By Carmelo Garcia – Local Democracy Reporter
A Forest of Dean resident was reportedly pushed out of the way by someone who entered their home and defecated in their living room as a warning for having the courage to stand up to anti-social behaviour.
That is one of the several examples raised by councillors last week who are concerned younger people are being housed in accommodation originally designed for the elderly.
Cinderford East councillor Stuart Graham (I) brought forward proposals which called for more to be done to ensure applicants being considered for specialist elderly or extra-care accommodation at the Forest of Dean District Council meeting on October 22.
He also called on the council to work with relevant housing providers to ensure that the age and eligibility restrictions applying to specialist developments are clearly stated in all relevant property advertisements and are consistently applied.
Cllr Graham said he put forward the motion because some elderly residents in housing developments originally intended for older people are suffering “serious long-term distress”.
He said the situation is leading to “obvious unresolved and incremental trauma due to persistent anti-social behaviour from some younger residents”.
He said this has been reported to the authorities and agencies have been involved for more than a year, yet elderly residents continue to suffer.
“This motion is not an attack on younger people or the homeless, it concerns the suitability of housing allocations and the protection of existing, often vulnerable, residents,” he said.
He claimed the council’s current approach relies heavily on enforcement after something has happened and they are “not well enough resourced”.
Reports had been made of residents enduring trespass, criminal damage, intimidation, drug dealing and noise, he said.
“Elderly residents, some in their 90s cannot sleep in their own beds and sleep on their kitchen floors,” he added.
“One resident was pushed out of the way while a person went into their home and defecated in their living room as a warning to them for having the courage to stand up to the anti-social elements.”
He called on the council to formally request that the responsible housing providers are obliged to seriously consider the intended age-related allocation criteria.
“Elderly residents should not have to endure the severe distress and trauma of months and years of intimidation and criminal behaviour while authorities wait for sufficient evidence to act,” he added.
Councillor David Wheeler (G, Newland and Sling) said the age-related restriction on allocation is generally discounted in social housing where an applicant has a medical condition or disability.
Conservative councillor Nick Evans (C, Tidenham), who is also deputy police and crime commissioner for Gloucestershire, commended the motion brought by Cllr Graham.
He told the meeting he spoke to him about the specific case he raised.
“I was very troubled by the points that were raised within it,” he said.
“I suggested to him that he apply to the Office for the Police and Crime Commissioner for an anti-social behaviour case review in that instance.”
He said there are a variety of legal avenues to be able to provide respite and resolution to the local community.
“I know very well anti-social behaviour and criminality in a locality can be debilitating,” he said.
“Especially if you’re the ongoing victim or person who was targeted as a result of that criminality.”
He said prevention is better than enforcement, which does happen but takes time.
Councillor Andrew McDermid (G, Lydney East) said he would support the motion even if it is “a bit flawed”.
“You’ve got to put yourself in the position of an elderly or vulnerable person who just wants a quiet life and has their life ruined by this kind of behaviour.
“And then when they ask for help, the authorities, the council, the housing provider, the police, mess about and don’t do much.
“It just goes to show you might have all embraced clever regulations and all sorts of stand by situations but on the ground what happens is very different.”
Thriving communities cabinet member Jackie Dale (G, Pillowell) said the motion was trying to address a claim of inappropriate allocation of specialist housing and anti-social behaviour.
She said she feared the motion did not prove “the assumption that if we restricted specialist housing i.e. for older and vulnerable residents entirely within this category, that we would remove the problem of anti-social behaviour”.
She said everyone wants residents to live in comfort, security and without fear of their surroundings and neighbours.
And she went on to say many of the issues are already being addressed and gave examples saying just three of the 73 properties advertised with age-related criteria were allocated outside of the age range to people with specific medical conditions.
Councillor Jaime Elsmore (Progressive Independents, Berry Hill), who welcomed the motion, gave an example claiming a young family moved into a home for the elderly in his ward and are causing anti-social behaviour.
“If you go there on the weekends, they move their settee out of their own living room into a public area and smoke pot and have their domestics and their anxieties and everybody in the neighbourhood is affected by this family through anti-social behaviour,” he said.
He went on to say he believes the council has a responsibility to make sure the housing allocation is “right for the right people”.
“We have a duty of care as well to make sure their concerns are addressed and the necessary actions are put in place to evict people like this that drag the neighbourhood down,” he added.
The council was tied on the vote and Cllr Martin (L, Cinderford East) used her casting vote to break the deadlock and reject the motion saying the council’s letting is not the issue.
“It’s the action on anti-social behaviour that needs to be,” she said.