedures in operation in theirorganisations were adequate. Some staffnoted that their organisation provided agood step-by-step guide to what theyshould do. Others found that, when theycame to progress a case to court, theprocedures did not provide enough detail.Staff in one organisation noted thatworking practice was for officers to askeach other rather than refer to theprocedures which were felt to need acomplete overhaul.

Other landlordsDetailed anti-social behaviour policies andprocedures were received from just twolandlords. In both cases, the same policiesand procedures on anti-social behaviourwere applied to all tenants, whether theywere introductory/starter tenants or not.The policies and procedures provided aframework for officers to respond toincidents of anti-social behaviour ornuisance. The level of detail varied hugelybetween the two examples, with one lessthan 10 pages and the other a largemanual.

Example 8: Housing association responseto anti-social behaviour by an assuredshorthold tenant

If there is an incident of anti-socialbehaviour during the first six months of thetenancy, the housing officer, the housingmanager and the scheme supervisor visitthe tenant all together, the morning afterthe incident. The tenant is told that theywill be given notice if they do not stop thebehaviour which has caused the nuisance.



34

Non-landlord organisationsThe Welsh Federation of HousingAssociations cited a positive example of theuse of starter tenancies in relation to anti-social behaviour. This was within a housingassociation with in-house solicitors whohad provided training to operational staffand board members. This association usedstarter tenancies in the context of a well-developed anti-social behaviour strategy.

Introductory/starter tenancies and rent

arrears

Case study landlordsThere were significant differences amongthe eight case study landlords in howintroductory/starter tenancies were usedfor rent arrears by housing associations andlocal authorities. Three of the associationsspecifically stated that they did not usethem for rent arrears cases. They wouldpursue the Notice of Seeking Possessionroute in cases of rent arrears to ensure thatlegal action would not result in mandatorypossession. The fourth association notedthat, whilst their organisation’s policy wasthat they could use starter tenancies forrent arrears, in practice this did not oftenhappen.

All four local authorities did useintroductory tenancies for rent arrears and,in two cases, the speed of possession forcases of rent arrears was specifically notedas a positive aspect of introductorytenancies. However, staff in one localauthority were concerned that the processwas too quick for rent arrears. Althoughthe policy required a visit to the tenantbefore court action was taken, in practicecases could end up in court where thetenant had not been visited. Staff inanother local authority noted:

‘We tend to tackle rent arrears as this iseasier than getting the evidence for anti-social behaviour’

Other landlordsDetailed rent arrears policies andprocedures were also received from twolandlords. In one case, the procedure forending an introductory tenancy for rentarrears involved a totally different processfrom ending an introductory tenancy foranti-social behaviour. Councillors wereinvolved in the review procedure for anti-social behaviour cases, but officers dealtwith reviews from tenants appealingagainst the ending of an introductorytenancy for rent arrears.

Non-landlord organisationsFrom their casework, Shelter Cymruidentify the following in relation to the useof introductory tenancies for rent arrears:

• between April 2000 and March 2001,62 introductory tenants were helpedby Shelter Cymru – 32 were facingpossession action and 26 of thesewere because of rent arrears

• requirements for introductory tenantsto settle rent arrears at more onerouslevels than if they faced normalsuspended possession court action

• examples of landlords takingintroductory tenants to court andobtaining possession in circumstanceswhere courts would normally havesuspended on an agreed repaymentplan

• a lack of knowledge amongst, andtraining for, officers implementingintroductory tenancies resulting ininappropriate practice.


35

Shelter Cymru also noted that it is notlegally possible for a court to grant asuspended possession order for anintroductory tenancy. Courts are obliged togrant outright possession even if thelandlord would be happy with a suspendedorder. In one case study area, anagreement had been brokered by Shelterbetween the council and the judge, in anumber of cases where young tenants withintroductory tenancies have been taken tocourt for rent arrears. The agreementswere that the cases would be adjourned,on condition that rent was paid regularlyplus an agreed amount off the arrears. Thisresulted in introductory tenants being ableto remain in their homes.

Monitoring the tenancy

Tenants Tenants of the one landlord who regularlymonitored the tenancy said that theyreceived a visit early on in the tenancy, atwhich the rights and responsibilities of thetenant were explained. Another visit wasmade after three months to check howthings were going and to ask the tenant ifthey had any complaints. Tenants of allother landlords said that their tenancy wasnot monitored during the 12 monthsintroductory/starter period.

Some tenants wondered whether thelandlord was using undisclosed ways ofmonitoring their tenancy, such as checkingon attendance at tenants’ groups.

‘Maybe they monitor whether you go to(tenants’ group) and write down whichnew tenants come.’

Case study landlordsAll but one of the eight landlords notedthat they only visited introductory/startertenants if there were problems. They did

not carry out any regular monitoring visitsin the first year of the tenancy.

Other landlordsA search of positive practice from AuditCommission inspection reports identifiedregular visits carried out by housingmanagement staff during the introductory/starter tenancy as one of the two keyissues which constituted positive practice.

Example 9: Effective housingmanagement during the introductorytenancy

The former Westminster City Council (nowCityWest Homes) requires its housingmanagement providers to visit all newtenants on three occasions in the first yearof a tenancy (within three months, sixmonths and with the third visit during thelast month of the introductory tenancy).This is aimed at ensuring a smoothtransition for the tenant to a securetenancy.

Leeds North West Homes has a system ofindividual tenant action plans. As part of arevised lettings policy, improved monitoringof introductory tenancies and supportedhousing cases has been introduced. Theseindividual plans are monitored every twomonths by housing office staff to ensureconsistent provision of support to tenantsand that problems or specific needs arefully addressed and do not disappear fromthe support package. This is a newinitiative resulting from a review ofhomelessness and links to the corporateHomelessness Strategy which has theprevention of repeat homelessness as oneof its key aims.



36

The two landlords taking part in theresearch, who had successfully usedassured shortholds on problem estates,monitored the tenancy carefully during thestarter period. One of the key factorsidentified in the success of using assuredshortholds was ensuring that theorganisation had a robust and immediateresponse to problems.

Example 10: Intensive managementduring the assured shorthold tenancy(used as starter tenancies on specificestates)

All starter tenants receive three visits fromhousing officers during the first six monthsto monitor their tenancy. During the visit,the tenant is asked how they are settlingin, if anything is bothering them, and ifthey need advice or help in sorting out rentor bills. By the end of the six months, agood relationship has usually beenestablished between the housing officerand the tenant.


Key points: housing management duringthe introductory/starter tenancy

• Anti-social behaviour was a significantissue for the eight case studylandlords

• The way in which introductory/startertenancies were being used by thecase study landlords varied. Some ofthe variation was due to differencesin organisational structure

• Some local authority introductorytenants said that their homes were letin a poor condition. They had tospend time and money to bring themup to standard, and felt that this was

unfair, particularly when the tenancywas temporary

• Two of the eight case study landlordsrequired tenants to sign a newtenancy agreement at the end of theintroductory/starter period

• Not all tenancy agreements used bythe case study landlords clearly setout the date on which the tenancywill become secure/assured

• There is evidence that having anintroductory/starter tenancy inhibitssome tenants from making complaintsabout problems they experience fromneighbouring tenants or reportingrepairs

• Three introductory tenants sufferingharassment did not receive adequatehelp from their landlord to resolve theproblem. They were not given adviceby their landlord about organisationsto approach for help

• In most of the case studyorganisations, complaints about anti-social behaviour of introductory/starter tenants were dealt with in thesame way as those against secure/assured tenants

• There was room for improvement inlandlord policies and procedures onintroductory/starter tenancies

• There were significant differencesamongst the eight case studylandlords in the use of introductory/starter tenancies for rent arrears. Allfour local authorities used them forarrears, but only one housingassociation did


37

• From their casework, Shelter Cymruare concerned about the use ofintroductory tenancies for rent arrears

• The majority of landlords taking partin the research did not monitortenancies during the introductory/starter period

• The majority of tenants wouldwelcome feedback from their landlordon how their tenancy is progressingduring the introductory/starter period

• Good practice examples in monitoringintroductory/starter tenancies andensuring that housing managementservices provide support for tenantsto successfully complete the first 12months of the tenancy wereidentified.

What happens at the end of the tenancy Making the decision

TenantsThe majority of tenants were not clearabout how the landlord would decide onwhether to make their tenancy permanent.Most current introductory/starter tenantssaid they had not been told what wouldhappen at the end of the introductory/starter tenancy. Comments from a range ofhousing association tenants included:

‘It was never mentioned to me what willhappen at the end.’

Case study landlordsIn most of the eight organisations, thetenancy simply became secure/assured ifthere had been no problems with thetenancy during the introductory/starterperiod. Specific examples of the decision-making process were:

• a paper review of the tenancy wascarried out after ten months by thehousing officer, who then made arecommendation about whether thetenancy should become assured. Thereview would involve a visit to thetenant only if there has been aproblem with the tenancy (HA1)

• a form was printed off for all startertenants who were nine monthsthrough their tenancy. It wascompleted by officers responsible forrent, maintenance and supportservices (where appropriate). Theform then went to senior officers forthe final decision (HA2)

• if there had been no problems withthe tenancy, a property inspectionwas carried out jointly betweenhousing management andmaintenance. If there were anyproblems, the tenant was informedthat they needed to rectify anydamage before they could sign a newtenancy agreement (HA4).

In two local authorities, housing officersmade contact with social services to see ifthey had any involvement withintroductory tenants before a notice to endthe tenancy was issued.

In most of the eight organisations, thedecision not to make an introductory/starter tenancy secure/assured had toinvolve more than one officer, usuallyincluding a senior officer.

In two housing associations, starter tenantswith rent arrears would still becomeassured tenants after the starter period. Ina third association, starter tenants with rentarrears reverted to an assured shortholdperiodic tenancy until the arrears were


38

clear. In all four local authorities, thereasons for not making an introductorytenant secure included both anti-socialbehaviour and rent arrears.

The process of confirming/ending the

tenancy

Tenants One local authority tenant described howthey had been told their tenancy waspermanent:

‘I had an interview (with a housing officer).She told me I’d been on probation and wasnow off it. I hadn’t known I was onprobation!’

Some housing association permanenttenants said that they had received a letterat the end of 12 months saying theirtenancy was now permanent. However,most said they had not known this wasgoing to happen.

‘I thought it was a letter telling me to go.’

Some permanent tenants of one housingassociation said that they had received aletter asking them to come into the officeto sign a permanent tenancy at the end ofthe 12-month period. However startertenants of the same landlord were notaware that this was going to happen at theend of the tenancy. A number ofpermanent tenants were still not sure whatsort of tenancy they had:

‘I don’t know if I’m permanent. I’ve beenthere over a year. I presume I am becauseof what I’ve been told now (in the focusgroup).’

Tenants in all the groups said that theywould welcome a letter from their landlordat the end of the 12 months to confirm

that their tenancy had been madepermanent.

Case study landlordsThe process of confirming the securetenancy varied between the eightlandlords:

• two housing associations requiredtenants to sign a new tenancyagreement. Tenants received a letterto make arrangements to do this(HA1 and HA4)

• one housing association wrote totenants to mark the change of thetenancy from starter to assured (HA2)

• in one local authority, officers in somearea offices issued letters to mark thechange, while officers in other areaoffices did not (LA3)

• in three local authorities, no letterwas sent to tenants to indicate thechange in tenancy (LA1, LA2 andLA4).

Other landlordsEach of the landlords that use assuredshorthold tenancies on specific estatesensured that there was a clear and positivemarking of the end of the starter periodand the commencement of a permanenttenancy.

Example 11: Action at the end of theassured shorthold period

Each new tenancy is carefully monitored,and records are kept of any incidents. Atthe end of the six months, if there havebeen no problems the tenant is visited bythe housing officer, congratulated on beinga good tenant, and asked to sign apermanent tenancy.


39

If there have been a few or minorproblems, the tenant is visited and it isexplained that they cannot receive apermanent tenancy unless their behaviourimproves. They are given a further sixmonths tenancy.

If there are serious problems during thefirst six months, two months notice ofseeking possession is issued and thetenancy is not made permanent at the endof the period.


Reviews

Case study landlordsAll case study landlords had reviewprocedures in place as required by the legaland regulatory framework. The way inwhich reviews were carried out variedbetween the eight organisations. In threehousing associations, the review or appealspanel comprised board members. In thefourth, the panel comprised a senior officerand board member.

In the four local authorities, thearrangements were that tenants couldappeal:

• to a panel comprising a senior officersupported by a member of staff fromthe specialist anti-social behaviourunit, with a member of the legal teamavailable for clarification of issues(LA1)

• to a panel of five councillors (LA2)

• verbally to a panel of councillors or inwriting to the Assistant Director (LA3)

• to the Chief Housing Officer (LA4).

Example 12: Enabling tenants to takepart effectively in the review process

The tenant is sent a copy of all theinformation that will be discussed duringthe review, with an agenda, explanatorynotes and information about what they can and cannot do. This information isprovided in a way which ensuresanonymity of any witnesses, etc. Theauthority tries to make hearings as informal as possible.

The first reviews undertaken by theauthority involved people who neededsupport but who were not engaging withsupport. The review process was ‘toneddown as people were clearly out of theirdepth.’ In one case, a tenant wasrepresented by the advice section of theauthority.


In all organisations where the reviewprocedure had been used, a proportion ofdecisions to end introductory/startertenancies had been overturned by theprocess. These decisions were seen as fairby front-line staff. In a number of cases,support needs had been identified andarrangements subsequently made toprovide the support.

Example 13: Positive action following areview being turned down

In one case, the original decision to end the tenancy was upheld by the panel. Theassociation asked Shelter Cymru to call acase conference to look at the futureaccommodation and support needs of thehousehold. The household was notexcluded from the association’s waiting list.



40

In all the organisations where councillors orboard members were part of review panels,the need for training for these individualswas noted. However, staff in all eightorganisations considered that members ofthe review panel took the role veryseriously and that it was a robust process.The difficult logistics of convening reviewpanels at short notice were noted. In onelocal authority, councillors had been takenout of the review process because they hadlimited availability to be involved in theprocess.

Accessing advice if there are problems

Tenants Seven council tenants and ex tenants werecontacted who had experienced problemswith their introductory tenancies. Of these,two tenants had had problems with rentarrears during their introductory tenancies,and their landlords had applied for courtorder for possession. Neither of the tenantshad been given information by theirlandlord about organisations which couldoffer help and advice. However, both hadfound it easy to get in touch with theirlocal Citizens Advice Bureau which hadreferred them to Shelter Cymru for advice.The outcome in both cases was positive, asShelter Cymru was able to negotiate withthe local authority and the court. The caseswere adjourned on condition that the rentwas paid regularly plus an agreed amountoff the arrears.

Case study landlordsSome of the eight landlords signpostedintroductory/starter tenants whose tenancywas not to be made secure/assured tosources of independent advice.

Example 14: Signposting introductorytenants to independent sources ofadvice

You may also want to contact agenciessuch as Shelter Cymru, Citizens AdviceBureau or local Community Advice Centres.The addresses and telephone numbers ofall these agencies are in Section 13 of yourtenant’s handbook.

[Source: local authority introductorytenancies leaflet]

Example 15: Signposting introductorytenants to independent sources ofadvice

Contact details are given for:

• race equality organisations• Victim Support• advice agencies• agencies offering support• social services

[Source: local authority handbook forintroductory tenants]

Key points: what happens at the end ofthe tenancy

• The majority of tenants were notclear about how the landlord decidedon whether to make their tenancypermanent

• The case study landlords had different processes for deciding howto make introductory/startertenancies permanent

• Three of the eight landlords, allhousing associations, would not endan introductory/starter tenancy forrent arrears


41

• The majority of tenants did not knowwhat would happen at the end of theintroductory/starter period

• Most tenants said that they wouldlike a letter at the end of the 12months to confirm that their tenancyhad been made permanent

• Three case study landlords markedthe tenancy becoming permanent,one did so inconsistently and four didnot

• The two landlords that used assuredshortholds in a targeted way clearlymarked the start of the permanenttenancy

• Review procedures were in place,were used by tenants and resulted indecisions to end tenancies beingchanged

• Two tenants with court hearings forpossession for rent arrears were notgiven advice by their landlord aboutorganisations to approach for help

• Some case study landlords signpostedtenants to sources of help and advice.

Monitoring outcomes and impactMonitoring outcomes

Case study landlordsMonitoring arrangements were felt by staffin all eight organisations to be generallyonly adequate. Staff acknowledged thatintroductory/starter tenants might abandontheir homes before legal action was taken,but that little monitoring of this was carriedout. In organisations where the rentcollection function was separate from therest of housing management, monitoringon the use of introductory/starter tenanciesfor rent arrears was being carried out byanother department. In these cases, it wasdifficult for senior housing management

officers to have an overall picture of howmany introductory/starter tenants weresubject to legal action and had thepossibility of losing their home. Staff in onelocal authority specifically noted that theirmonitoring did not pick up on how manyintroductory tenants left their home shortlyafter receiving a Notice.

Two examples were provided of fairlycomprehensive monitoring by case studylandlords which are summarised below. Theexamples show significant numbers oftenants with introductory/starter tenanciesand assured shorthold tenancies used asstarter tenancies that did not progress topermanent tenancies.

Example 16: Monitoring outcomes ofintroductory tenancies

One local authority landlord monitored theoutcome of introductory tenancies betweenJanuary 2003 and December 2003. Duringthis 12-month period, 322 introductorytenancies (from over 1,100 introductorytenancies issued during the year) did notbecome permanent for the followingreasons:

• 53 tenancies abandoned• 22 keys returned with no notice• 6 evictions• 6 buying own property• 6 moved to hospital/other property• 35 moved out of the area• 53 moved to relatives/friends• 21 moved to private rented property• 86 other reasons• 26 transfers within the area (these

would normally become secure at therelevant time in the new tenancies)

• 8 deceased.



42

Example 17: Monitoring outcomes ofassured shorthold tenancies

At the time of the case studies, the housingassociation that used assured shortholdtenancies as starter tenancies in specificgeographical areas was carrying out ananalysis of how effective they had been.This was partly to inform a decision onwhether to use starter tenancies across thewhole organisation. Monitoring of use ofassured shorthold tenancies in these areasfor the first two years showed:

Estate 1 39 assured shortholds issued10 signed up to assuredtenancies2 tenants assured periodic dueto rent arrears17 tenants moved on within thefirst yearNo action taken against astarter tenant for anti-socialbehaviour

Estate 2 13 assured shortholds issued3 signed up to assuredtenancies4 tenants moved on within thefirst yearNo action taken against astarter tenant for anti-socialbehaviour

Estate 3 4 assured shortholds issued3 tenants assured periodic dueto rent arrears1 tenant moved on within thefirst yearNo action taken against astarter tenant for anti-socialbehaviour

Estate 4 38 assured shortholds issued2 signed up to assuredtenancies

4 tenants assured periodic dueto rent arrears20 tenants moved on within the first year for various reasonsAction was taken against 1starter tenant for anti-socialbehaviour and outrightpossession given


Other landlordsThe two housing associations interviewedwho used assured shortholds on specificestates agreed that successful outcomeswere due to:

• the use of assured shortholds for allnew tenants in the target areas

• intensive and responsive housingmanagement which includes regularvisits to all new tenants

• an immediate and strong response toany problems

National organisationsAll the national organisations consideredthat there was a need to have robustmonitoring arrangements in place forintroductory/starter tenancies, includingmonitoring of abandoned tenancies as wellas evictions.

Key points: monitoring and impact• Case study landlords considered that

there is room for improvement in theway that the outcomes and impact ofintroductory/starter tenancies aremonitored

• There were some good examples ofmonitoring by case study landlords


43

• From the information available, it isclear that significant numbers oftenants with introductory/startertenancies and assured shortholdtenancies used as starter tenancies are not progressing to permanenttenancies for a variety of reasons

• Landlords who had achievedsuccessful outcomes to using assuredshorthold tenancies on specific estatesagreed that their success was due tocombining their use with othermeasures

• National organisations considered that robust monitoring is vital.

Suggestions for improvementAll staff, tenants and national organisationsinterviewed were asked their views abouthow the use of introductory/startertenancies could be improved. A summaryof the suggestions made is provided here.

Suggestions from tenants

The vast majority of tenants felt stronglythat introductory/starter tenancies shouldbe offered to all new tenants withoutdiscrimination. A minority of tenantssuggested that introductory/startertenancies could be made for a shorterperiod, perhaps for six months with afurther six months extension if there wereproblems with the tenancy.

Most tenants said that they would like toreceive:

• clear information at the start of thetenancy explaining what anintroductory/starter tenancy is, thereasons why it may not be madepermanent, how the decision will bemade and the rights and

responsibilities of an introductory/starter tenant

• a visit from the landlord during theintroductory/starter period, to ironout any problems with the tenancyand to feed back on how the tenancyis progressing

• a letter from their landlord at the endof the period to confirm that theirtenancy has been made permanent.

Suggestions from staff

A wide range of suggested improvementswere put forward by staff within the casestudy organisations. Some of these werealready in place in other case studyorganisations, highlighting the need toshare good and effective practice.

Suggestions made about the provision ofinformation included to:

• provide a fact-sheet on introductory/starter tenancies for new tenants

• review what and how muchinformation is given to tenants at thebeginning of their tenancy

• ensure the tenancy agreement is inplain language

• provide regular information innewsletters

• issue a letter to tenants to signal thechange in status of the tenancy after12 months.

Suggestions made about improving the useof introductory/starter tenancies includedto:


44

• carry out accompanied viewings anduse these as an opportunity to talkabout introductory/starter tenanciesand what they mean

• use the post sign-up visit/courtesyvisits in the first few weeks of thetenancy to reinforce the message

• carry out a visit later during theintroductory/starter tenancy

• provide incentives for tenants whosuccessfully get through theintroductory/starter period

• have comprehensive policies andprocedures in place which areamended in the light of experienceand changes in external context

• ensure the organisation’s informationtechnology system can flagintroductory/starter tenancies andwhere action has been taken

• ensure that the review process istime-limited and address any barriersto people taking up the opportunityfor a review

• provide sources of legal support andinformation for officers

• provide staff induction training andrefresher training when policies andprocedures change

• include on the review panel at leastone person with no connection withthe organisation

• link credit union services into rentarrears policies and procedures.

Suggestions made on legal/structuralchanges included to:

• seek possession againstintroductory/starter tenants in allcases where the tenancy has beenbreached, including, e.g. problemswith obtaining access and disrepair

• raise judges’ awareness about whatintroductory/starter tenancies meanand how they should respond

• extend the introductory/starterperiod, to at least 18 months, eitheracross the board, or for those caseswhere action is being taken.

Suggestions made on the role of otherorganisations included:

• the Local Government Associationguidance should be revised andupdated

• more effective multi-agency workingon anti-social behaviour, specifically inrelation to introductory/startertenancies.

Suggestions from non-landlord

organisations

A wide range of ways to improve the useof introductory/starter tenancies wereidentified by the various non-landlordorganisations, including:

• use them in a way which is consistentwith other aspects of theorganisation’s approach to tenancymanagement and its strategy fordealing with anti-social behaviour


45

• use them in a positive way, i.e. makeit clear to tenants what needs tohappen to progress to a permanenttenancy. Provide support to enablethis to happen

• regularly review their use and impact

• ensure there is a robust review orappeal process, including oralhearings

• provide quality training for allrelevant staff and board members

• view their use for rent arrears as poorpractice

• the Assembly Government shouldwork with a focus group of tenants todevelop a standard leaflet aboutintroductory/starter tenancies toensure consistency of message

• the Assembly Government, throughits inspection/regulatory activity,should ensure that they are not beingmisused.


46

ConclusionsIn this chapter of the report, we set out theconclusions of the research. The researchexamined how introductory/startertenancies are used by local authorities andhousing associations in Wales. In August2003, 14 local authorities and 18 housingassociations were using introductory/startertenancies and a further five social landlordshad taken a decision to use them. Theresearch found: significant variation in theway that introductory/starter tenancies areused by different landlord organisations,evidence of good practice, and examples ofpractice which demonstrated room forimprovement. The findings lead to a rangeof recommendations for the AssemblyGovernment, social landlords and otherorganisations.

The research found differing views aboutintroductory/starter tenancies amongsttenants, landlords and non-landlordorganisations. The differences betweentenants and some non-landlordorganisations are particularly striking.

Comparisons with previous research

Research evaluating the use of startertenancies published by the HousingCorporation in 1998 concluded that themajority of tenants in two pilot areassupported the use of starter tenancies.Tenants were not concerned about theirimpact on security of tenure and felt thatstarter tenancies had contributed to areduction in anti-social behaviour. Theresearch carried out for the AssemblyGovernment also found that tenantssupported the use of introductory/startertenancies and felt that they couldcontribute to tackling anti-social behaviour.However, the Assembly Government

research found that most tenants wereconcerned about their security of tenureand would like to receive clear informationabout the implications of having anintroductory/starter tenancy.

The findings of research on neighbournuisance and the law published by theChartered Institute of Housing in 2000, arelargely corroborated by the research carriedout for the Assembly Government. Inparticular, both studies found mixed viewsabout the effectiveness of introductory/starter tenancies. There was someconfusion around the eviction process andthe standard of proof required. Bothstudies found that the majority of evictionsof introductory/starter tenants were forrent arrears.

Rationale for using introductory tenancies

The research found that an overwhelmingmajority of tenants supported the use ofintroductory/starter tenancies by sociallandlords. They saw them as a tool toenable landlords to act effectively toresolve anti-social behaviour. The use ofintroductory/starter tenancies wassupported consistently by both currentintroductory/starter tenants and by thosewho have had their introductory/startertenancies made permanent. In addition, theresearch found that the vast majority oftenants in both categories felt strongly thatintroductory/starter tenancies should beused for all new tenants. They felt thatusing them in a targeted way, for certaingroups of tenants or on problem estates,was discriminatory.

The research found that staff withinlandlord organisations that were usingintroductory/starter tenancies also


47

Chapter 4: Overall Conclusions and Recommendations

supported their use. Despite the fact thatofficers made many suggestions forimproving the way that introductory/startertenancies are used in their organisations, allthe case study landlords wanted tocontinue to use them. Some landlords thatwere not using introductory/startertenancies were concerned that using themwould need additional time and resourcesand would be difficult to implement fairly.Other landlords were not usingintroductory/starter tenancies because theyconsidered that they were not relevant totheir context or necessary as a tool fortackling anti-social behaviour.

Some national organisations were opposedto introductory/starter tenancies inprinciple, while others saw the decision touse them as one that needs to be taken byindividual landlords. National organisationsalso identified a range of factors that needto be put in place in order for introductory/starter tenancies to be used positively.

The research found that landlords startedusing introductory/starter tenancies fordifferent reasons. Within the eight casestudy landlords, it is apparent that theywere used for rent arrears by localauthorities more frequently than byhousing associations.

Starting using an introductory tenancy

scheme

The research found that landlordsconsulted with tenants and staff whenconsidering introducing introductory/startertenancies but, in some cases, not with alltenants. It also found that local adviceagencies would welcome the opportunityto be consulted by landlords consideringintroducing introductory/starter tenancies.Some landlords consulted with otherlandlords in the area when consideringintroducing introductory/starter tenancies.

Impact and effectiveness

There was evidence from tenants takingpart in the research, that introductory/starter tenancies can have a positive, and insome cases a lasting, effect on theirbehaviour. Many tenants said that havingan introductory/starter tenancy had madethem more aware of the need to be a goodneighbour and more careful not to causenuisance or noise. Some tenants whoseintroductory/starter tenancies had beenmade permanent said that the need to be agood neighbour during theintroductory/starter period has had alasting effect on their behaviour.

This contrasts with the perception of themajority of staff who did not feel thatintroductory/starter tenancies had anoverall impact on the behaviour of mosttenants. This was despite them being ableto provide examples of whereintroductory/starter tenancies had made adifference to individual tenants. Staffconsidered that the message provided byusing introductory/starter tenancies wasimportant.

There was evidence from tenants andadvice agencies taking part in the researchthat introductory/starter tenancies cancause anxiety and insecurity for somevulnerable tenants, in particular, those withmental health problems. In addition,tenants interviewed who had experiencedproblems with their introductory/startertenancy were, in many cases, youngand/or in their first tenancy. They said thatthey did not receive adequate support oradvice from their landlords when theirtenancy ran into difficulties. AssemblyGovernment statistics suggest thatintroductory/starter tenants are much morelikely to leave their home prior to evictionthan non-introductory/non-starter tenants.


48

The research found that a minority oftenants were concerned that theirintroductory/starter tenancy made themvulnerable to unfair complaints againstthem by neighbours. However, the researchfound no evidence that introductory/startertenants are at risk of losing their tenanciesas a result of unfair complaints byneighbours.

The research found evidence that assuredshorthold tenancies can be effective whenused in a targeted way as part of an overallhousing management strategy to turnround estates or areas with problems. Suchstrategies included regular visits to all newtenants and an immediate and robustresponse to tenants who caused problemsduring their starter period.

Introductory/starter tenancies wereidentified as effective by staff, when usedas one tool of the many available to tackleanti-social behaviour, e.g. preventioninitiatives, mediation, injunctions and otherlegal remedies. They were not viewed as apanacea to all problems created by anti-social behaviour. Some staff consideredthat the effectiveness of introductory/starter tenancies could be undermined bytheir own organisations’ policies andprocedures, as well as by the courts.

Providing information

The research found that the majority oftenants had a good understanding ofintroductory/starter tenancies. However, asignificant minority of council tenants werenot told that they were being given anintroductory tenancy and did not have itssignificance explained, when they signedthe tenancy agreement. There waswidespread confusion amongst themajority of tenants about the reasons whya landlord might not make an introductory/starter tenancy permanent, especially as to

whether rent arrears were included as oneof the reasons. In addition, the majority oftenants did not know what would happenat the end of the introductory/starterperiod, or how the landlord would decideon whether their tenancy should be madepermanent.

The research also found that informationwas not consistently provided by landlordsto introductory/starter tenants at thebeginning of the tenancy, during thetenancy, or at the point where it becomespermanent.

Housing management during the


The research found that anti-socialbehaviour was a significant issue for theeight case study landlords. The way inwhich introductory/starter tenancies wereused by the case study organisationsvaried. Some of this variation was due todifferences in organisational structure, inparticular whether housing managementwas provided by generic or specialist staff.The variations in the way in whichintroductory/starter tenancies were usedincluded the detail of tenancy agreements.Not all introductory/starter tenancyagreements clearly indicated the date onwhich the tenancy would becomepermanent.

The research found wide variation betweenthe eight case study organisations as to theextent to which introductory/startertenancies were used to tackle rent arrears.However, in most of the eightorganisations, complaints about anti-socialbehaviour of introductory/starter tenantswere dealt with in the same way as thoseagainst permanent tenants. Policies andprocedures on introductory/startertenancies were not consistently good orcomprehensive.


49

There was evidence that having anintroductory/starter tenancy inhibited sometenants from making complaints to theirlandlord about problems experienced fromneighbouring tenants, or from complainingabout outstanding repairs. These tenantswere concerned about being labelled astroublemakers and about jeopardising theirchances of their tenancy being madepermanent.

The research found that the majority oflandlords did not monitor the tenancy orprovide any feedback to tenants on theprogress of their tenancy, during theintroductory/starter period. The majority oftenants said that they would welcomefeedback on any problems, or reassurancethat the tenancy was progressingsatisfactorily during the introductory/starterperiod. The research identified a number ofgood practice examples in monitoringintroductory/starter tenancies and ensuringthat housing management servicesprovided support for tenants to successfullycomplete the first 12 months of thetenancy.

What happens at the end of the tenancy

The research found that many landlords didnot inform tenants at the end of theintroductory/starter period that theirtenancy was now permanent. A number oftenants taking part in the research did notknow whether they held anintroductory/starter tenancy or apermanent tenancy. The majority oftenants indicated that they would like thelandlord to confirm to them by letter thattheir tenancy has been converted to apermanent one, and that they havesuccessfully completed the introductory/starter period.

The case study landlords had differentprocesses for deciding how to makeintroductory/starter tenancies permanent.In addition, they did not all mark the endof the introductory/starter period. Theresearch found that review procedureswere in place, were being used and wereresulting in decisions not to endintroductory/starter tenancies. Landlordsending introductory/starter tenancies didnot always signpost tenants to independentsources of information and advice.

Monitoring outcomes and impact

The research found that both landlords andnational organisations considered thatmonitoring the outcomes and impact ofintroductory/starter tenancies could be,and should be, improved. Some landlordshad comprehensive monitoring systems inplace, while others did not have systems toconsistently track the outcomes of allintroductory/starter tenancies.

RecommendationsRecommendations for the Welsh Assembly

Government

The Assembly Government should:

• clearly set out its expectations on theuse of introductory/starter tenancies,including whether it is appropriate touse them as a tool to tackle rentarrears. The majority of tenantsinvolved in the research consideredthat it is not appropriate to useintroductory/starter tenancies for rentarrears

• produce and disseminate a goodpractice note to clarify how, and inwhat circumstances, introductory/starter tenancies should be used

• ensure that inspection and regulatoryactivity examines the use of


50

introductory/ starter tenancies, andconsider appropriate action iforganisations do not use them in theway set out by the AssemblyGovernment

• include the requirement to provideclear information about the sort oftenancy that applicants will get froma housing association, in theinformation the AssemblyGovernment is considering producingfor housing association applicants

• ensure that the Tenants’ Guaranteefor Housing Association Residentssets out guidelines which address theissue of provision of information tostarter tenants at the beginning andduring the tenancy, as well as at thepoint that the tenancy is madepermanent or ended

• extend the requirement to provideinformation to housing associationapplicants, to local authorities.

Recommendations for social landlords

Social landlords should:

• consult with tenants and otherstakeholders to consider whetherthere would be benefits from usingintroductory/starter tenancies for allnew tenants. Stakeholders consultedshould include staff, other landlords inthe locality, local advice agencies andsupport providers

• once a decision has been taken to useintroductory/starter tenancies,identify the resource implications, e.g.staffing, monitoring, etc., and buildany costs into the budget

• where a decision is, or has been,taken not to use introductory/startertenancies, review this regularly inconsultation with tenants andstakeholders

• use introductory/starter tenancies forall new tenants, if they are used at all,to ensure equality of treatment inaccordance with the law andRegulatory Requirements. This doesnot refer to the use of assuredshorthold tenancies as an alternativeto excluding individual tenants

• draw up housing managementprocedures to ensure thatintroductory/starter tenancies areused as part of an overall strategy tocombat anti-social behaviour. Theseshould include visits to all newtenants and an immediate and strongresponse to any problems during theintroductory/starter period

• ensure that clear information andreassurance is given to tenants at thelettings stage, about the reasons andprocedures for making/not making atenancy permanent

• ensure that letting procedures includeproviding clear information to all newtenants, explaining their rights, underthe tenancy agreement, to receive thesame service from their landlord aspermanent tenants. Informationshould include an explanation of theorganisation’s policies on respondingto any complaints made about anintroductory/starter tenant

• provide clear information to allintroductory/starter tenants, both atthe start of the tenancy and on a


51

subsequent visit during theintroductory/starter period, about:

• the rights and responsibilities of anintroductory/starter tenant

• the reasons for having anintroductory/starter tenancy

• the reasons for not makingintroductory/starter tenanciespermanent

• what happens at the end of theintroductory/starter periodincluding procedures for decidingwhether the tenancy will be madepermanent or terminated

• the tenant’s rights to review andindependent advice if a tenancy isnot made permanent

• ensure that the agreements used forintroductory/starter tenancies clearlystate on what date the tenancy willbecome permanent, unless any actionis taken to end the tenancy

• include information aboutintroductory/starter tenancies intenant newsletters and other regularforms of communication with tenantson:

• the numbers of introductory/starter tenancies issued

• the overall outcomes forintroductory/starter tenanciesissued during the period

• in cases where introductory/startertenancies were not madepermanent, a breakdown of thereasons for this

• through regular monitoring duringthe introductory/starter period,identify any support needs of tenants.Landlords should ensure that theseare met adequately, to enableintroductory/starter tenants to resolveproblems and sustain their tenancies

• ensure that effective procedures andadequate staff resources are put inplace to regularly monitor the tenancyduring the introductory/starterperiod. Landlords should feed back totenants on problems and/or progress,and to support tenants who areexperiencing problems, to enablethem to sustain their tenancy

• ensure that, at the end of theintroductory/starter period, eachtenant whose tenancy is to beconverted to a permanent onereceives a letter of confirmationwhich also states the date on whichthis will happen

• ensure that relevant advice isprovided to introductory/startertenants who hand in their notice oragainst whom possession is beingconsidered, including the provision ofcontact details for sources ofindependent advice

• ensure that effective links are in placewith local advice agencies to enabletenants experiencing problems withtheir tenancy to be provided withindependent advice

• ensure that effective links are in placewith local support providers to enabletenants experiencing problems withtheir tenancy to access floatingsupport or supported housing


52

accommodation, as appropriate totheir needs

• monitor the outcome of allintroductory/starter tenancies

• ensure that monitoring includesgathering feedback from bothexisting introductory/starter tenantsand those whose tenancies have beenmade permanent. This feedbackshould focus on whether having anintroductory/starter tenancy affectshow they live in their homes

• provide induction and refreshertraining for staff on the use of

introductory/starter tenancies,including how to use them correctly

• explore possibilities of building linkswith the courts to ensure that thecorrect procedures are followed inrelation to introductory/startertenancies, e.g. through court usergroups.

Recommendations for other organisations

All advice agencies and support providersshould ensure that training for advisers andsupport staff includes information onintroductory/starter tenancies, theirimplications and what advice tenants mayneed.


53

Appendix 1: BibliographyAudit Commission/HouseMark (2003) CD-Rom of Housing Inspectorate PositivePractice September 2000 to September2003. Coventry: HouseMark

Chartered Institute of Housing (2000)Neighbour Nuisance, Social Landlordsand the Law. Coventry: CIH

Chartered Institute of Housing Cymru(2001) The Law: An Adequate Responseto Anti-Social Behaviour? A SocialHousing Perspective. Cardiff: CIH Cymru

Housing Corporation (1998) StarterTenancies and Introductory Tenancies:An Evaluation. London: HousingCorporation

Housing Corporation (1999) A Guide toStarter Tenancies for RSLs: GoodPractice Guide. London: HousingCorporation

Local Government Association (2001)Introductory Tenancies: Guidance.London: LGA

Shelter Cymru (October 2002)Introductory Tenancies: A Denial ofRights. Swansea: Shelter Cymru

Tai Cymru (1997) RegulatoryRequirements. Cardiff: Tai Cymru

Tai Cymru (1998) Circular 7/98 AssuredShorthold Tenancies for Use asIntroductory Tenancies. Cardiff: TaiCymru

Welsh Assembly Government (December2002) Social Landlord Possessions andEvictions in Wales 1 April 2001 to 31March 2002 SB 104/2002. Cardiff: WAG

Welsh Assembly Government (October2003) Social Landlord Possessions andEvictions in Wales 1 April 2001 to 31March 2002 SB 96/2003. Cardiff: WAG

Welsh Assembly Government (2003) DraftRegulatory Code (for consultation).Cardiff: WAG

Welsh Assembly Government (2004) Livingin Harmony Toolkit. Cardiff: WAG

Welsh Housing Quarterly (2004) Issue 53Legal Update. Cardiff: Cardiff University

WebsitesArden Chambers www.ardenchambers.com

HouseMark www.housemark.co.uk


54

evaluating the use of introductory and starter tenancies · landlords provide the housing...

Documents