Agenda item

The Cabinet Member considered a petition in objection to the change of use of Yiewsley Court sheltered housing scheme.

 

In objecting to the proposal to change the use of Yiewsley Court sheltered housing scheme, the lead petitioner put forward to the Cabinet Member some reasons against the change of use, and elderly residents being moved out of their homes. Key points raised by the petitioner included:

 

Following the consultative meeting the petitioner attended on Tuesday 20 September 2022 on a review of housing dedicated for use by older people that was provided by Hillingdon Council, the petitioner identified that residents needed help to remain in their homes.

 

The petitioner noted he contacted the Yiewsley Ward Councillor, Sital Punja, for further assistance from which they held their own residents meeting.

The petitioner acted as representative of 17 out of the 25 residents who expressed a desire to remain in Yiewsley Court.

 

It was noted that out of the 17 residents, one of the residents was reportedly occupying Yiewsley Court on a temporary basis and was not a permanent tenant.

 

Following submission of the petition, a family member of one of the signatories had contacted the Councilon their behalf to request thattheir signatureto the petitionbe removedon thegrounds that they had notunderstood what theywere signing, and in addition, accused the petitioner of doorstepping.

 

The lead petitioner made known that these claims were false and that the resident in question had expressed with certainty to him last week Saturday that he willingly signed the petition and would like to stay living in the property.

 

The petitioner respected the wishes of the 3 residents who had expressed a desire to move out of their homes. This left 5 residents remaining, who did not wish to become at all involved for reasons that possibly included the Home Loss Payment or awaiting the outcome of this petition.

 

The petition had acquired over 300 signatures within the local area, which included residents, their family members, the local church, the local doctor’s surgery, and the Robert’s Close Sheltered Housing Scheme.

 

The petitioner described the housing situation of a resident who was partially sighted, had lived in sheltered accommodation for 15years and was being looked after by her trusted neighbour whom she relied on. The petitioner posed the rhetorical question of what the resident would do without the help of her neighbour.

 

The petitioner described the housing situation of another resident who had severe reading and writing disabilities and had lived in sheltered accommodation for 6 years. The petitioner expressed that this particular resident enjoyed coffee mornings at the local church and felt safe knowing that he had helpful neighbours assisting him with tasks such as form-filling.

 

The petitioner cited another resident’s experience of living in sheltered accommodation who had been living in the property for 12 years, where there were many local shops as well as doctor and dental surgeries within walking distance. This resident was living in a perfect location and did not wish to move homes.

 

The petitioner also highlighted that his mother-in-law was an elderly Council tenant who had been living in sheltered accommodation for almost 16 years. She had given up living in a 3-bedroom house to reside in Yiewsley Court after her husband had passed away. The petitioner emphasised that his mother-in-law was happy living in Yiewsley Court and enjoyed her hobbies as well as regular visits from relatives. The petitioner expressed on behalf of his mother-in-law that ‘she just wanted to be left alone to stay here to the end of her days’.

 

The petitioner cited another resident’s experience of sheltered housing who had been very happy living in Yiewsley Court for 15 years and was described as being horrified and distraught at the thought of having to start over again by moving homes.

 

The petitioner noted that there were many other residents who also objected to being moved out of their homes as a result of the proposed changed use of Yiewsley Court sheltered housing scheme, but for reasons of time, he could not name them all.

 

The petitioner was disappointed with the proposal and asked the question of whether Hillingdon Council could do better than what had been  put forward for their proud senior citizens, some of whom were vulnerable or born in the UK or were immigrants, who had worked all their lives, and raised families.

 

The petitioner expressed that he did not think the decision to change the use of Yiewsley Court sheltered housing scheme was a morally or ethically good decision.

 

Councillor Sital Punja attended as Ward Councillor for Yiewsley and addressed the Cabinet Member. The key points raised objecting the proposal to change the use of sheltered housing scheme for Yiewsley Court were:

 

There were residents who had made Yiewsley Court their home, community, and support network.

 

There were also residents who had lived in the area most of their lives and enjoyed the ideally located Yiewsley Court, which was located close by to the local doctor surgery, dentists, pharmacy, High Street, Faith Groups, and bus routes.

 

Moreover, there were residents who benefited from an open space who felt safe and comfortable living in Yiewsley Court.

 

In addition, there were residents who had made adjustments to their homes to meet their personal needs and medical necessities.

 

There were residents who had family nearby to visit and help them, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic.

 

The Ward Councillor emphasised that the above reasons were expressed to her of why residents were heartbroken that they could be asked to leave Yiewsley Court. This served to demonstrate how Yiewsley Court was a great success in providing a good home for residents.

 

The thought of moving homes created a huge mental stress and anxiety for residents who were worried about finding for themselves comparable accommodation, benefits, and care.

 

The Ward Councillor acknowledged there were a few residents who did wish to move homes for personal reasons, but that the overwhelming majority of residents wished to stay in their homes. These resident feelings were reflected in the consultation feedback which formed part of the reporting as well as the 336 petition signatures.

 

The petitioner and Ward Councillor noted that there were many residents who wished to attend this Petition Hearing but due to illnesses or otherwise, were unable to support the petition by attending but nonetheless, supported the petition through their signatures.

 

It was expressed that consideration for Yiewsley Court stemmed around an oversupply of accommodation for the elderly across the Borough; however, during the consultation, Council officers were asked where there was an oversupply of places, and whether they were suitable for the specific needs of the residents, to which there was seemingly no knowledgeable answer. The Ward Councillor suggested feeding this information back to residents to improve their feelings of security and peace of mind.

 

The residents had previously expressed to the Ward Councillor that the consultation felt as though the decision had already been made to move elderly residents out of their homes and to change the occupancy to accommodate care leavers.

 

The financial incentive to help residents with the move was claimed to have enticed a few residents, but a larger proportion of residents questioned the costs of who would pay for the retrofitting of accommodation to fit the personal medical needs of the residents. The majority of residents did not want to take the money but to stay in their homes.

 

The Cabinet Member and Council officers were implored to listen to the views of the residents, decide to keep the use of Yiewsley Court as it was for the purpose of providing sheltered accommodation for elderly residents.

 

The Ward Councillor concluded by earnestly requesting the Cabinet Member and Council officers support the petition and not to make the consultation a tick box exercise because the residents were not numbers on an excel spreadsheet, but human beings who wished to live the best lives they could in a community they had made home, felt safe in, and could live their last days in.

 

The Cabinet Member listened to and acknowledged the requests and opinions of the petitioner and Ward Councillor. It was clarified that the Petition Hearing was a consultation and an official decision had not yet been made on Yiewsley Court and its uses going forward.

 

It was recognized that there was an oversupply of accommodation for the elderly across the Borough and that there was a need to consider how to best use the Council’s housing stock, with the needs of residents in mind.

 

It was emphasised that there was no tick box exercise involved in the consultation as the Council officers had consulted residents on their views, from which the feedback was seemingly more mixed with both positives and negatives than the petition would suggest.

 

The Cabinet Member acknowledged that residents could feel distressed about moving homes but that it was possible, if the proposal did move forward, the options offered to residents might have ultimately proved attractive to them.

 

The lead petitioner responded that some of the positive reasons noted in the consultation feedback could possibly be explained by the way the question was posed to residents, such as asking them which location they would like to move if the proposal was to go ahead, when the residents might not have necessarily wished to move at all.

 

The Cabinet Member listened to and acknowledged the petitioner’s point but reiterated that the consultation was not presented as negative as the petitioner and petition itself had suggested. Nevertheless, both the signed petition and the consultation feedback forms were to be investigated further before arriving at a decision.

 

The petition organiser addressed the Cabinet Member and asked whether consideration had been made to build something more purposeful than a leisure centre in West Drayton. 

 

The Cabinet Member responded that West Drayton residents would value a leisure centre and that building more accommodation for elderly residents, considering the current surplus of elderly accommodation that they could not fill, would not seem to be the best solution.

 

The Ward Councillor added that it was important to be mindful of elderly residents, many of whom were vulnerable with various needs, and that consideration should also be made to how difficult it was for people at any age to start living in a new home, let alone for elderly residents.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Cabinet Member:

 

1.    Met with petitioners and listened to their views following consultation with tenants at Yiewsley Court sheltered housing scheme; and

 

 

2.    Instructed the officers to bring forward a comprehensiveformal reportto Cabinetfor decisionon theproposals forsheltered housing, which incorporated the consultation and feedback from residents.