The Lambeth walk

The south London borough of Lambeth is said to be the most ethnically diverse in western Europe. Every bit as varied is its social housing coverage. The borough has the largest number of registered social landlords working within its boundaries – there are 87, according to the Housing Corporation register, though 19 don’t manage any social rented stock in the borough. The remaining 68 rent out 15,267 homes between them.

This begs the question of whether such a fragmented social housing landscape really gives tenants the best service. Just 10 associations manage more than 250 homes in the borough, while 33 have fewer than 250 homes overall. Lambeth’s many smaller organisations argue that only a specialised approach can fulfil the needs of the borough’s diverse population. The government takes a different view, believing that the building and management of homes will be more efficient with fewer, larger landlords. Organisations such as the council, which must navigate the complex network of RSLs, sympathise with both sides.

But what kind of service are Lambeth’s associations actually providing to tenants? To find out, my mission was to visit as many of the borough’s housing associations as possible in one day.

On a chilly November morning, my journey begins in the north of the borough, near the newly fashionable south bank of the Thames. The first ports of call are the two largest associations on my route: Presentation Housing Association and the Peabody Trust.

Presentation owns 4500 units, 880 of which are in Lambeth. Its brand-new head office is impressive – with its glass and steel construction it wouldn’t look out of place over the river in the City. Peabody, too, has a large and imposing office to serve tenants of its 963 homes in Lambeth. Fronted by security guards and receptionists with telephone headsets fielding a barrage of phone calls, both associations exude a professional, corporate image. But when I call, there are no tenants visiting to press for repairs or clear up rent queries – a common theme throughout my tour of RSL offices.

You can’t have too many RSLs in one borough. The more there are, the more diversity of need they can cover

Carol Jones, Black Roof community housing association

Neither association has anyone available to discuss whether Lambeth really needs 87 associations when I visit, but later Presentation chief executive Mohni Gujral says she believes there are too many. She does not think wholesale consolidation is the answer, though. “We must maintain both the range and diversity of organisations. It would be a mistake to end up with fewer associations of a single type,” she says.

On the other hand, staff at Peabody don’t appear to mind that 86 other organisations occupy the same stomping ground as them. A spokeswoman takes a more accommodating view: “There are evidently a great many people in Lambeth in need of social housing, so the high number of RSLs can only be beneficial for meeting the needs of the borough’s residents.”

Further south, many smaller associations are based in Stockwell. Ekarro Housing Co-operative has 58 units, all in Lambeth, and its office is in a huge converted church on a leafy suburban street. Inside is a bright room and, at a large table in the centre, a group of tenants are holding a meeting. In fact, Ekarro is the only office where I find any tenant presence at all.

“I’m very happy with a smaller housing association,” says Nicola Viinikka, chairwoman of Ekarro’s management committee, who’s been a tenant for five years. “All the houses are within walking distance of each other so it feels like a real community. I would prefer to stay with a small one because I think they are more dynamic, spontaneous and responsive. There’s too much bureaucracy in larger ones.”

Large RSLs don’t want to know when we go to them for money. They just want all the properties for themselves

Tim Cummins, Ekarro housing co-operative

Tim Cummins, director of housing, is also on hand and happy to talk. He acknowledges that there are a large number of housing associations in Lambeth and, when quizzed, can name some of the largest – Family Housing Association, Hyde Southbank Homes and Southern Housing Group. He says smaller associations, like his own, find it difficult to access funding and are shut out by their larger neighbours. “We go to the council for money and they don’t want to know and then we go to the larger housing associations but they don’t want to know either – they’re only interested in having all the properties for themselves,” he says.

But he is adamant that being small does not equate with being inefficient and insists his co-operative can complete repairs in less time that the larger ones. It’s not only being physically closer to their tenants that makes that possible, it’s also the result of being better acquainted with individual tenants.

This is, perhaps unsurprisingly, a common sentiment among smaller associations around the borough. At Vauxhall-based Black Roof Community Housing Association, which has 77 units and mainly serves black and minority-ethnic tenants, only the receptionist and manager Carol Jones are there. Jones says she is very busy but spares a few minutes for a chat in an empty meeting room. She     believes, as Cummins does, that the more localised the RSL, the better it serves its population.

She even goes a step further: “You can’t have too many RSLs in one borough. The more there are, the greater degree of diversity and varying needs can be covered.”

Forcing smaller associations to merge would be too much of a shock for tenants. They’d never forgive me

Derek Murphy, Brixton housing co-operative

The personnel touch find the office of Brixton Housing Co-operative, which has 87 units, on a deceptively quiet road behind Brixton high street. We ring the bell and, after a few minutes, housing manager Derek Murphy sticks his head out of the door. Displaying undeniable local knowledge, he says I am lucky that the cafe opposite the office has just been raided by the police because all the drug dealers who used to hang around there have now gone to ply their trade elsewhere.

Inside, the office is empty of people and furniture, apart from the tables and chairs stacked around the sides. Murphy says that the co-operative struggles to staff the office on a full-time basis. He offers me a cup of tea but warns that the kitchen upstairs might be a bit smelly – he’s looking after a tenant’s hamster and it needs its cage cleaned out. “You don’t get that kind of customer care with the larger associations,” he quips.

Murphy admits that 87 associations does sound a lot for one borough. But the alternative – forcing smaller ones to merge or join larger RSLs – would be too much of a shock to the system for his tenants. “They might never forgive me for it,” he says.

While smaller associations might lack the resources to keep their office open all the time, some of the larger stock owners have hardly any local facilities at all. Close to Brixton Housing Co-operative’s office, there’s a London & Quadrant sign outside a tower block. More than 2300 of L&Q’s 39,000 homes are in Lambeth and it is on the corporation’s development partner list with a £113m programme up to 2006. It expects to build up to 100 new homes for rent and 50 for shared ownership each year within the borough. But its only office for tenants is three miles from here, at the very south of the borough in West Norwood.

Smaller RSLs may be more expensive, but if that provides a more relevant service for clients, sometimes you have to say – so be it

Ian McDermott, Riverhaven

L&Q argues that this is perfectly adequate to serve the needs of its tenants. “Our office is based in the heart of our stock in the borough and is open nine to five for visitors. However, the majority of our residents prefer to contact us by phone or email,” a spokeswoman says.

L&Q is one of Lambeth council’s preferred partners for development and regeneration projects, and a spokesman for the council’s housing department says that because it works with preferred key partners for activities such as development and regeneration, the enormous number of RSLs isn’t the greatest concern. “Mergers are a good idea but we are not actively encouraging them because it wouldn’t change the way we operate or make it any easier for us,” he says.

“What is more of a problem is the way large housing associations can have diversified stock spread over a large area. When an association has a small number of units in a certain borough but thousands on the other side of London, there is a danger that their management is much more remote and less hands-on in the borough that has less stock.”

Of Lambeth council’s six preferred development partners – L&Q, Metropolitan Housing Trust, Notting Hill Housing Trust, Family Housing Association, Ujima Housing Association and Amicus Group – only L&Q, Metropolitan and Amicus have offices within the borough that tenants can visit.

Specialist RSLs do vital work. Some reduction in the number of RSLs is a good idea – but not if it jeopardises these specialists

Errol Harris, Ekaya housing association

Last, but not least

My final destination is Riverhaven, hidden behind Streatham train station. It’s got 1300 units, mainly in Lambeth and next-door Wandsworth. It’s only noticeable by its faint outside lights – they are just closing up for the day – but Ian McDermott, the interim chief executive, spares a few minutes to chat.

“It all depends on your definition of a housing association,” he says. “What is it there for? These days, they are increasingly taking on the role of the local authorities so there does need to be more consolidation and a more corporate-style attitude. But this doesn’t suit everyone’s needs.

“Smaller RSLs are more expensive to run, but if that provides a more relevant service to the tenants, sometimes you have to say – so be it.”

So my tour of Lambeth’s RSLs is over.

Many of the smaller associations do seem more community-centric than their larger, more corporate counterparts. But given that none of the offices I visited were exactly brimming with tenants, I’m still left with a nagging doubt over how important that local presence is to the people these organisations serve.