Inquiry Into Alternative Housing

Bristol-based charity Alternative Housing came to unwelcome prominence in May 2017 when it topped a list of the UK's most-prosecuted landlords compiled by the Guardian newspaper. The Guardian found that the charity, which had received thousands of pounds in housing benefit in connection with its object of 'relieving those in need' by providing them with accommodation, had been convicted of six breaches of housing regulations. These convictions included the 'failure to ensure all parts of the property were maintained in a safe and working condition', 'failure to ensure the internal structure of the property was maintained in good repair', and failure to ensure that water supplies, drainage systems, firefighting equipment and fire alarms had been kept in working order.

Although the Charity Commission was not responsible for investigating the convictions themselves, or the health and safety ramifications of the breaches, it did use its statutory power to open an inquiry into three key points of concern:

Had the trustees of Alternative Housing complied with and fulfilled their duties and responsibilities under charity law? Had there been misconduct or mismanagement by the trustees in the administration of the charity? Had there been significant risk to charity property and/or beneficiaries? The Commission served Orders under Sections 52 and 47 of the Charities Act 2011 to obtain information from the charity's bank and trustees regarding the activities of the charity and certain housing companies with which it had been involved. Based on this evidence, it identified several instances of significant misconduct and/or mismanagement by the trustees.

First, Alternative Housing had reported that it was exempt from the legal duty to file accounts because its income did not exceed £25,000 per year, but analysis of its bank statements made it clear that this was untrue: the charity's income had been £235,000 in the financial year to 2015, £269,000 in 2016, and £150,000 in 2017. Second, there was strong evidence of conflicts of interest between trustees of Alternative Housing and the directors of two housing companies to which the charity had paid...