Established 2005 Registered Charity No. 1110656

Scottish Charity Register No. SC043760

current issue



'Ruthless' council

September 25 2009
Two households may end up on the street after Slough Borough Council fails to cater properly for their housing needs Slough Borough Council is at the centre of a controversy over its housing policies and it has been accused of being 'ruthless' towards people's housing needs. Two households might end up living on the street after the council did not cater properly for their housing needs properly. Warwick Wareing, who faced both parents' deaths last year, may be evicted from his family home because his name was not on the lease. Mr Wareing told local press that he had tried to put the tenancy under his name five years ago, but believed that a parent and child could not both be on the documents. He will now have to live on the streets while he is on a three-year waiting list for a one-bedroom council flat. The council has offered to pay the deposit for a private flat, but Mr Wareing cannot afford to pay the rent, as he earns £800 a month as a warehouse assistant. Serena Webb and her five children, who also expect to be evicted, left a council property in June 2004 after Mrs Webb's son, Taylor, died following an seizure. Her housing application was cancelled in February last year when she moved, as the council said she failed to inform them of her change of address. The council says it would provide temporary accommodation for Mrs Webb and her family if they become homeless. According to a council statement, after Mrs Webb left her council accommodation, she received a rent deposit for a three-bedroom house, which she later moved from. Due to this, her housing application was cancelled. She can now make a homeless application or reapply for a permanent home by joining the housing register. The council says that she should be housed in at least five years. As to Mr Wareing's situation, the council says that his case has been heard by a housing needs panel. Because he is in employment, he is not considered to be vulnerable, and the panel ruled against him being fast-tracked for another smaller tenancy.