Agenda item - Housing Management Performance Report Quarter 3 2015/16

Report of Acting Executive Director for Environment, Development & Housing (copy attached).

(1)      That the report be noted along with the comments of the Committee. 

75.1    The Committee considered the report of the Acting Executive Director Environment, Development and Housing which covered the third quarter of the financial year 2015/16.    The report was presented by the Head of Income, Involvement & Improvement.  

75.2    Councillor Mears thanked officers for the additional information in the report and acknowledged that there had been some positive news since the last quarter.  She stated that it would be helpful to have another column to show the quarter before, in order to make sense of the movement.  This would be a good indicator when things were going well.  The Head of Income, Involvement & Improvement replied that reports used to have this information but it had been decided to use the trend arrow instead. However she would amend the report as requested by the committee. 

75.3    Councillor Miller referred to Page 328 and welcomed the average re-let time at 1a at 16 days.  He asked why there was a difference between 1b and 1c.  Was it because it was harder to re-let senior housing.  On paragraph 4.2  No 3. - Mutual exchanges he wondered if the 42 days figure should be reviewed.  Councillor Miller referred to page 329, paragraph 4.3 No 6.  – Responsive repairs passing post inspection.  He found the 90% figure rather concerning.  He asked why this figure was not higher.  Councillor Miller referred to page 330, where he noted that 172 of post inspections failed.  123 due to the cost of the work being over claimed by the contractor.  He found this concerning.  Councillor Miller referred to page 342 – Long term empty properties.   He asked when empty homes were reported to the committee, whether they were reported every time or were they reported once and then taken off.    

75.4    The Head of Income, Involvement & Improvement explained that in relation to long term empty properties, the report sometimes listed different properties.  Sometimes the properties remained the same but the number of days that they had been empty would have changed since the last report.  These were always properties that were over 6 weeks.   With regard to re-lets, there was a difference between 1b and 1c because officers wanted to provide additional information to highlight that there was a particular issue with seniors housing.  In terms of mutual exchanges, it was pointed out that the figure was not at 100% at the start of the quarter.  The council had now met the target. 

75.5    The Interim Head of Property & Investment/Head of Housing Strategy responded on the issue of post inspections.  He reported that since the last committee, officers were undertaking weekly quality assurance meetings with Mears who had looked to improve the oversight and quality assurance of their post inspections. It was predicted that there would be more failures in the short term.  Members had also asked for a report to be brought back after 6 months on the overcharging issue, which would include the remedies put in place to ensure this did not happen again.  Mears were looking to employ more direct labour rather than sub-contracted labour. 

75.6    Councillor Gibson congratulated officers on the positives in the report.  He commented on the red arrow with regard to responsive repairs post inspections. He accepted the previous point but asked when the sub-contractor employed by Mears (discussed at the last meeting) would cease to carry out work.  The Interim Head of Property & Investment/Head of Housing Strategy confirmed that the sub-contractor ceased to carry out work in September 2015.    

75.7    Councillor Gibson suggested that some of reasons for the red arrow might be due to other sub-contractors.  The Interim Head of Property & Investment/Head of Housing Strategy reported that officers were working with Mears to look at all other sub-contractors and working with quality assurance to double check this matter.  More detail would be brought back in the report that had been promised.    

75.8    The Acting Director of Environment, Development & Housing stated that he believed that the 123 failed responsive repairs due to the cost of the work being over claimed by the contractor were post inspections in relation to the issue related to the one sub-contractor.   If this was not the case, officers would need to report back to members. 

75.9    The Interim Head of Property & Investment stated that officers would report back to members with a more detailed briefing on this issue.   

75.10  RESOLVED:-

(1)       That the report be noted along with the comments of the Committee.