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

[StressedandNameChanged]

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.

Absolutely! As my children will be. But until they’re adults, they’re my responsibility.

This is what I mean. Utter ignorance. My son moved out of home into a residential home (own flat within the residential home) aged 17. We still held parental responsibility for him.

Clearly parents with children with mental health difficulties or disabilities are meant to live forever then to provide care for them!. Terrifies me how ds2 will cope after dh and I die given the lack of compassion by some on this thread.

@Devilishpyjamas - bollocks
. It's easy to virtue signal when it's not you that has to step over broken bottles and used needles.

It’s totally context dependent.

I currently live a couple of doors from an assisted living setup which seems to be young people with complex mental/physical needs. They’re all delightful, workers are lovely, absolutely zero problems and they’re probably one of our better neighbours. Bit of noise now and again but nothing more than a house with kids in. No safety issues for us at all - they are a bunch of young people with often quite profound needs and very pleasant neighbours.

I’ve also as a student lived next door to a poorly run place where I think it was mainly older adults with substance abuse issues. That was not a pleasant experience, it was badly run, the residents didn’t seem to be supported well at all and we had numerous incidents. Including high volume music - same song played on repeat for three days straight (yes, honestly, it took us three days to get environmental health and the police in to stop them) repeated banging on the walls telling us to shut up and screaming abuse at us (we were very quiet and I doubt they could have heard us) and threats of rape from one resident. It was a very upsetting experience and I moved out as soon as I could.

Your experience is going to depend on who moves in and how well supported they are.

Your neighbour sounds like an absolute arse.

It's easy to virtue signal when it's not you that has to step over broken bottles and used needles

My old estate had no hostel/homeless accommodation and I still did that daily! Nothing to do with homeless people!

No YANBU not to want this
Nobody would actively WANT to live next door to a place with potential problems, despite all the over competitive virtue signalling on this thread.
However, it might be absolutely fine and I suppose they need facilities like this to help people back into society and they have to go somewhere. If it’s definitely happening will just have to wait and see and hope it’s ok.
On a purely practical level the value of your house will go down unfortunately but if you’ve no plans to move that’s not an issue

And incidentally I was told by our SW that most families would have had Ds1 removed from our home long before he left - because the risks within the home were so high. (He has severe self injurious behaviour). She said she used to wake at night worried he would have headbutted and gone through a window - and would then remind herself he was with us and we would manage the risks. At that time we were waiting for a place nearby - if he would have had to move hundreds of miles away. It meant dh had to leave work at 2pm every day so we could both be there after school and utterly wiped out family life for the siblings.

The day he moved out was one of the worst of my life, but we really had no choice - if we had resisted SS would have started care proceedings anyway as the situation at home was not safe.

So yes I get annoyed at tthe ‘your responsibility’ line. In my son’s case he will be my responsibility for the rest of my life (& we are going to court to get deputyship so we can make decisions for him - once 18 parents have no rights to make decisions about their children without capacity). We take that responsibility seriously - part of which was needing to move out at 17.

Massive difference between living next door to disabled people living in supported housing and living next door to drug addicts/ex offenders living in supported housing...I'd only have issues with the latter.

How am I virtue sigalling?

It’s interesting how people with personal experience of homelessness, or of living next to a house like OP describes are being shut down as “virtue signallers” by people quite happy to write off an entire group of people they know fuck all about, have never met and have no right to judge isn’t it?

So call me a virtue signaller all you like. I’d rather be the kind of person who doesn’t write off people with complex needs and a snob.

I think the term 'complex needs has upset a lot of people, and I apologise for that. It obviously means different things in different situations and I can see a lot of concern in this thread from parents and carers of adults with mental health problems, learning difficulties and physical disabilities, who think I am demonising their loved ones. I understand that it is an emotive issue. But that is not the case here, and that is not what I am concerned about.

'Complex needs' was the term used in the contract for the group of people the housing organisation will be housing, and it was also defined in that contract very specifically as people with at least 2 of the following issues:
substance misuse;
history of offending;
history of anti-social behaviour;
mental health problems

• of that list, mental health problems is probably the one I am least worried about, though in many cases the issues are interrelated. Nor is it the fact that the people are homeless, or am I assuming all homeless people are drug users and criminals. But because of the selection criteria for this property, they are very likely to come with that history.

We have supported housing for people with disabilities in the area, but I hadn't even thought of these in the same category. There is a group of flats where disabled people live independently, no problems there apart from an incident of cuckoo-ing. There is a home for people with head injuries. A friend of mine lived there until he made amazing progress and was able to move back to his own home (though still with live in care) and even holds down a part-time job. There is also a home for adults with very high needs, possibly similar to @devilishpyjama 's son, who will never be able to live independently. Sometimes the people living there do make funny noises because of limited speech, and admittedly when those noises are of distress it can be worrying. But I (and I expect most of the community) have no problem with these facilities and their residents, and interact with them and their carers on a regular basis

I also have friends with debilitating and enduring mental health problems living close by and I am part of their informal support networks, by mutual consent.

On the plus side, there are not likely to be known sex offenders living there, as that is not part of the current contract remit, and a risk assessment taking into account the nearby supported housing for young people and the very close proximity of looked after children would probably preclude this.

Also positive, no-one with a history of arson will be housed there, as that would invalidate the housing organisation's insurance.

Absolutely! As my children will be. But until they’re adults, they’re my responsibility

What happens when the care needs become too great for you to deal with? When the person reqires a team of people in order to receive the care they need?

Sigh.

As I said, OP, you’ve attracted people who leave sense at the door to make room for hyperbole.

Not surprised. If you’re not careful you’ll attract one particular person who will shut down the entire discussion. Though her ilk seem to be doing that for her.

@YeTalkShiteHen - probably because "challenging" tenants get circulated round less affluent neighbourhoods no matter how many HA/Council houses they smash up or how many times they're evicted the misery just gets moved elsewhere. It's a continuation of the same problem really.

*but the ‘complex needs’ noted above heightens that nervousness but a hell of a lot of people with complex needs live and function perfectly well in society without causing any disturbance to anyone.

A person with asthma and depression is classed as complex needs; do you think every asthmatic with depression is a drug-fuelled, alcohol loving, partying to 4am individual??*

Oh my mistake @Hawkie. Didn’t realise that asthma was covered under Complex needs means at least 2 of the following issues: substance misuse; history of offending; history of anti-social behaviour; mental health problems And btw your intolerance shows with your comment about shitty areas.

OP has a right to be concerned.

rosy As I said, I will think of you lot whilst we are in town being stared at.

Please do think of MN - as it's bursting with lovely empathetic people who would be utterly supportive and would have helped your son when he was lost.

However, in this instance things are a bit different - the company have actually said their definition of "complex needs" includes "substance misuse; history of offending; history of anti-social behaviour; mental health problems." At least two of those on the list are extremely concerning - who wants to live next door to an offender with a history of antisocial behaviour?

Mind you, some posters don't seem to be able to tell the difference... Numerous fires since a teen with a history of arson moved in. Superglue squirted in people’s locks. Shouting abuse because a resident “looked at me funny”. Girls lying in the middle of the road to get run over because they’re depressed. Screaming at all hours of the night. Etc etc.

Llama - do you really think depression is on a par with arson etc?!

probably because "challenging" tenants get circulated round less affluent neighbourhoods no matter how many HA/Council houses they smash up or how many times they're evicted the misery just gets moved elsewhere. It's a continuation of the same problem really.

I think it’s the same problem as is evident on here, councils write off entire estates because to actually help people would take time and money.

Ironically we moved because of bullying from a child, not social issues. We were happy there and despite it being classed as a “sink estate” it was a brilliant community. Not without problems, but the lack of council/agency intervention was very telling.

When we write people off we create these problems. I’m staggered that people and governments can’t see that.

@YeTalkShiteHen oh and I used to live opposite a house housing the people op described, so I'm fully aware of the mayhem they caused. Two doors up was a HA owned property which was used to house smack heads. It was gutted as a result of a fire caused by them fiddling the electric meter with an electric drill. When workers came to repair the damage they found the garden was littered with used syringes. Enough experience for you?

Oops cross posted with OP who has clarified to those who have suffered a reading comprehension failure.

PS Here’s a map of homeless shelters in my local area. No concentration at all of where they are located eh? notice how many there are in leafy Crosby for example.

Stirner nobody said there aren’t any problems, what I said specifically is that OP hasn’t encountered any problems so the phrase “don’t borrow trouble” seems apt?

The example I gave above? My 7 friends? 6 of them were drug addicts. Also people, and actually just very lost. 4 of the 7 (including one who wasn’t an addict) were murderered. But nobody gave a shit, because they lived (and I quote the newspaper on one of them( “chaotic lifestyles”). That was about the one who wasn’t an addict.

So that’s the kind of society we live in, where euphemisms and a few words can reduce somebody to less than human.

So aye, you’re no the only one with experience!

It's easy to say let's be inclusive of everyone and not discriminate. But in reality OP your next door neighbours or their visitors are likely to be involved in anti social behaviour which may well impact on you - noise etc. I live near a number of recovery projects and whilst I've visited them (for work) and know that they are a 'good' thing equally I wouldn't choose to live next door. Arguments between tenants, drink and drugs use can lead to noise and the tenants may well adhere to the housing rules but their visitors and people who loiter outside do not.

If it were me id encourage your neighbour to keep the cctv it's there for a reason! And if you encounter difficulties will help evidence this. I'd be asking questions about staffing levels, is the house staffed 24 hrs? What are the house rules, is drinking allowed? Who do you contact if there is a problem etc

Murdered.

Exactly formerbabe

A house full of unsupported people with numerous antisocial needs is never going to a success. As you are struggling to find someone to talk to I'd read this as a warning sign.

Don't take the risk, OP, I'd sell up fast before you end up with problems you can't fix, your house prices drops in value and you'd never sell anyway.

And in my experience the staff are excellent at turning a blind eye.

No, there will not be someone at the property 24/7. The tenants will have access to 24 hour support, but this will be delivered by floating workers, referred to rather poshly as a 'concierge service'. There will be 24/7 cctv coverage which will be accessed remotely.
(incidentally, it appears that my every coming and going will also be monitored by their cctv cameras - just as well I've got nothing to hide!).

I have seen the job adverts for people to work as support workers for this property (among others). The full-time support worker role, supporting residents from this cohort in 12 properties across 2 towns, with use of own car, only pays £16k p.a. This is low even for a low paid sector.