Optional Extra - July 2007
Welcome to Optional Extra. Every month we'll update you about what's happening in the world of housing and disabled people and, of course, at Ownership Options. We'll be covering subjects such as the changes in legislation affecting adaptations, the roll-out of the Homestake homebuyers' scheme and developments in benefits-based mortgage lending for disabled people. Along the way, we aim to highlight cases of good practice as well as examples of the bariers faced by disabled people in their search for decent housing.
We welcome your comments, and suggestions for subjects to be covered in future issues, which can be emailed to optionalextra@ownershipoptions.org.uk. Feel free to forward the newsletter to your colleagues, who can subscribe by emailing us at the address above quoting "subscribe" in the subject line.
Estimating the value of providing adaptations The Office for Disability Issues (ODI) report ‘Better outcomes, lower costs’ is the latest in a series of reports from government agencies to look at adaptations and equipment. It aims to provide, for once and for all, evidence of the social and financial benefits of adaptations.
In doing so the researchers identified 4 areas where savings may be made:
1. Saving by reducing or removing completely an existing outlay
The researchers looked particularly at the savings possible in the cost of residential care and the provision of home-care. For a seriously disabled wheelchair user, the cost of residential care is £700-£800 a week, equating to £400,000 in 10 years. The potential to save money by ensuring a disabled person can leave residential care is therefore significant. The researchers identified a case in a London borough where £30,000 was saved annually by ensuring that a wheelchair user could leave residential care by adapting their home.
When looking at home-care, they found that adaptations that remove or reduce the need for daily visits pay for themselves in a time-span ranging from a few months to three years and then produce annual savings.
2. Saving through prevention of an outlay that would otherwise have occurred
The researchers were also able to find evidence of savings arising from adaptations through the prevention of accidents with their associated costs, the prevention of admission to hospital or to residential care and prevention of the need for other medical treatment.
3. Saving through prevention of waste
More controversially, the report identifies that much of the waste in regard to adaptations comes from under-funding that causes delay, or the supply of inadequate solutions that are ineffective or psychologically unacceptable.
In one case, a disabled person received additional home-care hours costing £1,440, when a door-widening adaptation costing £300 was delayed for 7 months for lack of funding. In another case, a local authority spent nearly £90,000 on adaptations for disabled people who, because of the delay in providing them, died before they could gain any real benefit from them.
4. Saving through achieving better outcomes for the same expenditure
Adaptations are reported as producing an improved quality of life for 90% of recipients, as well as improving the quality of life of carers and of other family members. Given the choice of home-care assisting with toileting and washing, or an automated toilet and accessible shower, unsurprisingly most value the dignity and autonomy of the latter option. The report shows that the latter may also be the cheaper option.
Whilst the report was commissioned by the Westminster Government, the evidence it evaluates is international. The reports overall conclusion that adaptations offer both financial and social ‘best value’ in many circumstances is therefore as valid for Scotland as it is for England.
You can read the ‘Better Outcomes, Lower Costs’ report on the ODI’s website.
The Scottish Executive is continuing to look at the provision of equipment and adaptation services following the Equipped for Inclusion report of the Strategy Forum: Equipment and Adaptations in 2003, which was quickly followed by Audit Scotland’s report ‘Adapting to the Future’ in 2004.
The funding of private sector adaptations, identified as a major problem area, will be under the spotlight shortly when Communities Scotland starts its review of Private Sector Housing Grant. We’ll keep you posted on any developments.
Mobile Homes and mobilityA recent request for help from the City of Edinburgh Council regarding Homestake led us to look more at the issues facing disabled people who live in mobile homes. The Council was keen to know whether mobile home buyers could access the Homestake scheme, and whether any additional support would be available for those who were disabled.
The issue turns out to be more complex than we’d first thought. Under law, most residential property meets the definition of a ‘house’ as used in the various Scottish housing acts. Mobile homes, however, are not legally ‘houses‘; instead they are classed as ‘land’ and ‘living accommodation’. Instead of housing legislation, they are generally dealt with through the Mobile Homes Act 1983 and the Caravan Sites Act 1968, although the Housing (Scotland) Act 2006 has amended both of these Acts.
Additionally, unlike ‘housing’ in Scotland which is generally owned outright, mobile home owners may own their home but often rent the ground on which it is sited from a landlord. These landlords may be private owners or local authorities.
The result of these issues is that Homestake cannot be used to fund the purchase of mobile homes. It also, however, raises the issue of the funding of adaptations for disabled mobile home owners. Both the current adaptations grant scheme, and the new Scheme of Assistance to be introduced shortly, are written in terms of ‘housing’ which would appear to exclude applications for grants from those living in mobile homes.
If you have any experience of these issues we’d be interested to hear from you. Email us at optionalextra@ownershipoptions.org.uk.
New Minister's first speech on EqualitiesThe Minister for Communities and Sport, Stewart Maxwell MSP, gave a positive performance at the Disability Rights Commission’s (DRC) launch of its research into independent living. The event, attended by organisations representing disabled people, was expected to be one of the last for the DRC before they become part of the Commission for Equalities and Human Rights in October.
The DRC’s report examines current policy issues relevant to independent living and highlights opportunities and challenges for the promotion of independent living. It looks in particular at the political, social and service structure, the environment, personal support and services, opportunities for economic and social participation and funding and resources.
We were pleased to see the Minister give significant coverage in his speech to the issue of housing, which is a fundamental requirement for independent living. In particular, he spoke of the value of ‘joined up’ adaptation services between health, social work and housing which were also highlighted in the ODI’s new report. He also talked of the opportunities in the future for enabling disabled people to buy more suitable homes when adaptations aren’t the best option.
The DRC’s ‘Independent Living in Scotland’ report is available on their website.
'Notional Capital' and its effect on benefits-based borrowingWhen claiming means-tested benefits, including those which entitle a disabled person to buy a property using a benefits-based mortgage, the Department for Work & Pensions (DWP) will consider what capital, savings and assets a claimant has available to them. This consideration can also include what is known as ‘notional capital’, which describes a situation where the DWP treats a claimant as having money which they may not immediately possess.
Such a situation can arise where a claimant has money available to them but disposes of it, either by giving it away or by spending it on expensive or unnecessary items. Whilst the purchase of an expensive foreign holiday may obviously fall foul of this ruling, the expensive replacement of a kitchen, even if it ensures increased accessibility, may also raise suspicions.
Notional capital can also be an issue when a claimant has debt which is not enforceable under law. This can arise if a claimant receives a capital sum from a family member which the claimant later feels that they should repay. Without a formal agreement stating the sum and when it should be repaid, problems are likely to arise. This situation is particularly relevant where a family member has given, or loaned, capital to a disabled person to assist them to buy a more suitable property.
Such situations can present an issue if a person makes a claim for benefit, as the DWP can decide that this is ‘deliberate deprivation’ of capital and that the money was deliberately disposed of for the purpose of claiming benefits.
The decision maker at the DWP should consider all the facts of the case, and what the reasons might have been at the time. There may have been more than one reason for a person to act the way that they did. However, even in cases where the predominant motive was something quite different (e.g. a claimant ensuring that his home was in good condition by spending capital to do necessary improvements), they can still consider whether it could have been a secondary motive to be able to qualify for benefit.
Timing of the disposal will be crucial in considering whether the deprivation was deliberate. The longer the period that has elapsed between the disposal of the capital sum, and the claim for benefit, the less likely it is that it will be assumed to have been done mainly for the purposes of a benefit claim.
Obviously, this is a difficult matter for the DWP to prove. If they believe that a claimant has deliberately ‘deprived’ themselves of capital in order to qualify for benefits, then the benefit claim would be refused and the claimant would need to appeal this decision.
A claimant should therefore try to provide as much evidence as possible to argue their case. For example, they may be able to produce proof of monies given by a relative. Evidence in writing which supports the fact that the capital sum is conditionally given and should be repaid either as soon as possible, or after a specific event, is even better. Such an event could be the sale of a property or the maturing of an insurance policy
Further advice and assistance should be sought from a CAB or another welfare rights agency if a claimant needs to appeal.
Building to suit Homestake gives housing associations the opportunity to tailor-make accessible homes for sale to disabled people, as one of our clients recently found out.
Mr & Mrs D live in central Scotland. Mrs D has MS and is partially sighted. An OT assessment concluded her current housing situation is not suitable for her longer term needs. She requires a wheelchair accessible property as she is now a full time wheelchair user. Her current property is, however, based on 2 levels with steps at the access. Mr D has to use retractable ramping in order to cope with the latter.
The Ds ideally require a purpose built property with wheelchair access, wet floor shower and additional bedroom space. Thinking towards the future and the likely deterioration in Mrs Ds condition, it was a reasonable assumption that she will need to use a hoist to access the bathroom and bedroom facilities. Suitable circulation space was therefore required for a mobile hoist or, alternatively, ceilings were needed that were strong enough to support a ceiling track hoist.
As the family has equity of around £50,000 in their property, and were happy as homeowners, renting a valuable socially rented house didn’t make sense. Unfortunately, they simply couldn’t find a wheelchair accessible home or afford to buy an inaccessible one and adapt it.
The solution has been for the family to work with their local housing association to agree the design of a property which will be built for them as part of a Homestake development. When this is finished in 2008 they will sell their property and buy the new one with a stake of between 51% and 80%, depending on the completed property’s market value.
Uniting behind disabled peopleThe number of countries signing up to the United Nations Convention for People with Disabilities broke 100 in July. The Convention aims to rectify the situation where disabled people have not received adequate protection through existing UN conventions by recognising more explicit rights. The UK signed up in March 2007.
The Convention will come into effect worldwide shortly after the 20th member country ratifies the treaty. Whilst only 1 has done so to date, the UN is confident that others will follow shortly. When it comes into effect it will recognise disabled people's right, amongst others, to an adequate standard of living and social protection which includes public housing, services and assistance for disability-related needs.
You can read about the Convention on the UN’s website.
Optional Extra is produced every month. If you would like to receive the newsletter please e-mail us quoting "subscribe" in the subject line.
If you no longer wish to receive the summary email, please email quoting "unsubscribe" in the subject line.