View report page

RE-HOUSING ON HEALTH GROUNDS
In matters of rehousing the use of a points scheme to guide
housing committees is probably the system most commonly used but
no one has yet managed to produce a scheme which will give a
truly satisfactory guide to the more seriously needy applicants.
Hornsey's scheme has been revised from time to time in an
attempt to make it more equitable. In 1956 the Housing Management
Sub-Committee considered a report drawing attention to the priority
needs of housing applicants where a health factor was involved. The
points scheme was revised to permit, among other considerations,
the award of 15 points on health grounds instead of 10 which had
previously been the maximum. In addition, it was made possible
to award 5, 10 or 15 according to the urgency of the case, whereas
previously the award had been 10 points or nothing. A further 15
points may be awarded by the Committee at their discretion and,
where circumstances permit, it is possible to recommend to the
Committee that discretionary points be awarded to enable an application
to be placed on the "live" list.
To ensure that applicants with specially urgent health need
are not overlooked merely because they are unable to obtain sufficient
points, the Council has agreed that the Medical Officer of Health may
recommend any applicant for rehousing as a special case, without
regard to the points scheme, if he is satisfied that rehousing is
essential on health grounds. Unfortunately, the present shortage of
Council owned housing accommodation has a restrictive effect on the
selection of such cases, and only the urgent cases in which housing
is considered to play a very special part in the health of the family
are put forward for consideration. It follows that there are many
cases in which the need, though not quite so urgent, is still great,
and some of these would certainly be put forward for consideration
if more accommodation were available. Such cases are placed in
special categories and during 1961 thirty such cases were dealt with.
Nine families were recommended to the Committee for rehousing as
special cases and two were accepted, both of which were rehoused
before the end of the year.
The following notes on six cases, which were not thought
sufficiently urgent to recommend to the Committee for special rehousing,
illustrate the extreme difficulty of deciding when to recommend
an applicant for special rehousing.
CASE NO. 53 - Husband and wife (aged 70 years) live in
two rooms on the first floor. The wife suffers from diabetes
and has had one leg amputated. The circulation in remaining leg
is poor. Walking (with the aid of stick) is a precarious manoeuvre,
and the stairs (17 in all) are particularly difficult. A ground floor
flat would help her to remain mobile.
15