Issue - items at meetings - Housing & Social Inclusion Performance Report (Quarter 2)

Report of the Head of Housing & Social Inclusion (copy attached).

63.1    The Committee considered a report of the Head of Housing & Social Inclusion which set out the second quarter performance report for Housing & Social Inclusion for the financial year 2011-2012 and followed the format for presenting information agreed at the last meeting. 

63.2    Councillor Mears stated that it had previously been agreed to have figures and not percentages in the report.  Meanwhile she noted that asbestos removal was not mentioned.  Councillor Mears referred to the delays in the Ainsworth House project.  She understood that the delays to the development were not caused by asbestos but due to a problem with procurement.  She requested a report on Ainsworth House. 

63.3    The Head of Housing and Social Inclusion informed Councillor Mears that he would send her a report on asbestos removal.   Councillor Farrow asked for this to be sent to all councillors on the HMCC.

63.4    John Melson stated that there were 350 empty homes.  He asked if they were included in the report.  The Head of Housing and Social Inclusion explained that long term empty properties were not included in the calculations. 

63.5    John Melson referred to paragraph 3.5.0 – Tenant satisfaction with repairs.  This stated a 97.54% satisfaction.  He asked why jobs were cancelled, and whether the jobs were wrongly raised.  Mr Melson noted the improvement in the percentage for decent homes.  He asked if the criteria for kitchens and bathrooms had moved to the Brighton & Hove standard.             

63.6    The Chair stated that she would like to see more clarification on why more appointments were not kept. 

63.7    The Head of Housing and Social Inclusion reported that future reports could include details on cancelled jobs.  With regard to tenant satisfaction, he was aware that there was mistrust in the process.  As a result, officers were looking at a number of ways of measuring satisfaction.  This might involve using tenants or third party representatives to produce the figures.  This matter would be discussed by the various groups in the New Year.

63.8    The Head of Housing and Social Inclusion explained that the standard on Decent Homes had not changed.  The council was trying to communicate more clearly on this subject.  He would be happy to circulate an explanation of the standard to all members of the HMCC.

63.9    Ted Harman expressed concern about the use of percentages which he felt did not give sufficient information.  The Chair agreed that raw figures were needed.

63.10  Councillor Randall stated that progress on long term empty properties should be reported to the HMCC.  He stressed that work needed to be carried out to see if there was asbestos at Ainsworth House.  Meanwhile, the LDV was now beginning to deliver.

63.11  Stewart Gover was glad to hear that the squatters were being moved from Ainsworth House.  The Head of Housing and Social Inclusion reported that a court hearing had issued a possession order for the squatters to leave.  If they remained, bailiffs would remove them before Christmas.

63.12  Beverley Weaver reported that she had spoken to a Mears operative on 27 October.  She was told that 500 tenant satisfaction surveys had to be completed by the end of the month, and that some of the surveys were not being completed accurately.  She questioned how there could be a 97% satisfaction rate.  Ms Weaver mentioned that her son had required some work and the job was cancelled.  He had to wait another 3 weeks. 

63.13  The Chair stated that she had requested a meeting with the Head of Housing and Social Inclusion and Mears Ltd.  Tenant satisfaction would be discussed. 

63.14  The Head of Housing and Social Inclusion referred to the allegation made by Beverley Weaver.  This was the first he had heard of it and it would need to be investigated.

63.15  James Crier from Mears Ltd reported that communal repairs such as jobs to communal blocks were excluded from the satisfaction survey.  Customer surveys were carried out on PDA’s (personal digital assistants).  There would be a need to carry out an audit to ensure that the surveys were carried out properly.   The Chair stated that it needed to be made clear whether the information collected on the PDA’s was for Mears’ records or for the council’s records.

63.16  Councillor Simson asked for clarity regarding the percentage of empty properties passing right first time.  She was not clear whether the decent homes percentage was measured on the national or local standard.  Councillor Simson asked how properties renovated under the LDV were prioritised.   She considered that family homes should be prioritised.

63.17  The Head of Housing and Social Inclusion reported that the percentage of empty properties passing right first time was 97.93%.  This was slightly below the target but had not impacted much on the turn around time, which was currently 18 days.  The council was still performing better than in previous years.  Meanwhile, the council worked to the Brighton & Hove Standard which also applied to kitchens and bathrooms.  The standard had not changed and could not be a lesser standard than the national standard. 

63.18  The Head of Housing and Social Inclusion reported that there was an agreed business model with regard to properties renovated under the LDV.  The council were trying to prioritise long term empty properties and were working with contractors to see how best to prioritise.  It might be done geographically.  There would be a time scale for each batch of properties to ensure an income stream for Brighton & Hove Seaside Homes.   

63.19  John Melson raised the issue of communal repairs.  He asked why someone else other than Mears Ltd did not collect information on these repairs.  He suggested that a representative from a local association could give feedback.  Mr Melson wondered if the stock being transferred to the LDV was the least expensive property, in order to squeeze costs.  Meanwhile, Mr Melson expressed concern that the Brighton & Hove Standards should be the very best standards and not the worst.   

63.20  The Chair stated that she would like a report to be made available to all members setting out exactly what the decent home standards were, and providing information on specific standards for Brighton & Hove Seaside Homes Ltd.   

63.21  Councillor Randall agreed with Mr Melson regarding the matter of judging tenants’ satisfaction on communal blocks.  He suggested that there could be a tenant representative for each block to look at the work that had been carried out.   With regard to the LDV, it was not avoiding taking on the more expensive homes.  There was a mixture of different homes.  He asked for a presentation on this matter at the next meeting. 

63.22  John Melson asked about progress on scooter storage.  The Head of Property and Investment reported that the scooter storage programme was being rolled out.  Tom Whiting confirmed that work was progressing.  

63.23  John Melson stressed that officers had not visited individual blocks to discuss this matter.   The Chair asked for the relevant officer to provide a report back to the next HMCC meeting on the progress with scooter storage.

63.24  RESOLVED – (1) That the report and the above comments be noted.