Some people have been living there for more than a decade

Councillors have voted to take action over five unauthorised homes in Exminster, despite being warned that doing so could make people homeless.

Guy Henderson, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

Teignbridge’s planning committee was told that holiday accommodation at Pottles Barn had been used as permanent housing for years. In fact, they heard, seven of the 12 units had been used permanently for more than 10 years, making them exempt from council action.

But the other five haven’t been used as long, and now the council is demanding they return to holiday use.

Planning permission for holiday occupancy was granted in 2007, when the council decided the rural location was ‘unsustainable’ for permanent homes.

In 2019 the council was alerted and the owner of the barns was contacted. An application to remove the holiday-only condition was refused in 2021.

A report said: “Whilst seven of the units may be immune from enforcement action, this does not mean the remaining units should also be allowed to become lawful permanent residential dwellings.”

Enforcement action would mean the occupants would have to leave and “this could result in a number of occupants becoming homeless.”

Instead there will be a ‘breach of condition’ notice with no right of appeal, which will still mean occupants have to find new homes within 12 months.

Agents for the owners of Pottles Barn said national planning policies had changed since 2007, and might now allow a change of use. The owners had been approached by local people looking for small and affordable homes.

Committee chairman Colin Parker (Lib Dem, Buckland and Milber) said: “It’s a shame that we have got to this situation. All those years that people were living there, and it shouldn’t have happened.

“It is difficult to say that some people can stay there and some can’t.”
 

Fee income for 20 largest operators – many private equity-owned – soars as councils struggle to meet costs

The biggest private providers of children’s homes in England made profits of more than £300m last year, as concern mounts over the conditions some children are being placed in and the spiralling costs for councils.

Michael Savage www.theguardian.com 

Fee income for the 20 largest operators of independent children’s homes totalled £1.63bn last year, a 6.5% increase on the previous year. And 19% of that – £310m – was recorded as profit, according to an independent analysis. Half of the top 20 providers have some private equity or sovereign wealth fund ownership.

Council spending on privately-run children’s homes in England has more than doubled in six years. In 2021-22, spending on independently-run residential care for vulnerable children increased by 11% on the previous year.

This comes with the number of children in care at its highest level since before the pandemic: 82,170 in England. There are also concerns among councils over the indebtedness of some of the main providers.

The report was commissioned from Resolution Consulting by the Local Government Association (LGA), which worried that increasing fees were putting council budgets under immense pressure. The report also raised concerns about financial transparency in the sector, given a significant rise in mergers and acquisitions.

One company to increase profits last year was Your Chapter Holdings. Accounts out this month show profits rising from £1.7m to £2.2m. The company was formerly called Care 4 Children but changed its name after criticisms over the care it provided.

Just last month, Ofsted warned that Your Chapter had failed to sufficiently improve one home, which it had deemed “inadequate”. It stated: “There are serious and/or widespread failures that mean children and young people are not protected or their welfare is not promoted or safeguarded.”

A spokesperson for the provider said: “We strive continuously to improve and to provide the best possible care and education for the children and young people in our care.”

Katharine Sacks-Jones, chief executive of the Become charity for children in care and young care leavers, said: “There are serious questions to ask when we have a care system in crisis, a chronic shortage of homes for children, local councils struggling and private providers making ever-increasing profits. We know children in private provision are more likely to be placed away from their local area and the people and places that matter to them.

“Children in care, who have experienced significant trauma, must not be seen as a commodity. This is public money that should be spent on providing a system where children get the support and stability they need.”

Local authorities report spending £12.8bn on children’s social care in 2022-23, compared with £6.6bn in 2012-13. Senior figures fear children’s social care is affecting all other areas of spending.

“What matters most for children who can’t live with their birth parents is that they feel safe, loved and supported, in homes that best suit their needs,” said Louise Gittins, chair of the LGA’s children and young people board. “While many providers work hard to make sure this is the case, it is wrong that some are making excessive profit from this.

“As the report shows, spending on residential care placements for children has increased dramatically in recent years as councils have sought to find the best homes for record numbers of children in care, while mergers and acquisitions have seen some large independent providers grow significantly. Yet while councils are having to divert more and more money away from early help services and into homes for children in care, the largest privately-run companies continue to bring in huge profits.”

The Children’s Homes Association said it shared these concerns, particularly at levels of debt carried by large private equity providers, but that this did not reflect the sector as a whole.

“The majority of our members are micro or small providers that achieve small margins to ensure the viability of their organisations, and critically are not carrying significant levels of debt,” it said. “The independent sector consistently provides care at a significantly lower cost than local authorities. This, combined with caring for a higher-need cohort of children and young people, demonstrates value for money.”

Plans for 63 homes on the edge of Ottery St Mary have been rejected for the third time. The development was voted down after a lengthy discussion that saw several residents and local councillors raise concerns.

Bradley Gerrard www.devonlive.com

A key focus of the near two-hour debate by East Devon councillors centred on whether Sidmouth Road, which would provide access to the site, could adequately deal with increased traffic, and whether a proposed footpath was adequate to keep pedestrians safe. The three-hectare site is classified as good quality, or Grade 2, agricultural land, a factor several objectors highlighted as a reason to reject the application.

Residents also complained that the site was outside the agreed local plan that guides where future houses should be built, that it could be seen from a large area, including from the nearby Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and that Ottery St Mary’s primary and secondary schools are oversubscribed.

ALD Developments, the firm behind the scheme that would have been half affordable housing, had sought to appease concerns about the roads after the scheme was last rejected in 2021. It proposed a priority scheme that would mean traffic heading towards Ottery would give way to vehicles leaving the town, and had attempted to ensure adequate pedestrian access.

But objectors claimed that the width of the road meant it wasn’t possible to provide safe access for pedestrians and cyclists. John Pearson, a highway consultant for 40 years, said that in this case, the “constraints are insurmountable. It’s never good to squeeze in sub-standard solutions,” he said.

“The evidence is clear that the footway width is well below guidance, and that the remaining carriageway width prevents anything larger than a car from passing a non-motorised vehicle safely.”

Highways officers from Devon County Council acknowledged that a small section of the proposed footpath was below statutory guidance, but only by eight centimetres, and that it was safer than the current situation on this stretch of Sidmouth Road where no pavement existed.

Richard Grainger, Ottery St Mary mayor, said there had been “hundreds of objections” to the plan from residents. “This application has already been rejected – correctly – twice and I really feel that there is no grounds for bringing it back to this committee,” he said.

Devon County Council councillor Jess Bailey (Independent, Otter Valley) said it was the first time in two and a half years that she had needed to attend East Devon’s planning committee in person, which showed how “exceptionally bad” the application was.

“I would go so far as to say that if it is approved, it would be disastrous for Ottery,” she said. “I disagree with the decision by Devon County Council’s highways officers to withdraw their objections, and my greatest concern is for pedestrians along the proposed substandard pavement.”

In mitigation, Graham Cridland, the agent for ALD Developments, said his client had “worked hard to address all the previous reasons for refusal”.

“We’ve done a great deal of work on specific mitigation measures and all the statutory consultees, such as Devon highways and Natural England, support the application and so there should be no legitimate reason for refusal,” he said.

Wendy Ormsby, East Devon District Council’s development manager, said that the planning committee had to consider the authority’s requirement to demonstrate that it had five years’ worth of land supply for future development.

Given this figure stood at 4.28 years, Ms Ormsby said the council had to assess whether some of its concerns about the development significantly and demonstrably outweighed the benefits of delivering housing.

However, councillors voted against the plans, citing the loss of agricultural land, its overwhelming impact on the landscape, and that there had been no mechanism to secure the affordable housing or published efforts about mitigating the impact on nearby Pebblebed Heath, a special area of conservation.

Duo say they can serve the bay better outside the Tory ranks

Torbay Council’s Tory leader has called on two of his former party colleagues to face by-elections after defecting from the Conservative ranks.

Guy Henderson, local democracy reporter  www.radioexe.co.uk 

Rebels Katya Maddison and Patrick Joyce, who were voted on to the council as Conservatives in May, have resigned from the party ranks to set up their own Prosper Torbay group.

The decision means the Tories have lost their overall majority.

Cllr Maddison (Shiphay) and Cllr Joyce (Wellswood) said they felt they would be better able to serve the interests of Torbay residents by being outside the Conservative group.

They are calling on the Tory administration to focus on supporting local High Streets and tackling the problems of homelessness and housing.

Their statement said: “There’s a lot of good stuff going on in Torbay with devolution and big capital projects lining up, but if history has taught us anything it’s that the devil is in the detail, and we would encourage the administration to be focused on that too.

“We want to be free to challenge projects while they’re still being formulated so we can avoid the fiascos of the past.”

Council leader David Thomas (Con, Preston) said: “I am really disappointed that they don’t want to remain within the group. One thing is for certain – Katya, Patrick and I have not had a huge blazing row where we have all fallen out with each other.”

And, he said, there would be questions for the pair to answer from the people who elected them in May.

“Are they going to their communities for a by-election?” he asked. “I think they should.

“It was only five months ago that they stood and were elected on a Conservative ticket, and a lot of people will have been voting for a manifesto and a certain direction of travel.

“They stood on that manifesto, and yet in five short months they want to do something different.”

Cllr Thomas said the new administration’s focus on ‘delivering’ big projects across Torbay would have town centres and High Streets at their heart.

There is potentially around £200 million to be spent, with the council’s new regeneration partner having access to £100 million in investment and the £100 million we have from the government.

“The opportunities to do something are just coming on line now,” he added. “We are well aware of the problems in the town centres. We are not blind to them.”

The change shifts the balance of power on Torbay Council significantly. Up until today there were 19 Conservative councillors, 15 Liberal Democrats and two Independents, giving the Tories an overall majority of two.

However, with 17 Conservatives, 15 Liberal Democrats, two Independents and two Prosper Torbay councillors, the overall majority is gone.

It would now be possible in theory for the 19 non-Conservative councillors to launch a vote of no confidence in Cllr Thomas, but that seems highly unlikely.

“I’m very disappointed that they think they can do things better on their own,” said Cllr Thomas. “But I hope they will continue to support what we are looking to bring forward.”