Agenda item

The Community Safety Manager also delivered a very detailed presentation in respect of the work of the North Worcestershire Community Safety Partnership to tackle ASB.  This report had been requested as a regular update to the Panel at the meeting of the Panel that took place in September 2020.  Members were asked to note that the data provided in the report and presentation covered the period April 2018 to July 2021.

During the delivery of this presentation, the following points were highlighted for Members’ consideration:

·                There were different types of preventative action that could be taken to deter ASB.

·                In Housing, this included the use of Introductory Tenancies, whereby new tenants could be expelled from their properties if they caused ASB.

·                There were also specific verbal and written warnings that could be issued again residents involved in ASB.  This included Community Protection Warnings (CPWs), which could be elevated to Community Protection Notices (CPNs) if residents did not change their behaviour in response to the warning that had been issued.

·                Failure to comply with the terms of a CPN was a criminal offence.

·                The Council had issued 23 CPWs between September 2020 and August 2021 and 11 CPNs.  Some CPNs had been issued in planning enforcement cases.

·                Residents could request a Community Trigger, in cases where residents were concerned that limited action had been taken and they therefore wanted a review of their case and the way it had been handled.  Since September 2020, three Community Triggers, which were managed by the Community Safety team, had been recorded for Redditch, which all related to disruptive neighbour nuisance issues.

·                There was an option available for the Council to refer people for mediation and restorative justice. 

·                Funding had been received for projects designed to tackle youth ASB in the community.  In addition, funding had been received for projects related to Covid-19 recovery.

·                Representatives of the Community Safety Team attended multi agency meetings to discuss rough sleeping.  Members were asked to note that many of the rough sleepers who had been housed during the national lockdowns had remained in their accommodation following the end of the lockdown.  Some were being supported through the Housing First scheme.

·                The data indicated that there had been an increase in reports of ASB in the period April 2020 to March 2021 compared to the previous 12-month period.  This increase had occurred during the Covid-19 pandemic across all parts of the Borough.

·                The largest increases in reports of ASB in this period had been in the Batchley and Brockhill and Astwood Bank and Feckenham wards.

·                The increase in ASB included a rise in ASB nuisance calls, which appeared to have been influenced by the associated increase in the number of people working from home during the lockdown period who had been exposed to ASB that they might otherwise not have observed during working hours.

·                In addition to nuisance ASB, there had been reports of personal ASB cases, involving behaviour targeted at specific individuals.

Members subsequently discussed the report in detail and in so doing raised the following matters:

·                The number of CPNs that had been issued which had resulted in the Council taking court action.  Officers confirmed that the Council had not taken court action in relation to any of the CPNs, though two people who had been issued with CPNs were appealing through the courts.

·                The extent to which CPWs and CPNs could be regarded as a real deterrent to ASB if court action was not taken.

·                The position of Council tenants and the extent to which they could be assured of a secure tenancy with the local authority regardless of their behaviour.  Officers explained that if a tenant lost their tenancy as a result of their behaviour they were regarded as being intentionally homeless and the Council did not necessarily have a duty to rehome them under these circumstances.

·                The number of Community Triggers that had been launched in Redditch and the reasons why this number was so low relative to the number of ASB cases that had been reported.

·                The potential for mediation to be used to address ASB and the types of ASB cases where this might be useful.  Officers explained that mediation might be useful in cases of neighbour disputes where no other action had been identified that could resolve the matter.

·                The people who would undertake mediation in these circumstances.  The Panel was informed that initially mediation would be provided through an external agency, though in the long-term it was envisaged that Officers in the Housing Department would be trained to provide this service.

·                The circumstances in which restorative justice might be used.  Officers clarified that a Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) might work with residents on restorative justice in cases such as young people causing graffiti in local communities.

·                The organisations involved in the North Worcestershire Community Safety Partnership and the extent to which VCS groups had opportunities to get involved with the partnership’s work.  Members were informed that there were a number of VCS groups involved with the Safer Redditch group, including Victim Support and several mental health charities. 

·                The £83,000 funding for youth ASB projects received by the partnership in 2020/21 and the extent to which this funding would be available in future years.  The Panel was informed that this funding had been secured for a further two years and was likely to be a similar figure.

·                The impact of Acceptable Behaviour Contracts on the behaviour of residents.  Members were informed that these contracts were voluntary and both parties needed to sign up to the contract.  Breaches of these contracts could be used as evidence in court that the Council was doing everything reasonably possible to address inappropriate behaviour and only taking court action as a last resort.

RESOLVED that

the report be noted.