A survey by The Independent and openDemocracy found that huge sums in housing benefits for “excluded accommodation” have been given to organizations since 2018 despite crises or warnings from the Social Housing Regulatory Authority (RSH). The figures, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, cover 95 of more than 300 UK local authorities, which means that the actual number is likely to be much higher. Some non-profit bosses have even taken advantage of a regulatory loophole to cash in on themselves, our research has revealed. Excluded housing is supported housing available to women fleeing domestic violence, people with substance abuse problems and people leaving care, for whom providers can claim higher rates of housing allowance. Providers may also charge service fees for residents in addition to this, which are designed to cover real estate support. It is a thriving industry – the number of households in excluded accommodation in the UK increased from 95,149 in 2016 to 156,868 in May 2021, according to data revealed by the housing charity Crisis. But it is also plagued by problems, with concerns expressed by charities, police and the government about the quality of support provided to those in sheltered accommodation, as well as cases of violence and sex work on property. According to regulations, exempt accommodation providers must be non-profit entities, such as housing associations or registered charities that provide “care, support or supervision”. However, our research has revealed examples of these non-profit companies making large payments to private companies affiliated with their own directors or founders.
Expensive cars and a yacht in the Algarve
The Pivotal Homes Group was founded by husband Denis and Fiona Dixon in 1999. Part of the group, the Pivotal Housing Association, has received more than 1 1 million from councils in the Southwest from 2019 until this year for exempt accommodation. However, the most recent housing association accounts show 22 225,598 in “costs” paid to Pivotal Support Group Ltd in the year to March 2021. This company is in turn owned by Pivotal Group Holdings, of which Denis Dixon is co-owner. His wife was the director of Pivotal Support Group from March 2005 to December 2017. Dixons in a photo they uploaded to social media () Meanwhile, another company for which Denis Dixon is a director and co-owner – Charles Terence Estates Ltd – was paid over .000 400,000 in “rentals” for hostels owned by the association in 2020 and 2021. An additional 0 390,107 from were charged to Charles Terence Estates for the year to March 2021, the accounts show. Charles Terence Estates, meanwhile, has paid dividends totaling 95 12.95 million from 2018 on its total revenue, according to the company’s accounts. In March last year, RSH reported a series of failures to the Pivotal Housing Association, including that it “was unable to provide adequate assurance” that its accommodation met the government’s social housing requirements. Noting that the housing association operated units in five local authorities, the regulator said: “Rents and service charges for Pivotal tenants may have been and may continue to be over-indebted. “As part of the cost of these rents has been covered through housing allowance and universal credit, there may also be an impact on the public treasury.” Denis Dixon posted on Facebook next to a photo of a Bentley () Dixons live in the Algarve on the south coast of Portugal and social media offers a window into their luxurious lifestyle with sailing, fast cars and parachuting. Denis Dixon’s Facebook page shows photos from the couple’s yacht, the Navigo, and the Bentley he described as “early birthday presents” in both 2015 and 2018. In his 2015 post, he added: “Happy birthday to me ! ». In the United Kingdom, they own a four-bed house in Poor’s Dorset, which is estimated to be worth 1, 1.1 million. The daughter of Denis and Fiona, Chloe, a 28-year-old surveyor, is one of two people with “significant control” of the Pivotal Housing Association, while Fiona Dixon resigned as director on May 11, 2018. Denis Dixon ceased to be a “person significant control ”of Pivotal Support Group in April 2019. Dennis and Fiona Dixon did not respond to requests for comment, while Pivotal said only six of its 523 properties currently leased belonged to its co-founders, with a rent “no higher than any other in our portfolio”. A spokesman said the housing association did not accept “any suggestion that we sought to take advantage of the housing benefit system in relation to exempt accommodation”.
“Subversive innovators”
There is a similar story in Sustain (UK) Ltd, a provider based in Birmingham. His website says that his vision is that “vulnerable / homeless people deserve the opportunity to live in decent housing”. The non-profit company made a regulatory decision in 2019 regarding “inherent conflicts of interest” related to transactions with companies affiliated with its directors. However, 2, 2.3 million was paid to private companies linked to two directors – Adam Barwell and founder and former CEO Pauline Hughes – in 2020 and 2021. However, despite these concerns, from 2018-19 Sustain has received ,5 87.5 million in housing allowance for supported exempt housing and other “general purpose” housing in Birmingham, separate figures show. Hughes owns a fenced property in Birmingham worth more than 1 1 million, while a six-bedroom house on two acres, bought for .000 900,000 in 2015, is owned by one of its companies, Topcare West Midlands Ltd. A sales brochure described the property as “a prominent and very beautiful holiday home” that “offers absolute peace and tranquility”. Hughes and Barwell’s high salaries at Sustain were highlighted by Inside Housing in 2020, with the couple paying 5 215,000 a year through March 31, 2019. Hughes’ daughter also worked at a stage also from Sustain as director of education and development and was appointed director in 2014, at the age of just 20, before resigning in July 2019. Sustain did not submit a statement. Hughes resigned as manager last July, while Barwell left in January. Neither of them responded to requests for comment. The Falcon Housing Association (FHA) – subject to regulatory notice in November last year – has been paid 8 8.2 million in housing allowance for exempt accommodation by city councils from 2018 to 2021-2022. Among the failures, the regulator concluded: “The FHA has failed to ensure that any arrangements it enters into do not improperly promote the interests of third parties or are arrangements that the regulator could reasonably assume were for such purposes.” Falcon accounts show that as of March 31, 2021, the company used the services of companies associated with two directors, Faisal Lalani and Jamil Mawji, in which “sales of £ 510,466 and purchases of £ 90,061 were made”, adding: ” As at the end of the year, these companies owe 2. 142,684 to Falcon Housing “. Mr. Lalani resigned as director on October 4, 2021, followed by Mawji a week later, on October 11. The couple – finalists for the EY Businessman of the Year award and said they “see themselves as subversive innovators” – also had an affair with another rogue provider. Auckland Home Solutions has received 3, 3.6 million from housing allowance boards for excluded accommodation since 2018. Mr Lalani was Auckland’s director from October 2017 to October 2021, as was Mr Mawji from in September 2017 to October 2021. In a statement issued last August against Auckland, the regulator said: “Our inquiries have also revealed that some of the lease agreements that Oakland has entered into are with companies affiliated with Auckland executives and their shareholder. For these transactions, in more than one case, Auckland sought and received shareholder approval to approve the reported conflict of interest and not to apply the provisions in its related articles. “Transactions have been substantial and continuous, and in this way, Auckland has turned long-term risks into business, for which we have no assurance that they can be adequately addressed on current terms.” Auckland, Falcon, Mr Lalani and Mr Mawji did not comment. RSH has the power to take enforcement action against providers, stating on its website that it will do so if consumer standards are violated “and there is a significant risk of serious harm to tenants or potential tenants”. However, none of the above providers has encountered any such action to date.
Press to change rules
In March, Housing Secretary Eddie Hughes unveiled plans to introduce minimum standards of support provided to residents and changes to housing allowance regulations to “seek to define care, support and supervision.” He also revealed the government’s intention to give local authorities in England new powers to “better manage the locally supported housing market and ensure that fraudulent landlords can not exploit the system to the detriment of vulnerable residents and taxpayers”. However, he added, “any measures required by law” will be introduced “when parliamentary time allows”. A government spokesman said: “It is appalling that fraudulent landlords are taking advantage of the supported housing system to take advantage of the housing of vulnerable people who need help to live independently. “That is why we recently announced our intention to introduce new laws as soon as possible to crack down on fraudulent landlords, protect vulnerable residents and give councils stronger powers to intervene.” RSH said it had “significant concerns about providing exempt accommodation without commission”, but claimed that the regulatory alerts had an impact, with providers canceling expansion plans or suspending their transactions.
