Agenda item

5.1 The Chair opened the item by explaining that the Commission had requested this item as it was keen to hear about how the cyber attack had affected residents on the housing register and whether the service had returned to business as usual.

 

5.2 Representing London Borough of Hackney

 

·  Mayor Philip Glanville, Cabinet Member for Digital and ICT

·  Councillor Sade Etti, Mayoral Advisor for Housing Needs and Homelessness

·  Rob Miller, Strategic Director of Customer and Workplace

·  Jennifer Wynter, Head of Benefits and Housing Needs

·  Marcia Facey, Operations Manager - Benefits and Housing Needs

·  Andrew Croucher, Operations Manager - Benefits and Housing Needs

·  Zoe Tyndall, Change Support Team Manager - Digital and Data

 

5.3 The Chair invited the Strategic Director of Customer and Workplace to give a short verbal presentation. The main points are highlighted below.

 

5.4 The cyber attack in October 2020 affected all systems hosted on the Council’s servers. Many of these systems had already been transferred to a Cloud based service and, whilst the cyber attack was hugely impactful, this therefore meant that some vital systems such as the Council’s website, emails and telephone system were not affected.

 

5.5 However, the attack did lead to the loss of the Universal Housing system. This removed the ability to process new applications to the housing register and changes of circumstances for existing applicants.

 

5.6 The bidding system was not affected. However, without access to the Universal Housing system, it had meant that officers had to make manual changes to allow residents to bid for appropriately sized properties.

 

5.7 The service had been developing an in-house IT system prior to the cyber attack to manage the housing register and replace the Universal Housing system, which included a front facing online form and back office processing and administration.

 

5.8 The online application form sought to make the process easy to understand and complete for residents, reduce the number of questions and make applications aware upfront of expected waiting times and other housing options. The administration tool would make it easier for officers to view, assign and manage applications.

 

5.9 There had understandably been delays in replacing Universal Housing due to the cyber attack. The service was prioritising those households that had been negatively impacted, for example those where a change in circumstances would shorten their waiting time or they were close to successfully bidding for a property.

 

5.10 The Chair then invited the Mayor of London Borough of Hackney to make any additional comments.

 

5.11 The Mayor, as Cabinet Member for Digital and ICT, had attended weekly meetings as the Council responded to the initial cyber attack, followed by bi-weekly and monthly meetings during the recovery phase. Individual Cabinet Members also attended to respond to issues that affected their service areas.

 

5.12 This aimed to bring a level of political oversight and sometimes critical challenge to the recovery process. The Audit Committee also had oversight of the recovery process, and Member briefing sessions were also used to keep councillors updated and share experiences.

 

5.13 It was noted that the cyber attack was a criminal act that had been investigated by the relevant agencies. Many other organisations, both public and private, had been affected by similar attacks, and the Council was in dialogue with many of these organisations to share best practice.

 

5.14 The Chair then invited the Mayoral Advisor for Housing Needs and Homelessness to make any final remarks.

 

5.15 There had been an understandable sense of frustration for residents waiting to have applications and changes progressed. The absence of an IT system had resulted in a backlog of applications, assessments and changes to process. Progress was being made, with households negatively impacted being prioritised.

 

Questions, Answers and Discussion

 

5.16 A Commission Member asked for an update on the progress of reducing the backlog of applications, assessments and changes to process on the housing register.

 

5.17 The Operations Manager explained that all residents removed from the housing register had been contacted. All residents that had applied for reconsideration and qualified for the register were being processed to rejoin.

 

5.18 1024 households had been accepted as homeless since October 2020 and were therefore eligible to join the register. Of those, 673 remain to be processed. This was expected to be completed by the end of the calendar year.

 

5.19 Residents were being prioritised in relation to when they applied to join the register so that none would be negatively impacted, for example if they were very close to successfully bidding for a property.

 

5.20 A Commission Member asked whether a high proportion of homelessness cases were of households that had been supported into private sector housing by the Council, and were unable to maintain their tenancy.

 

5.21 The Head of Benefits and Housing Needs explained that the biggest reason for residents approaching homelessness in Hackney was eviction from family and friends, many of which were living in overcrowded social housing.

 

5.22 A Commission Member asked how the Council had engaged with affected residents both at the time of the attack and throughout the recovery process, and what had been learned about how residents access council services.

 

5.23 The Operations Manager explained that each resident that had contacted the team had been called back by a dedicated officer who would be on hand to assist them with their request, whether that be an application, change of circumstances or other issue.

 

5.24 Speaking more widely, the Strategic Director of Customer and Workplace explained that the engagement methods used depended on the service and where it was at in the recovery process.

 

5.25 A Commission Member asked for further information on the impact of the increased number of calls into the Council’s contact centre as a result of the cyber attack, and the mitigations in place to reduce waiting times for residents in need of housing advice.

 

5.26 The Strategic Director of Customer and Workplace explained that additional staff had been employed and trained to provide the best possible service to residents needing housing support and advice. Officers within customer contact teams were also being cross trained to ensure they were in a position to provide the correct advice and signpost.

 

5.27 The Council’s housing advice contact number had been split into separate queues to minimise waiting times for residents with the most urgent cases, namely homelessness, temporary accommodation, choice based lettings and housing advice queues with the homelessness queue prioritised.

 

5.28 The average waiting time in the previous week was just over two minutes, with the longest waiting time being 29 minutes, and out of 799 calls 88% had been answered.

 

5.29 The Mayoral Advisor for Housing Needs and Homelessness added that call handling rates had dramatically improved since July. It was important to note that from April to July, the housing advice contact number was receiving around 5,000 calls per month. 

 

5.30 A Commission Member asked what the timeframe was for a resident who makes a new application to the housing register, through to that application being accepted and that resident being able to bid on eligible properties.

 

5.31 The Operations Manager explained that the timeframe varied from resident to resident. Once an application was received, it may be that supporting evidence was required such as medical history. In many cases it took some time for a resident to provide the necessary evidence.

 

5.32 Having said this, officers had to complete the registration process in 20 days and in the vast majority of cases this timeframe was being met.

 

5.33 A Commission Member asked how the Council had engaged with the Haredi community in Hackney both at the time of the attack and throughout the recovery process.

 

5.34 The Operations Manager explained that the majority of Haredi households were not removed from the housing register as they were in the urgent band. Those that had received personalised, dedicated housing advice and support from officers.

 

5.35 The most common contact officers had with the community was in regard to changes of circumstances, and those who were urgent or at risk of being disadvantaged had been prioritised.

 

5.36 The Head of Benefits and Housing Needs added that the Council also engaged with Agudas Israel Community Services who provided advice on a range of issues to the Orthodox Jewish community.

 

5.37 The Haredi community was densely populated in the N16 area in close proximity to their synagogue. This, coupled with particular concerns around planning and property standards in that area, limited the community’s housing options.

 

5.37 The Mayor of London Borough of Hackney added that the Council was engaging with community representatives, members of local organisations and developers on how new developments and changes to local spaces can be made, reflecting the unique circumstances of Stamford Hill.

 

5.38 A Commission Member asked for further information on the Council’s relationship with registered social housing providers in Hackney, and on the nominations process in particular.

 

5.39 The Head of Benefits and Housing Needs explained that a nominations agreement was in place across East London which dictated how many units registered social housing providers should give to the Council.

 

5.40 The number of units depended on whether those units were new build or existing, and the size of the unit. The nominations process was managed by Housing Strategy on a quarterly basis, and any deficit was discussed between them and the social housing providers.

 

5.41 Registered social housing providers did hold back a percentage of their units for high profile emergency rehousing cases, particularly domestic abuse and gang violence. Having said this, many of those cases were being referred to the Council despite it not having the housing stock to meet this need.

 

5.42 The Mayor of London Borough of Hackney added that Housing Strategy were working on updating its dataset on housing needs in Hackney. This data would then feed into key pieces of work across the Council such as the Housing Strategy and planning policy.

 

5.43 The Council was also working to develop a Housing Compact that would ensure that there is a strategic and coordinated approach to meeting the housing needs of residents across the borough and bring greater transparency and accountability for the provision and delivery of housing support and accommodation.

 

5.44 A Commission Member asked when the Council expected the housing register to return to business as usual, and what this may look like.

 

5.45 The Strategic Director of Customer and Workplace explained that the road to recovery was complicated due to the interlinkedness of the range of services across the Council and the differing stages at which these services were at in the recovery process.

 

5.46 The work plan for the housing register was outlined in the written materials provided in the agenda pack. It highlighted three phases of the work plan, with a view to further review and business as usual.