星空传媒

The Audit Commission could include performance on rent collection in its inspections of housing associations.

The announcement comes in the wake of a hard-hitting report by the commission into the sector's performance at tackling rent arrears.

Housing Association Rent Income said collection was deteriorating, with associations collecting 拢21m less rent in 2001/2 than the year before. In 2001/2, tenants owed 拢231m.

The report suggested that inspections of rent and service-charge collection would be reserved for associations with below-average track records.

But Greg Birdseye, associate director in the Audit Commission's research division, told Housing Today the commission would consider assessing rent collection by all associations. He said: "The intention in the long term will be to get a standardised inspection methodology, but it's for the inspector locally to decide what the focus is for each housing association."

The commission will consult on the issue over the summer.

Ann Eggington, policy leader at the National Housing Federation, said she backed inspections of rent collection, but said it should be considered in the context of overall service delivery and the different challenges faced by associations.

She said: "You have to create a balance between the effort to manage arrears and improve collection. If you are spending 5% to collect 1% it's not economical. Associations are accepting a certain amount of failure to collect and lenders accept this. It won't have a major impact on the sector's ability to raise finance. The global accounts show the sector is not suffering."

The report recommended IT systems that differentiated between arrears caused by housing benefit and those caused by the tenant. It also suggested incentive schemes for tenants who pay on time and flexible payment policies to suit tenants.

It also found that post-transfer associations collected more rent than traditional ones (see chart, left).

It said this was because large-scale voluntary transfer associations tended to have their stock in one local authority area, so only had to liaise with one housing benefit department, and staff often had well-established relationships with former council colleagues in the benefits department.