Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to not want to have homeless people with complex needs placed in the house next door to me?

460 replies

StressedandNameChanged · 05/08/2018 23:57

I live in a 2 storey terraced house in a small residential street in an area with lots of rows of similar small terraced houses. It’s not the smartest area of town and hasn’t had the best reputation, but it was affordable when we moved here over 15 years ago, and we have been happy here. I live with my dh, and my youngest ds 12.

The end terrace house next door to me was bought by a private investment company earlier this year, and I recently found out that this was part of an organisation which combines property investment with supported housing. Following a lot of enquiries on my part, I found out that they planned to use the house as a house share for 5 vulnerable adults with complex needs and a history of homelessness. Complex needs means at least 2 of the following issues: substance misuse; history of offending; history of anti-social behaviour; mental health problems.

Communications with the organisations who will be managing the property have been problematic. They were initially very evasive, but once I had more info, the housing manager agreed to come to a residents’ association meeting to discuss the plans for the property. It didn’t go very well. On the agenda at the same meeting were problems with an existing supported housing project in the neighbourhood, where due to staffing issues and some challenging clients, the police are being called out every night.

The housing manager later offered to come and speak with dh and myself but as we were away at the time, we said we would arrange a date when we got back. Unfortunately, while we were away a neighbour put up some very offensive signs around the property, including some in my garden and went to the local paper. (This may be the same neighbour who has also been cutting cctv cables at the property). Since we got back we have tried to get in touch but no response. There is a meeting set up with the neighbourhood policing team and others, but the housing managers are not available to attend that either.

Meanwhile I have heard from elsewhere that at least one tenant would be moving into the property in 2 weeks’ time. I think the company running the property are trying to get it as a done deal with people living there before talking to anyone.

I know people can change and this is hopefully a good opportunity for the people who will be placed next door, but I also know there is no magic wand for people who have struggled with multiple serious issues for several years, and there will be relapses. I am worried about the location and the suitability of the property for this use. Most people who have suffered high levels of trauma and are trying to move away from a chaotic lifestyle want their own place where they can control their surroundings, not a shared house. I am worried about 5 vulnerable adults being housed together in a small Victorian terraced house with poor sound proofing. Many houses around here are used for student housing and they live 5 to a house, but they are groups of friends who choose to live together, and they can usually escape to their parents’ homes for a break. I know from experience the level of disruption just one tenant in a shared house can cause if they kick off, mainly to the other tenants but also to the neighbours. I am worried about some of the visitors they will attract. I am worried about the possible high turnover of tenants. I am worried about the potential disturbance for ourselves and other neighbours. I know what the streets around other hostels are like, and I will not feel safe if my street becomes like that. I am worried about the failure of the people managing the property to communicate, which doesn’t bode well if problems do occur. I am stressed out and losing sleep worrying about it.

Yes, I know I am being the very definition of a NIMBY, but I am amazed that this sort of facility can be placed in a residential street without any consultation with neighbours, the local authorities, the police or any existing services in the area.

OP posts:
HelenaDove · 06/08/2018 18:12

Which HA is it OP?

StressedandNameChanged · 06/08/2018 18:53

@Devilishpyjamas I don't know if there is a policy about single sex, though given the size they may decide it is easier to keep it single sex. The majority of people locally who will qualify for their criteria are male.

@HelenaDove Pivotal. They are brand new to this area, so we have no local knowledge of them. They have also had a massive overhaul and rebranding recently with new board and structure, etc, so may not even be the same as their previous incarnation.

OP posts:
Stirner · 06/08/2018 19:08

@Devilishpyjamas "reee anybody that disagrees with me reads the Daily Mail"

isadoradancing123 · 06/08/2018 19:11

I certainly would not like it, YNBU. If they are ex criminals with special needs .Any problems the police do not seem interested.

Neshoma · 06/08/2018 19:11

Lakie I think you are misunderstanding what these HC profs are saying.

It not that they don't want to live next door to clients on a professional basis, but on a personal one. They know what some residents are like and don't want themselves and their families exposed to them when off duty.

Neshoma · 06/08/2018 19:12

Whats the DM got to do with it? It's rather rude to imply those you disagree are DM readers. No one is accusing you of reading the Guardian and wearing Jeremy Corbyn badges.

Devilishpyjamas · 06/08/2018 19:17

I didn’t mention the daily mail @stirner . That was someone else. At least complain about what I actually did write.

Devilishpyjamas · 06/08/2018 19:18

OP - I am a bit biased against all male groups but the one time we had a MO all male group next door (5 builders) they were good as gold.

bakingdemon · 06/08/2018 19:39

@plantingandpotting I was! Our bedroom didn't share a wall with the care in the community house so we weren't kept up at night like it sounds you were.

zzzzz · 07/08/2018 08:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

hungryhippo90 · 07/08/2018 08:40

OP, I’ve not RTFT, but I read the first post shortly after it was put up and I’ve pondered on it since.
We’ve recently had notification that a block is due to be built for similar purposes in our estate, it’s going to be quite large, and will back on to the neighbours who live opposite.

My view is that they are in supported housing for a reason, they obviously need support. There will be people there to help keep things under control. There will be rules, and those who don’t keep to the rules will be moved on/out really quite quickly.

I think that everyone deserves a chance, and the people who may well end up living beside you could be great neighbours, if they have a history of homelessness, they’ll probably be on their best behaviour to keep a roof over their head.

If you can, forge a good relationship with the support workers for next door, it’ll be invaluable If problems do occur.

RolyRocks · 07/08/2018 08:44

Complex needs means the same thing and it’s meaning isn’t changed for this case.

Except the meaning is specific to this case because the HA who will be overseeing the property, has specified in a contract that criteria using that terminology and that criteria alone, not that the OP is inferring that is what the overall term ‘complex needs’ means to her or anyone else. I do wish some posters would stop projecting their personal experience that is not specific to this situation.

zzzzz · 07/08/2018 09:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

RolyRocks · 07/08/2018 10:01

But you have completely missed the point zzzzz in that the property is not just a temporary base for people with complex needs, full stop.

The property is for people with the following specific complex needs, as listed in the contract. Those specific complex needs have concerned the OP, not the example of complex needs regarding your DC. It is not a mistake of not knowing what the term ‘complex needs’ means. It is a few posters, such as yourself, that have jumped on the words ‘complex needs’ out of context of the specific situation that the OP is facing.

Therefore, berating the OP for something that is not directly related to her issue is a red herring and not particularly helpful.

Stirner · 07/08/2018 11:26

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

YeTalkShiteHen · 07/08/2018 11:37

I think that using complex needs as a catch all is the problem here.

Because as described by many posters it means different things to different people and is ambiguous at best.

RolyRocks · 07/08/2018 11:49

But it isn’t being used as a catch-all in this situation. If it was, I would 100% agree with you but I don’t know how many times it has to be established that the HA has written into the contract that the property will be for those who are deemed to have at least two of the specified criteria of complex needs specifically listed and therefore, it is so far removed from ‘ambiguous’ as you can get!

zzzzz · 07/08/2018 11:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

YeTalkShiteHen · 07/08/2018 11:51

But it isn’t being used as a catch-all in this situation. If it was, I would 100% agree with you but I don’t know how many times it has to be established that the HA has written into the contract that the property will be for those who are deemed to have at least two of the specified criteria of complex needs specifically listed and therefore, it is so far removed from ‘ambiguous’ as you can get!

If the term complex needs wasn’t ambiguous in itself and used as a catch all it wouldn’t need to be explained for different circumstances. That’s what I meant, I probably didn’t phrase it well.

zzzzz · 07/08/2018 12:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

stillamum22 · 07/08/2018 12:47

I understand completely - and I'm a little irritated by people labelling your behaviour as NIMBY ism.

From where I'm sitting it looks like there are some answers you'd like to reassure you that this business is not going to impact negatively on your neighbourhood and family. It is a business after all, bringing together a disparate set of people to a small living environment. I'd have some questions. e.g.

Staff numbers and their skills in this field
Contingency plans if there are concerns around relapse and behavioural issues, or are they
depending on local services to deal with problems e.g. the police? The police I suspect will get might tired of having a incompetent provider shipping people into a neighbourhood and then getting local services to mop up. It does happen.

That said if you are tolerant regarding students, who are my definition of hell (Smile), as long as this is a well run and monitored placement you'll be absolutely fine..

RolyRocks · 07/08/2018 13:08

zzzzz Very unfair to keep picking up on the OP’s first post and not accepting, despite reading, the OP’s subsequent two posts clarifying that that is what is in the HA’s contract that is clear and specific.

It is absolutely not damaging to have the terminology in a written contract stating that the specific complex needs that this particular accommodation is applicable to, is defined as complex needs as at least 2 of the following issues: substance misuse; history of offending; history of anti-social behaviour; mental health problems. to those with other complex needs where this is not applicable to.

If the contract stated just ‘complex needs’ and left it as that, then I agree with you that that would be damaging and stigmatising to a variety of different people with complex needs, but it doesn’t say that, does it?

YeTalkShiteHen yes sorry, I did misunderstand what you meant! Totally agree with you.

YeTalkShiteHen · 07/08/2018 13:12

RolyRocks I read my post back and you’re right it (ironically) was ambiguous!

zzzzz · 07/08/2018 13:22

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

HopefullyAnonymous · 07/08/2018 13:39

YANBU to hope that there isn’t much of an impact on your family, but YABVU to assume that there will be.

I deal with homelessness a lot through work. Without being too outing, we receive a lot of complaints from one individual about people “sat in doorways”. He has actually said to me that he doesn’t see why he should have to look at that every day. It’s this attitude of NIMBY that is part of what makes the problem so hard to address; it’s not glamorous, no option for pretty campaigns like for breast cancer, it’s hard to generate any sympathy/empathy which translate into support/donations.

If projects like the one in the OP can be successful in acting as a transitional accommodation, it would really help to reduce the problems associated with homelessness/rough sleeping - shoplifting/petty crime/drug use/alcoholism/ASB.

Swipe left for the next trending thread