|
Archived Transcript for 26 November 2001: Pages
101 to 150
101
1 the application.
2 MR SHELDON: How do the Housing Registration Team assess
3 whether or not the clothing that you were shown
4 indicates whether or not Mrs Kouao was living at the
5 address?
6 MS McGREGOR: That would not really help them but there are
7 other ways as well to obtain other documents and
8 letters.
9 MR SHELDON: But that is what you were being sent to do, to
10 obtain documentary evidence as we see from page 4 in
11 volume 6: "Document required: proof of residence, proof
12 of ID, proof of eligibility." They seem to have been
13 under the impression that that was your job. You did
14 not see it as your job?
15 MS McGREGOR: It is part of my job, yes.
16 MR SHELDON: But it is also their job?
17 MS McGREGOR: Yes, it is, because at the time of interview
18 if they do not have any documents there they will be
19 requested to bring them in.
20 MR SHELDON: Do you recall anything about the flat itself,
21 the condition, whether it was furnished, anything like
22 that?
23 MS McGREGOR: I cannot remember.
24 MR SHELDON: Let us have a look at the form you filled out
25 in volume 6, starting at page 8. Is this your writing
102
1 again?
2 MS McGREGOR: It is, yes.
3 MR SHELDON: We can see on page 8 that you record the
4 information that is in the interview record, namely that
5 they have been there since 24th March, previously been
6 in France and left of their own accord.
7 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
8 MR SHELDON: When you put a line through a section on this
9 form, as for example you have on page 2 and following,
10 does that mean that the answer to all the questions
11 posed there is no?
12 MS McGREGOR: I believe so, yes.
13 MR SHELDON: Where for example you have written on the form
14 as you have on page 12 of volume 6 "N/A", what do you
15 mean there?
16 MS McGREGOR: It says: "If seeking rehousing because of
17 violence enter name and address", so I would have asked
18 the question if, you know, she is seeking rehousing
19 because of those reasons.
20 MR SHELDON: So no would have been the answer that you are
21 indicating there?
22 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
23 MR SHELDON: You record, if we look on page 10 of your form,
24 page 3 of the form, 10 in our bundle, that there was
25 a separate kitchen, a bathroom, an inside toilet and hot
103
1 water. Yes?
2 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
3 MR SHELDON: And that the flat was, I take it through the
4 line in the box, was in a reasonable state of repair.
5 Is that what that means?
6 MS McGREGOR: I believe so.
7 MR SHELDON: You note that Miss Kouao bought her own food
8 but at the bottom of that page you also make the note
9 that the child is not going to school yet. You see
10 that?
11 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
12 MR SHELDON: What was the significance of that piece of
13 information as far as you were concerned?
14 MS McGREGOR: That will help Housing Registration check an
15 address history as well, so if she was going to school
16 they could have checked with the school.
17 MR SHELDON: So your purpose for taking time and trouble to
18 write that down was to avoid Housing Registration
19 wasting their time by trying to find the address through
20 school records, is that right?
21 MS McGREGOR: I would guess so.
22 MR SHELDON: Was there any other significance as far as you
23 are concerned about that piece of information?
24 MS McGREGOR: It says any children taking exams. She was
25 too young to be taking exams.
104
1 MR SHELDON: You know that the child has been in the country
2 for six months, or at least that is what you have been
3 told, yes?
4 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
5 MR SHELDON: And that term has probably already started for
6 that school year, yes?
7 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
8 MR SHELDON: So did you ask any questions as to why the
9 child was not going to school?
10 MS McGREGOR: I cannot remember if I asked that question.
11 MR SHELDON: Do you remember whether you offered any advice
12 or assistance as to what Miss Kouao might want to do
13 about that?
14 MS McGREGOR: I cannot remember.
15 MR SHELDON: Would you have regarded that to have been part
16 of your job?
17 MS McGREGOR: Well, not really, no.
18 MR SHELDON: Whose job would that be, do you think, to
19 advise a parent whose child was not attending school?
20 MS McGREGOR: I just would not have thought it was my job.
21 MR SHELDON: Whose job would you think it might have been?
22 MS McGREGOR: I have no idea. I would not have thought it
23 would have been my job to advise her.
24 MR SHELDON: Did it cross your mind at this or at any stage
25 during your dealings with Miss Kouao and Victoria to
105
1 pass on any information to social services?
2 MS McGREGOR: Not that I can remember.
3 MR SHELDON: Did the fact that there was a seven-year old
4 child sleeping on the floor in a room occupied by four
5 people not attending school not indicate to you at any
6 stage that social services might be interested in this
7 case?
8 MS McGREGOR: Well, I cannot really remember.
9 MR SHELDON: You did not tell social services anything about
10 this case in fact, did you?
11 MS McGREGOR: I have not had any communication with them.
12 MR SHELDON: About this case or about anything?
13 MS McGREGOR: Well I cannot remember if I have spoken to
14 them about anything at all.
15 MR SHELDON: Have you ever referred to social services
16 information that you have picked up during the course of
17 a home visit you have carried out?
18 MS McGREGOR: Not that I can remember.
19 MR SHELDON: Can you envisage circumstances in which you
20 might see a child living in such intolerable conditions
21 that you felt obliged to inform social services about
22 them?
23 MS McGREGOR: I would have more gone to my manager.
24 MR SHELDON: Did you go to your manager about Victoria's
25 case?
106
1 MS McGREGOR: I did not see that there was any problems with
2 the case.
3 MR SHELDON: Have you ever gone to your manager on the basis
4 of discovering information for example that a child is
5 not attending school or is living in grossly
6 inappropriate circumstances?
7 MS McGREGOR: Have I?
8 MR SHELDON: Yes.
9 MS McGREGOR: Not that I can remember.
10 MR SHELDON: So throughout your home visiting experience
11 which is now approaching four years, you have never come
12 across a child throughout that time whose circumstances
13 were such that you thought that either your manager or
14 social services needed to be told?
15 MS McGREGOR: Maybe but I cannot remember.
16 MR SHELDON: I take it that even if it does happen, the fact
17 that you cannot remember means that it is not a regular
18 occurrence, is that fair?
19 MS McGREGOR: I suppose so.
20 MR SHELDON: Despite the fact that you see presumably
21 children living in some extremely unpleasant
22 circumstances, is that right?
23 MS McGREGOR: I would not really say unpleasant.
24 MR SHELDON: Would you not? What would you say?
25 MS McGREGOR: Maybe overcrowded.
107
1 MR SHELDON: Unsanitary?
2 MS McGREGOR: No, I would not go that far to say that.
3 MR SHELDON: Four years as a home visitor, never seen a
4 child living in unsanitary conditions?
5 MS McGREGOR: No, I have not.
6 MR SHELDON: Are you aware of any published guidance as to
7 cooperation between Housing and Social Services?
8 MS McGREGOR: No.
9 MR SHELDON: Have you ever been given any instruction or
10 training, formal or informal, as to circumstances in
11 which you should be communicating information to social
12 services?
13 MS McGREGOR: No.
14 MR SHELDON: As you have already said, you never in your
15 entire career as a home visitor have ever communicated
16 any information to social services as far as you can
17 remember.
18 MS McGREGOR: That is right.
19 MR SHELDON: That has remained the case, has it, even more
20 recently?
21 MS McGREGOR: I would say so.
22 MR SHELDON: What procedures or protocols were you working
23 to in mid-1999?
24 MS McGREGOR: Basically when I visit I will basically just
25 go by a standard form which is this form here.
108
1 MR SHELDON: We have seen the form but what handbooks,
2 procedures, guidelines, protocols, documents of that
3 nature were you working to when you went on these home
4 visits? Where could you go for documentary advice or
5 guidance as to how you should do your job?
6 MS McGREGOR: My manager.
7 MR SHELDON: He is not a document.
8 MS McGREGOR: No, he is not a document.
9 MR SHELDON: Were there any documents?
10 MS McGREGOR: Not that I can remember.
11 MR SHELDON: There were no corporate policies or procedures
12 in operation in Haringey as far as you were aware which
13 would have helped you in the way in which you conducted
14 your functions as a home visitor?
15 MS McGREGOR: I did not have a job description so I was not
16 aware of my entire duties.
17 MR SHELDON: You were effectively being sent out to fill in
18 the boxes on this form and that was the start and the
19 end of it?
20 MS McGREGOR: Basically.
21 MR SHELDON: And that has remained the case for the four
22 years that you have been doing these home visit?
23 MS McGREGOR: I still work from the same standard form.
24 MR SHELDON: Have you been given any training handbooks or
25 written guidance over the last year and a half?
109
1 MS McGREGOR: I have had training.
2 MR SHELDON: What has that involved?
3 MS McGREGOR: I have had training in regards to like
4 challenging, aggressive behaviour -- I cannot remember
5 all of them but I have had training like that.
6 MR SHELDON: Where was your office physically in relation to
7 Social Services' offices? Are they in the same
8 building?
9 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
10 MR SHELDON: Different floors?
11 MS McGREGOR: Yes, I think so, yes.
12 MR SHELDON: Do you know what floor Social Services is on?
13 MS McGREGOR: I think it is on the first.
14 MR SHELDON: Which one are you on?
15 MS McGREGOR: Second.
16 MR SHELDON: You have never had cause to go downstairs and
17 talk to a social worker or member of Social Services
18 about any of the cases that you have been involved in?
19 MS McGREGOR: No, I have not.
20 MR SHELDON: What would you do now if you went on a home
21 visit and you discovered during the course of it that
22 there was a seven-year old child living in a flat who
23 had been living there for in excess of six months and
24 was not going to school? Would you do anything
25 differently to what you did in this case?
110
1 MS McGREGOR: Maybe I would have made a more detailed note
2 of it.
3 MR SHELDON: More detailed in what respect? "Child not
4 going to school" pretty much covers it, does it not?
5 MS McGREGOR: I could have maybe asked the applicant why.
6 It has not happened.
7 MR SHELDON: Has your practice changed in any way at all
8 since Victoria's case?
9 MS McGREGOR: I think maybe I am more aware when I go out to
10 visit.
11 MR SHELDON: Aware of what?
12 MS McGREGOR: All sorts of things.
13 MR SHELDON: For instance?
14 MS McGREGOR: Like this case, child abuse or things like
15 that.
16 MR SHELDON: So you are now more on the lookout for evidence
17 of child abuse, are you?
18 MS McGREGOR: I am not on the lookout for it but I am more
19 aware.
20 MR SHELDON: But that awareness has never induced you to
21 pass on any concerns to either your manager or Social
22 Services?
23 MS McGREGOR: Not as yet.
24 MR SHELDON: What, if anything, do you understand by the
25 phrase "statutory overcrowding"?
111
1 MS McGREGOR: Well I do not really look into the
2 overcrowding of homes. I would write down how many
3 people share a room, and that is for Housing
4 Registrations to look into it.
5 MR SHELDON: So you do not understand very much by it, but
6 that is not part of your function?
7 MS McGREGOR: I am not saying that, I am just saying that
8 I would write down how many people are sharing a house
9 and the facilities.
10 MR SHELDON: One of the elements of your job description
11 that we looked at at the outset that you agreed formed,
12 as far as you were aware, part of your job at the time
13 was to give advice on aid available to housing
14 applicants, for example help with rehousing, welfare
15 rights, home ownership schemes and to refer on to other
16 sources as appropriate. Do you recall that bit?
17 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
18 MR SHELDON: What did you understand that to mean?
19 MS McGREGOR: If they are interested in other means of
20 housing. I am not quite sure if it is called the same
21 thing, but the do it yourself, shared ownership.
22 MR SHELDON: What if any training or documents were given to
23 you to enable you to do what it says there, namely give
24 advice and assistance on those matters?
25 MS McGREGOR: Well, if the client had actually asked about
112
1 anything like that you know, we did have a package to
2 send out to them.
3 MR SHELDON: Thank you very much.
4 THE CHAIRMAN: Miss Lawson I think this would probably be
5 a convenient time for us to break for lunch. Therefore
6 we will do that. If we could get back here by 1.40,
7 would that be convenient?
8 Ms McGregor you are under oath and you are not
9 allowed to discuss your evidence with anyone now, and
10 that includes your advocate, until your evidence is
11 completed. Thank you very much. 1.40 ladies and
12 gentlemen.
13 (12.50 pm)
14 (The short adjournment)
15 (1.40 pm)
16 MR SHELDON: Can we have Ms McGregor back, please. No
17 further questions from me, sir.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Ms Lawson, thank you.
19 MS LAWSON: Ms McGregor, you were being asked about and
20 describing how you came to have your present job and you
21 described being a supernumery before, is that right?
22 MS McGREGOR: That is correct.
23 MS LAWSON: But it is right you were a supernumery
24 administrative assistant before you applied for your
25 present job, is it not? Do you remember or not?
113
1 MS McGREGOR: No, I cannot remember.
2 MS LAWSON: And that you applied for the job as a home
3 visitor?
4 MS McGREGOR: Well I was slotted into the job. I did not
5 really have to apply for the job.
6 MS LAWSON: Right. Then you were also asked some questions
7 about what training you had.
8 MS McGREGOR: That is right.
9 MS LAWSON: Could you please have volume 29/92. Now, that
10 is a document taken from your personnel files setting
11 out some of the training courses that according to
12 Haringey's records you have actually been on. They seem
13 to confirm what you were saying but would you just like
14 to look at it and make sure that that is right? Are you
15 on the right page?
16 MS McGREGOR: That is right.
17 MS LAWSON: That is you, is it?
18 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
19 MS LAWSON: So that is your training record?
20 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
21 MS LAWSON: Can I then move you on to Victoria's case and
22 just ask you: apart from what is written down in your
23 notes of that home visit that we have in the file and
24 what you have been able to add to it from your statement
25 to the Inquiry, do you now have any very clear
114
1 recollection about that particular visit or not?
2 MS McGREGOR: No, I do not.
3 MS LAWSON: Can I just take you, arising out of something
4 you were asked, back to volume 6, please, and to page 4?
5 Now, this is the form requesting a visit that you were
6 asked about earlier on.
7 MS McGREGOR: That is right.
8 MS LAWSON: You may remember that Mr Sheldon was pointing
9 out to you that, if you look at the top part of that
10 form, it does not tell you what the reason for the visit
11 was supposed to be. Do you remember that?
12 MS McGREGOR: That is right, yes.
13 MS LAWSON: If you look just below that, do you see the line
14 which says "reason for cold call"?
15 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
16 MS LAWSON: And what does that say?
17 MS McGREGOR: "Confirm residence".
18 MS LAWSON: Did that help you at all about what your job was
19 supposed to be on 16th September; your job in the sense
20 of why you were making this visit?
21 MS McGREGOR: Basically just to confirm residence.
22 MS LAWSON: Right. Have you got your statement there still
23 in front of you? I think it is the loose document.
24 MS McGREGOR: I have.
25 MS LAWSON: Would you go to what we have as W2/227 and it is
115
1 paragraph 7 of your statement. Do you have that?
2 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
3 MS LAWSON: Now, in that you set out in a little bit more
4 detail what you would normally do on such a visit in
5 order to check whether somebody was really there.
6 MS McGREGOR: Mm-hmm.
7 MS LAWSON: Can you just read that through to yourself and
8 confirm that that is right?
9 MS McGREGOR: It is correct.
10 MS LAWSON: So that would be your usual practice, would it?
11 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
12 MS LAWSON: Do you have any reason to remember whether you
13 departed from your usual practice in this case?
14 MS McGREGOR: No.
15 MS LAWSON: You were shown, you have told us, some documents
16 by Ms Kouao, her passport.
17 MS McGREGOR: Mm-hmm.
18 MS LAWSON: She showed it to you. Did you take it away with
19 you or not?
20 MS McGREGOR: No we do not take original documents with us.
21 MS LAWSON: Do you know what the procedure is about actually
22 producing the documents to the Housing Department or
23 not?
24 MS McGREGOR: Well the applicant would normally bring it in
25 for us to photocopy.
116
1 MS LAWSON: Yes. And you were asked about whether or not,
2 and indeed you say in your statement that it is
3 sometimes difficult to distinguish which of two women
4 a pile of women's clothes belonged to. But if you go to
5 page 14 in bundle 6, please, we see your note there. It
6 is after the note about Carl and partner and the
7 applicant and child all sleeping on the floor. It says
8 "clothes seen for applicant and child".
9 MS McGREGOR: That is right.
10 MS LAWSON: So that means you saw clothes for Victoria, did
11 you?
12 MS McGREGOR: Yes, because I made a note of it.
13 MS LAWSON: You have said already you do not remember seeing
14 Mr Manning. Can I ask that you be shown the document at
15 bundle 4, page 72, please. Have a quick look at that,
16 Ms McGregor. It was explained to Ms Alexandrou that
17 that is a document apparently written by Mr Manning
18 which is described as a draft but we do not know what
19 became of it and I just wondered whether Ms Kouao had
20 shown you a document which looked anything like that or
21 you remember seeing that letter.
22 MS McGREGOR: Not that I can remember.
23 MS LAWSON: Would you have made a note of it if she had
24 shown you a letter like that?
25 MS McGREGOR: Possibly.
117
1 MS LAWSON: I see. Finally, from me, you were being asked
2 about your contact; whether or not you and the Children
3 and Family Service actually occupied offices in the same
4 building. Do you remember being asked about that?
5 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
6 MS LAWSON: Whether you could have just popped into the
7 Family and Children Service. I would like to ask you
8 some more about that because you are based in
9 Apex House, are you not?
10 MS McGREGOR: That is right.
11 MS LAWSON: If I was to suggest to you that the only parts
12 of Social Services which are based in Apex House were
13 the elders and the people dealing with children leaving
14 care, is that right or do you not know?
15 MS McGREGOR: I am not certain.
16 MS LAWSON: Right. Thank you.
17 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you Miss Lawson. I have no questions.
18 MR SHELDON: I have been passed one or two short questions
19 by one of the interested parties. With your permission
20 I will ask them now.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: Certainly.
22 MR SHELDON: Ms McGregor, the visit you made to 267 Somerset
23 Gardens was a cold call.
24 MS McGREGOR: It was, yes.
25 MR SHELDON: So you did not announce the fact to Ms Kouao
118
1 that you were going to visit her that day?
2 MS McGREGOR: No.
3 MR SHELDON: When you were there do you remember whether you
4 saw any toys?
5 MS McGREGOR: I cannot remember.
6 MR SHELDON: Is that the sort of thing you would have noted?
7 MS McGREGOR: In some cases, yes.
8 MR SHELDON: Do you remember whether you noticed a smell of
9 urine in the flat?
10 MS McGREGOR: I cannot remember.
11 MR SHELDON: Do you remember whether you noticed a smell of
12 either excrement or bleach in the flat?
13 MS McGREGOR: No.
14 MR SHELDON: If the flat had smelt unpleasant, would you
15 have noted that?
16 MS McGREGOR: I would have noted it, yes.
17 MR SHELDON: You say that you were told that all four of the
18 people living in the flat slept on the floor; is that
19 right?
20 MS McGREGOR: That is right.
21 MR SHELDON: Do you remember seeing a bed or a sofa bed in
22 the flat?
23 MS McGREGOR: I cannot remember.
24 MR SHELDON: Then, lastly, did you go into the bathroom at
25 any stage?
119
1 MS McGREGOR: I cannot remember but I would presume so from
2 my notes.
3 MR SHELDON: Because you saw toiletries?
4 MS McGREGOR: Yes.
5 MR SHELDON: Do you remember anything about the bathroom?
6 MS McGREGOR: No.
7 MR SHELDON: That is all, sir. Thank you very much.
8 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
9 MR SHELDON: Miss Gibson will take the next witness.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Miss Gibson.
11 MS GIBSON: Sir, the next witness is Bambos Kakouratos.
12 MR BAMBOS KAKOURATOS (sworn)
13 MS GIBSON: Good afternoon, Mr Kakouratos. Could you begin
14 by giving the Inquiry your full name and professional
15 address, please.
16 MR KAKOURATOS: My name is Bambos Kakouratos. I work at
17 820 Seven Sisters Road, London N15.
18 MS GIBSON: And you have made one statement for the Inquiry
19 which is found at volume 2/180. I believe you have
20 a copy of that in front of you.
21 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes.
22 MS GIBSON: Can you confirm that the contents of that
23 statement are true?
24 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, I can.
25 MS GIBSON: Are there any amendments or additions that you
120
1 wish to make to that statement before you start giving
2 your evidence?
3 MR KAKOURATOS: No.
4 MS GIBSON: Thank you. It is correct that you were the
5 Housing Registrations Manager dealing with this case in
6 1999?
7 MR KAKOURATOS: That is correct.
8 MS GIBSON: And that you have worked in Haringey
9 since December of 1991, first of all managing a team of
10 administrative staff providing support to specialist
11 social services teams and then in 1997, in March of that
12 year, you moved to your present post?
13 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes.
14 MS GIBSON: So it is right that you have had experience
15 working in both the Housing and Social Services
16 Department of the local authorities?
17 MR KAKOURATOS: That is right.
18 MS GIBSON: Can you assist with whether, firstly, dealing
19 with 1999, there were any joint protocols in place
20 between Social Services and the Housing Department for
21 dealing with cases?
22 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, there were. Did you want me to give
23 you examples?
24 MS GIBSON: Yes.
25 MR KAKOURATOS: One process we have is for children leaving
121
1 care. We have got systems in place whereby the leaving
2 care team can nominate children for accommodation,
3 permanent accommodation.
4 MS GIBSON: And were there any other protocols that you can
5 give us examples of?
6 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes. For different types of social services
7 clients, if the Housing Department is dealing with
8 someone who has mental health or learning difficulties,
9 for example, and the Housing Service contacts various
10 professionals, social services included, to get
11 information regarding those clients so that we can make
12 an assessment as to their housing needs, what type of
13 property, for example, they require.
14 MS GIBSON: What about joint protocols dealing with
15 situations where there were concerns surrounding
16 children?
17 MR KAKOURATOS: Regarding children leaving care, for
18 example?
19 MS GIBSON: No, not leaving care --
20 MR KAKOURATOS: Child protection?
21 MS GIBSON: Child protection concerns, yes.
22 MR KAKOURATOS: Not very clear guidelines.
23 MS GIBSON: You say not very clear guidelines. Were there
24 actually any guidelines at all? Because from the
25 evidence we have heard this morning from Miss Alexandrou
122
1 and Karen McGregor, they were not aware of any such
2 guidelines.
3 MR KAKOURATOS: I think a lot of these -- many of these kind
4 of cases that you refer to would go directly to managers
5 or to, for example, the Special Needs Team. So the
6 officers that you were talking to would not have had
7 direct experience dealing with such cases.
8 MS GIBSON: You say that, but it seems that they had not
9 received any training at all about what to do in
10 a situation where there were child protection concerns.
11 MR KAKOURATOS: That is right. There does not appear to be
12 any training, yes.
13 MS GIBSON: And is that the position now as well as 1999?
14 MR KAKOURATOS: I think staff were more aware of how to --
15 of dealing with such cases but there is not formal
16 training available to staff.
17 MS GIBSON: What has been done to make them more aware of
18 how to deal with such cases?
19 MR KAKOURATOS: I can only speak for my own team. I think
20 this case in particular has made us -- my team in
21 particular -- more aware of how we can be more proactive
22 in dealing with these cases, for example.
23 MS GIBSON: And what is it that you do differently now as a
24 result of this case?
25 MR KAKOURATOS: I think Rubiecka(?) has mentioned herself
123
1 that we would -- it formed -- as far as possible we
2 would liaise with social services and give them as much
3 information as they need.
4 MS GIBSON: Have there ever been any training schemes for
5 Housing staff to enable them to better understand the
6 way that social services work?
7 MR KAKOURATOS: No, there is not.
8 MS GIBSON: Has any consideration ever been given to such
9 training?
10 MR KAKOURATOS: I do not think so, not to my knowledge. But
11 I would not be always involved in all the management
12 discussions that might be going on in the Housing
13 Service.
14 MS GIBSON: Nothing to your knowledge?
15 MR KAKOURATOS: Not to my knowledge.
16 MS GIBSON: Can I ask you now about what guidance your
17 department was working to at the time in 1999? I do not
18 know if you were present this morning when reference was
19 made to the Code of Guidance for local authorities on
20 the allocation of accommodation and homelessness which
21 is a draft consultation document issued in March of
22 1999, which seems to have gone missing. Are you aware
23 of that document?
24 MR KAKOURATOS: I have seen a number of documents
25 regarding -- that give us guidance on how to deal with
124
1 housing applications, but I have not seen this copy that
2 you are referring to.
3 MS GIBSON: Well we will see if we can get you a copy for
4 later on so you can look at the document and see if that
5 jogs your memory. But do you use in your department
6 a book called "Homelessness and Allocation," which is
7 edited by Andrew Arden QC and Caroline Hunter? It is
8 a red book.
9 MR KAKOURATOS: No.
10 MS GIBSON: Is that a book that you have heard of?
11 MR KAKOURATOS: No.
12 MS GIBSON: Is that a book that you have ever had cause to
13 refer to?
14 MR KAKOURATOS: No.
15 MS GIBSON: I have a copy of the guidance here. I wonder if
16 that could be passed to you to see if that assists.
17 (Handed). If you just take your time to have a look at
18 the cover and have a quick flick through the contents,
19 if that helps you. Perhaps you can tell us now whether
20 or not you are familiar with that.
21 MR KAKOURATOS: I have not seen this document before but
22 I recognise a lot of the advice it is providing.
23 MS GIBSON: And how do you come to be aware of the advice
24 that it is providing?
25 MR KAKOURATOS: I think I have seen it in -- Shelter
125
1 produced similar guidance. I have seen it in that and
2 there are other documents that I have come across that
3 gives us guidance on how to deal with housing issues.
4 MS GIBSON: I just want to ask you about some of the
5 contents just to see what you do in Haringey and to what
6 extent it differs from this guidance. I wonder if one
7 of the witness managers could pass this document to the
8 witness (Handed). Sir, it is a copy of extracts from
9 this book and I think you have a photocopy there.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: We have, yes.
11 MS GIBSON: At paragraph 18.1, which is on the first page of
12 that series of documents there, in the middle of the
13 paragraph it states that:
14 "Joint or coordinated working between these
15 different agencies, societies," and that is housing
16 authority, social services departments, health
17 authorities, education authorities, environmental health
18 departments and voluntary sector organisations, prison
19 and probation services, and other referral agencies,
20 "has an important role to play in securing the delivery
21 of appropriate responses to people with housing and
22 other needs."
23 Is that a philosophy with which you are familiar?
24 MR KAKOURATOS: Definitely. We work very closely with all
25 these agencies.
126
1 MS GIBSON: And at 18.3:
2 "Housing authorities should consider devising
3 screening procedures that identify at an early stage in
4 the homelessness or housing application process those
5 cases where there is a need for case specific joint
6 working and they may wish to encourage other partner
7 bodies to do the same."
8 I just wonder what happens in Haringey in relation
9 to joint working on cases and if you can provide us with
10 some examples of any joint working that you are aware
11 of.
12 MR KAKOURATOS: Do you mean in considering people for
13 housing?
14 MS GIBSON: Yes. What I am particularly interested in is
15 where there are issues of child protection concerns,
16 firstly, and then, secondly, concerns related to a child
17 in need.
18 MR KAKOURATOS: If this is a general question regarding
19 whether we work with other social services or other
20 agencies in order to make an assessment and approve
21 people for accommodation that meets their needs, whether
22 it is medical needs or social needs or whatever, yes.
23 The answer is yes we do -- we actually work in that way.
24 MS GIBSON: That is generally. But can you help with
25 specifically, firstly in relation to whether child
127
1 protection concerns and social service is involved and
2 perhaps one of the issues in the picture is housing.
3 MR KAKOURATOS: In my experience, working within my team, we
4 do not get a lot of child protection cases coming to us.
5 So I do not have much experience in actually working
6 with social services on these type of cases. The only
7 one that comes to mind is this particular case.
8 MS GIBSON: What about cases where there are concerns the
9 child might be in need under Section 17 of the
10 Children Act?
11 MR KAKOURATOS: We do get referrals from social services
12 regarding these cases and we will consider them.
13 MS GIBSON: You say you will consider them. What is the
14 process by which you work with social services in
15 relation to those type of cases?
16 MR KAKOURATOS: The process involves the social worker
17 writing to us and referring a case to us in a formal way
18 and giving us as much information as possible regarding
19 the housing situation. We need to make a housing
20 assessment, we need to see what their current situation
21 is in, what situation they are in at the moment. Then
22 we can advise the social services as to what services we
23 are able to provide their client.
24 MS GIBSON: So, is that a similar situation to what happened
25 here in this case, with Miss Arthurworrey making a
128
1 referral, I know this is a child protection concern so
2 far as you were aware from the referral, but then you do
3 your thing in relation to the housing application? You
4 do not make enquiries of social services about what
5 their particular concerns are and you do not do any form
6 of joint assessment with social services. Is that fair?
7 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes. We do not do necessarily a joint
8 assessment but we are involved in making our own
9 assessment and we take into account the assessment
10 social services make as well.
11 MS GIBSON: Looking now at 18.5 of that, which appears on
12 page 110 of the bundle of documents you have in front of
13 you, there is reference there midway down the page to
14 the Children Act. It mentions Section 27 of the
15 Children Act:
16 "The Social Services Authority can ask a Housing
17 Authority to help in delivering services for children in
18 need and the Housing Authority must comply with such
19 a request insofar as it is compatible with your
20 statutory duties."
21 I take it you are familiar with that section.
22 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes.
23 MS GIBSON: At 18.5:
24 "Housing authorities, social services and health
25 authorities should liaise over the best solution for
129
1 each client, recognising for example that the provision
2 of more appropriate housing may assist in the delivery
3 of social services or that increased support or care
4 services may allow a person to remain in his or her
5 current home rather than move into new accommodation."
6 And so on. It speaks there of looking jointly at
7 delivery of services and discussion with social
8 services. Do you not consider that there may be merit
9 in working more closely with social services in cases
10 where there are issues both in relation to child
11 protection and/or in relation to a case of a child in
12 need?
13 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, definitely.
14 MS GIBSON: But at present that does not happen in Haringey,
15 that is right, is it?
16 MR KAKOURATOS: I think there is a lot of cooperation and
17 liaison between the services but there is always room
18 for improvement.
19 MS GIBSON: Well, you have said in your evidence that you
20 are not aware of any specific new initiatives coming
21 from management higher than yourself; that now there is
22 generally more consciousness amongst your staff as
23 a result of Victoria's case of the need to be aware of
24 issues of child abuse, but there is nothing specific, is
25 there, to promote joint working?
130
1 MR KAKOURATOS: Not to my knowledge.
2 MS GIBSON: So, when you get a case now in relation to
3 either child protection concerns or a child in need,
4 there is no discussion at all with social services about
5 what the issues are as far as they are concerned and
6 what impact housing might have on the situation?
7 MR KAKOURATOS: Since Victoria's case, I do not think we
8 have had another child protection case come to my team.
9 So I cannot really answer that question.
10 MS GIBSON: What about frequency of cases of child in need
11 that you deal with?
12 MR KAKOURATOS: I would include child in need cases as well.
13 We do not get a lot of referrals to Registrations Team.
14 MS GIBSON: Mr Kakouratos, I find that surprising given that
15 it may often be the case that where there are housing
16 issues, not always but it can happen that there would
17 also be concerns in relation to children within the
18 family.
19 MR KAKOURATOS: I am sure there is, but the role of my team
20 is to make a housing assessment, and we specialise in
21 that assessment. We are not qualified to make
22 assessments of social services-type of assessments.
23 MS GIBSON: But it may assist you in your task in looking at
24 how many points to allocate to a family in terms of what
25 their level of need is if you have consultation with
131
1 social services about what concerns they might have.
2 For example, if a child in the household was suffering
3 developmentally as a result of, amongst other things,
4 poor housing, frequent moves of house.
5 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, definitely. Sorry, if that is what you
6 mean, we do have that contact with social services. We
7 do request that kind of information. But that part of
8 the assessment is done by our Special Needs Team. So if
9 there are concerns regarding the mental health of
10 a child, for example, or any member of the family or any
11 welfare needs, then our Special Needs Team will meet
12 that assessment.
13 MS GIBSON: Can I ask you if Housing routinely inquire about
14 child protection or child in need issues when you
15 receive referrals? For example, do you ask families
16 when they fill in an application form whether they have
17 had any contact with social services so that you can
18 check the position with social services as to whether
19 that may impact on their housing needs?
20 MR KAKOURATOS: We do not do that, no.
21 MS GIBSON: I have asked you about that guidance, and you
22 are aware of some of the concepts from the guidance but
23 not of the specific document. Is that fair?
24 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, that is fair.
25 MS GIBSON: The Local Government Housing Encyclopaedia cites
132
1 the guidance in force at the time that we are dealing
2 with as being a circular, LAC96, which gives guidance on
3 children services plans. Is that a document that you
4 were familiar with?
5 MR KAKOURATOS: No.
6 MS GIBSON: I just want to ask you now some questions about
7 your team and the workload that you were dealing with.
8 You say in your statement that it was an efficient and
9 competent team, yet we know in this particular case the
10 application came in on 19th July. On 25th August there
11 was a letter from Lisa Arthurworrey, the social worker
12 in the case, asking you to process the application more
13 rapidly and then on 1st September a letter to Kouao
14 informing her of the number of points that she had
15 received. A home visit on 16th September and then the
16 mitigating circumstances letter on 30th September. So
17 from start to finish a longer period than eight weeks.
18 MR KAKOURATOS: It appears to be, but if you consider that
19 the family arrived in England in March 1999; is that
20 correct?
21 MS GIBSON: That is correct and that is what it said on the
22 forms that you were dealing with.
23 MR KAKOURATOS: In that case, we would not have even
24 considered them to go on the register because they would
25 not have been in Haringey, or even the UK, for at least
133
1 six months out of the past 12. So to say that there was
2 this overdue period, you must consider that we would not
3 normally consider that application. We only considered
4 it because there was a referral from social services.
5 MS GIBSON: What did you do, if anything, to communicate
6 that first problem with this application, the lack of
7 the six-month residence criteria, to the social worker
8 in the case?
9 MR KAKOURATOS: I overlooked that because we took the fact
10 that social services were dealing with the case as
11 a priority. So we thought it was important to make the
12 housing assessment as soon as possible.
13 MS GIBSON: But at some point when you dealt with the case,
14 you must have become aware of the fact that the family
15 had not been in England longer than March --
16 before March. What was done to inform social services
17 about that problem?
18 MR KAKOURATOS: I do not think it was a problem for social
19 services. Social services wanted the family
20 accommodated and that is what we were actually looking
21 into. I just explained: we overlooked the fact that the
22 family -- what I am trying to say is that I accepted
23 that they had not been in the country for more than six
24 months, and I overlooked that and still put them on the
25 register.
134
1 MS GIBSON: I see, because of the social services letter you
2 thought that you would process the case anyway because
3 of their concerns?
4 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, because it looked like the case may
5 have gone to the Homeless Team if that did not happen
6 anyway. So we would have had eventually -- we would
7 have had to have responsibility to house this family
8 anyway, even though -- I know there is a contradiction
9 there but on the Housing Register there is a requirement
10 for a minimum residency of six months out of 12 months,
11 so I was taking into account the fact that if I was to
12 exclude her from the register she would probably go to
13 the Homeless Team and probably go into -- be put into,
14 I assume, emergency accommodation.
15 MS GIBSON: Okay. We will come to that in more detail
16 later. Just turning now to the systems within your
17 office, was there any method that you had in place for
18 prioritising cases with child protection concerns?
19 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, there was. We have a system of
20 prioritising any case where there are dependant
21 children. All cases that come into the Registration
22 Team that have any type of priority need are prioritised
23 and they are dealt with very, very quickly; quicker than
24 the eight-week period that was mentioned here.
25 MS GIBSON: So, in this case you say it was fast tracked
135
1 despite the lack of six months. But still overall
2 a 10-week period in dealing with the case. Why that if
3 there was --
4 MR KAKOURATOS: Because we got the memo from the social
5 worker in late August, and if you look at your records
6 you will see that we have acted very, very quickly to
7 get the case assessed. The case was assessed the very
8 day I received the memo and a letter went quite promptly
9 out to the applicants. So if you take that into account
10 you can see that there was actually very swift action in
11 the way the form was processed within the team as soon
12 as we got the letter from the social worker.
13 MS GIBSON: Looking now at the letter you received from the
14 social worker, did you do anything to bring that to the
15 attention of Maria Alexandrou who was dealing with the
16 case?
17 MR KAKOURATOS: Well all documents would be together in
18 a file. So Maria would have had -- the letter would
19 have been available to her and I am quite sure that
20 I would have pointed out to her, if I told her that the
21 assessment had to be done very quickly I am sure I would
22 have pointed out to her why -- the background to the
23 case, and not a lot of cases are passed on to the
24 visiting team so quickly.
25 MS GIBSON: Yes. Looking at the form, this morning we
136
1 looked at the situation of what happens as in this form
2 where someone who has a more limited command of English
3 is the applicant that you are dealing with. Here
4 someone wrote on the form that her use of written
5 English is limited.
6 MR KAKOURATOS: (Witness nods).
7 MS GIBSON: Are there any procedures in place to make sure
8 that such a person understands correspondence from your
9 department?
10 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, there is. We have our translation
11 unit -- interpreting translation unit which provides us
12 with interpreters when we need them. Also, if we need
13 a letter translated we could pass it on to the
14 translation team to have it translated in the language
15 that is required. I presume it is French.
16 MS GIBSON: Yes.
17 MR KAKOURATOS: That was the language, yes. But that can
18 cause delays in replying back to people. That is out of
19 our control. It can take a couple of weeks, for
20 example, maybe longer to get a letter translated.
21 MS GIBSON: This is from your in-house translation service?
22 MR KAKOURATOS: That is right. But it is available to us.
23 MS GIBSON: But we know in this case that the letters were
24 not translated. Again, how do you ensure that someone
25 who may well have had help in filling in the initial
137
1 form for all that you knew in the case; how do you make
2 sure that that person --
3 MR KAKOURATOS: I think in this case it was not very clear,
4 the need for this type of service. It was not very
5 clear because a visit was made. There was not any
6 feedback to us that there was a problem -- a language
7 problem there. It was not indicated by the social
8 worker that there was a language problem.
9 MS GIBSON: Well it was indicated on your initial form that
10 there was some problem with written communication.
11 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, of course. But I am also asking you to
12 consider our other sources which indicated -- did not
13 indicate there was a problem.
14 MS GIBSON: You received the letter from Lisa Arthurworrey.
15 Again, you did not -- and indeed no-one from the Housing
16 Department it seems actually phoned Social Services.
17 There was contact from Lisa Arthurworrey, we see from
18 the Social Services file, contacting you to ask about
19 the progress of the case, but no communication coming
20 from Housing to Social Services. I just wonder, would
21 it be your normal practice when you get a letter like
22 this from a social worker to telephone and have a word
23 with the social worker about the case, what the issues
24 are, what the concerns are, what impact that might have
25 on your housing assessment?
138
1 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, you are quite right to mention this.
2 It is good practice and actually normal practice to
3 respond to these memoranda. There should have been
4 a response and notes made of phone calls between the two
5 teams.
6 MS GIBSON: Can you explain why that did not happen here?
7 MR KAKOURATOS: I think sometimes when people are under
8 pressure -- we are a very busy team. I mean, at the
9 time very effective, dealing with a very large volume of
10 application of forms. Sometimes you can overlook good
11 practice in order to deal with more cases.
12 MS GIBSON: Yes, but I think the evidence, at least of the
13 statements of members of your department, would say that
14 although it was a busy team it was competent. It
15 certainly does not give the impression that you were
16 deluged with work to the extent that good practice had
17 sometimes to go by the by.
18 MR KAKOURATOS: I am not trying to excuse that these notes
19 were overlooked. I am trying to explain what I think
20 the reasons were. Yes, our team worked very well, under
21 the circumstances, under the pressures, and it was
22 a very busy team. I am not trying to make any excuses.
23 I am just trying maybe to explain a reason why they were
24 overlooked.
25 MS GIBSON: Can I just deal with the housing points
139
1 allocation for 194, which I understand to be quite
2 a high score. You say in your statement that that is
3 the case. About how long would it have been before
4 Kouao would have been rehoused with those sort of points
5 if it were not for the fact that your further home
6 assessment showed her to be intentionally homeless?
7 MR KAKOURATOS: I think it would have been possible at the
8 time to have rehoused her very very quickly indeed
9 because at that time I remember very clearly that we
10 were rehousing people into permanent accommodation with
11 a minimum of 185 points. So she had 194. So it was
12 quite obvious to me that as soon as we had made
13 a decision, we could have contacted the allocation team
14 and ensured that a very quick allocation of suitable
15 accommodation could have been made. So it did seem
16 feasible that we could have dealt with this effectively.
17 MS GIBSON: So a lot turns on the assessment that was made
18 by the person who conducted the home visit, from
19 Karen McGregor; the fact that she thought this to be
20 a case of intentional homelessness because of the family
21 having left France and a council property in France.
22 Yet that information, as we know, was not relayed on to
23 Social Services by your department; correct? Is that
24 correct?
25 MR KAKOURATOS: Social Services made inquiries with us and
140
1 we informed them, if that is what you ...
2 MS GIBSON: Yes, but you knew about this position before
3 Social Services contacted you about the case.
4 MR KAKOURATOS: That is right, yes.
5 MS GIBSON: If it had not perhaps been for Lisa Arthurworrey
6 contacting the Housing Department, you might not have.
7 MR KAKOURATOS: No, I do not think that is right. I do not
8 think you are fair. I accept the fact we did not notify
9 Lisa that -- of the progress, but she should have been
10 informed as soon as we had arrived at a decision.
11 MS GIBSON: If you would have a look at volume 6, which is
12 the Social Services file, and page 55 in that volume --
13 sorry, I think page 56 first. You have that there.
14 There is a reference there to a telephone call to
15 Housing on 9th September, the purpose to chase up memo.
16 And then:
17 "Outcome: informed visit had taken place during the
18 first week of September. Appears Marie-Therese may have
19 made herself intentionally homeless. Left secure
20 accommodation in France. Will be writing to mother for
21 more information."
22 That is dated 9th September but it seems that the
23 notes of the home visit are dated 16th September. Can
24 you explain the apparent discrepancy because it appears
25 Lisa Arthurworrey has been given information about the
141
1 visit that has already taken place on 9th September when
2 it seems that it had not yet taken place.
3 MR KAKOURATOS: It seems that the visit was made some time
4 before the notes were made, I presume. But obviously we
5 must have informed her much earlier on and we must have
6 received some kind of report from the home visitor.
7 MS GIBSON: It is a little bit perplexing that the only
8 document we have on the file is dated 16th September.
9 I think we heard from the visiting officer this morning
10 that she would usually write up notes when she returned
11 from the visit. There is nothing on the form to suggest
12 anything other than that the visit took place on that
13 day, 16th September.
14 MR KAKOURATOS: I do not really know the details of when the
15 visit was made. From what I can see in front of me, the
16 visit must have been made prior to this note that you
17 see in front of you of 9th September.
18 MS GIBSON: That may well be right, but is it normal for
19 visiting officers to date their records of interviews
20 when they make them up rather than when the visit
21 actually happens, or at least not to put something on
22 the form that clearly indicates when the visit took
23 place and then sign off their notes when they are made?
24 MR KAKOURATOS: I presume that Karen must have made her
25 notes much later on and just written the dates that she
142
1 wrote the notes -- the day she actually wrote the notes
2 in the office. It is probably not the best -- it should
3 be made clear on the report when the visit was made and
4 if the notes are made at a later stage then a separate
5 date should be put down.
6 MS GIBSON: Excuse me one moment.
7 I understand -- and we can go to it in the bundle --
8 that the actual application form is signed and dated by
9 Kouao herself on 16th September, page 13 in that bundle
10 in front of you. It does appear from that that it is
11 both signed off by the visiting officer on the 16th and
12 by the applicant.
13 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, I can see.
14 MS GIBSON: Might it have been the case that there were two
15 visits in this case?
16 MR KAKOURATOS: No, I do not think so.
17 MS GIBSON: There is no reference to it on your file but
18 I am just trying to work out why there is this
19 discrepancy in the notes.
20 MR KAKOURATOS: I have never noticed -- obviously I have
21 never seen the Social Services file before so I never
22 was aware of this discrepancy. I mean, I always thought
23 that these records were correct. The 16th of September
24 was the date of the visit. But I have never seen this
25 note before. I cannot explain it.
143
1 MS GIBSON: Okay. Thank you. Then just looking back to
2 page 55, there is there reference to a telephone call
3 made on 18th October in which Lisa Arthurworrey was
4 informed of a letter of 30th September informing Kouao
5 that her application had been unsuccessful and she made
6 herself intentionally homeless. Again, that is Social
7 Services contacting you rather than the Housing
8 Department making contact with Social Services to keep
9 them updated of the position.
10 MR KAKOURATOS: That is right.
11 MS GIBSON: So do you accept that all the real activity in
12 relation to communication between Housing and Social
13 Services came from the Social Service side rather than
14 the Housing side?
15 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes, I accept.
16 MS GIBSON: You mention making inquiries into Kouao's
17 accommodation in France. How would that be done?
18 MR KAKOURATOS: We did not make any inquiries to Kouao
19 regarding Kouao's accommodation in France.
20 MS GIBSON: Would that be something that you might have
21 undertaken in a case such as this, where there was an
22 issue about an applicant who had left secure
23 accommodation in France?
24 MR KAKOURATOS: No, not in this case like this and I will
25 explain why. Where a client volunteers this type of
144
1 information, there is no need to chase it up because
2 they are obviously explaining that they had council
3 accommodation and the reasons why they left. It was
4 obviously -- she obviously left that accommodation
5 intentionally and made herself intentionally homeless.
6 That is how we understood by this, it is quite clear,
7 and we would not normally chase that information up.
8 MS GIBSON: I am just a little bit perplexed, because if you
9 turn to volume 2/185 -- but it is in fact your statement
10 and I think you have a loose copy of that in front of
11 you, underneath the file. If you look underneath, you
12 have your own statement here.
13 MR KAKOURATOS: I have it here.
14 MS GIBSON: Do you have that there? If you look at
15 paragraph 15(e) of the statement.
16 MR KAKOURATOS: Is that page 185?
17 MS GIBSON: Yes. You refer there to there being:
18 "... no note of telephone communication with the
19 Social Services Department ..."; that is on your side of
20 the file. We do not see anything on your file so that
21 is correct. "Given their concern as set out in the
22 letter from Lisa Arthurworrey, there should have been an
23 attendance note. There was, however, communication, and
24 I understand that the Social Services file may support
25 this. I was approached by Social Services by telephone
145
1 and asked what was holding up her application.
2 I explained that we were making inquiries about her
3 accommodation in France. I believe that the application
4 had come to a halt because she had not responded to our
5 letter."
6 What did you mean by making inquiries about
7 accommodation in France?
8 MR KAKOURATOS: We were making inquiries to Miss Kouao, that
9 is what I mean by that. This visitor's report indicated
10 that she had left this council accommodation and we
11 wrote a letter to her, the mitigating circumstances
12 letter, and we were waiting for a response to that
13 letter. So that is why I was referring to -- that is
14 what I mean by making inquiries.
15 MS GIBSON: And that letter invites a response within seven
16 days. That is a standard form letter, and we know that
17 she did not respond to you.
18 MR KAKOURATOS: She did not respond and I know we give seven
19 days, but in practice if information comes in we will
20 look at it, even if it is overdue.
21 MS GIBSON: So by early in October you would have been aware
22 that the response to that letter was outstanding and yet
23 it was not until the call from Lisa Arthurworrey on the
24 18th that that information was relayed to Social
25 Services. Given that this is a case that had first been
146
1 referred to you by the Social Services Department, do
2 you accept that it was important for them to know that
3 their client --
4 MR KAKOURATOS: Absolutely, definitely yes.
5 MS GIBSON: -- was not responding in a way that enabled you
6 to help her?
7 MR KAKOURATOS: Absolutely. We should respond fully, and as
8 I said before we had not yet at that time -- we did not
9 close the case and we were still hopefully wanting to
10 make a final decision as to whether we could have put
11 her on the waiting list or just taken her off the list
12 totally. So until that time -- we would have replied to
13 Social Services fully.
14 MS GIBSON: We know after the 18th on 30th November you put
15 this case in a category that it was deferred, and again
16 there was no reference --
17 MR KAKOURATOS: Can I explain?
18 MS GIBSON: Certainly.
19 MR KAKOURATOS: The reason why we do that is when a case --
20 where there is no action in a case, it is not moving, we
21 were not getting any further information, we defer it
22 simply because -- we are not closing it, we are
23 deferring it so that if anyone gets an inquiry on that
24 case they could see from the computer that a deferral --
25 it has been deferred and they can look into the notes
147
1 within the computer records which will explain why and
2 it would explain to them that we were actually waiting
3 for a response from a letter.
4 That is why we do that, so that if we get any calls
5 perhaps from Social Services or from the client
6 themselves maybe several weeks down the line, anybody on
7 duty, anybody, it could be in the Housing Advice Team,
8 our team or the Homeless Service could look at the
9 record and provide some information to that person
10 regarding that case. That is why we do that. We are
11 not closing the case down. That is all.
12 MS GIBSON: Yes. Just looking at that on 30th November when
13 the case was deferred and somebody looks at the case to
14 make that decision, at that point one would have thought
15 it might have been logical again to contact Social
16 Services and say, "That case that you spoke to me about
17 on 18th October, your client has still not made any
18 contact. What is going on?" There does not seem to be
19 any effective communication at all between --
20 MR KAKOURATOS: I have accepted that the communication was
21 not ideal. There should have been, as I said, better
22 records kept of communication we did have with Social
23 Services and we could have been more proactive with the
24 case, provided more -- you know, responded to Social
25 Services quickly.
148
1 MS GIBSON: Looking at the situation now in the light of
2 Victoria's case, are there any actual systems in place
3 within the office where there is a case such as this
4 referred from Social Services to ensure that that type
5 of communication is maintained?
6 MR KAKOURATOS: I think generally within the service we have
7 not developed very clear guidelines, but I think
8 generally there is a greater awareness of this
9 importance of communicating and liaising with Children's
10 Services.
11 MS GIBSON: Finally, just on a slightly different point, we
12 know in this case that there was also a housing
13 application to the London Borough of Brent. Firstly, at
14 the time of Victoria's case in 1999 were there any
15 systems in place for checking with other bordering
16 authorities or other London authorities if they had live
17 applications?
18 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes. Yes, there was.
19 MS GIBSON: In what sort of cases would you run those
20 checks?
21 MR KAKOURATOS: Well, if we had any information that
22 a client had been previously resident in another
23 borough, we would make checks regarding that residency
24 and we would get in touch with any part of that council
25 that may have had contact with that person.
149
1 MS GIBSON: And that accords with some of the evidence we
2 have heard earlier on today and you concur with that?
3 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes.
4 MS GIBSON: And there is no reason, is there, why anyone
5 cannot have an application running in a different
6 authority; it is just that it might be helpful for you
7 to --
8 MR KAKOURATOS: I think that if someone was on the register
9 in a different borough then we would be asking
10 questions. To be on a register in another borough you
11 need to be resident within that borough so we are going
12 to be sceptical how genuine the application is to us.
13 MS GIBSON: Thank you very much, Mr Kakouratos. If you
14 would wait there.
15 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Miss Lawson, please.
16 MS LAWSON: You mentioned the Special Needs Team as the one
17 that would normally deal with cases involving children
18 and families where there were special concerns about the
19 children.
20 MR KAKOURATOS: Yes.
21 MS LAWSON: Could you just explain to us a little how cases
22 get funded between the different teams. How does that
23 work?
24 MR KAKOURATOS: Well, the main way is through a medical form
25 which has to be completed so that the Special Needs Team
150
1 can begin to carry out an assessment and the medical
2 form asks a wide range of information regarding any type
3 of agency that is involved with the care of the child.
4 MS LAWSON: So we are talking there, are we, primarily about
5 children with disabilities or problems of that nature?
6 MR KAKOURATOS: Primarily, yes.
7 MS LAWSON: Is there a special team which would deal with
8 children who were vulnerable simply because of their age
9 or because they were living in a dysfunctional family?
10 MR KAKOURATOS: Are you referring to child protection cases?
11 MS LAWSON: Well partly those but there may be other
12 situations where within the Children Act definitions
13 a child could be regarded as a child in need without
14 necessarily having the sort of special needs that would
15 affect the housing that the child might require.
16 MR KAKOURATOS: There is no special team within the Housing
17 Service that exclusively deals with children's needs.
18 It can be a number of different teams.
19 MS LAWSON: Right. Only when they have a specific special
20 housing need identified, then, do they go to the Special
21 Needs Team; is that right?
22 MR KAKOURATOS: That is right.
23 MS LAWSON: In general terms, the whole question of the
24 points and the allocation is dealt with in the
25 allocation system which Haringey has which you have
|
