The Housing Asset Investment & Delivery Manager presented the report which gave an update on the programme which was now in year 4 of 8.  The Committee heard that the aim of the programme was to bring Council properties up to Decent Homes standard and that the report gave updates on the key elements of the programme such as increased governance and challenge towards contractors, increased customer satisfaction and a decrease in complaints and the added social value which provided benefits to the local community and economy.  Members were advised that Officers were awaiting news of the Government’s new scheme regarding energy efficiency funding which would be due to be implemented in April.  Damp and mould had been a key issue throughout the programme and the works carried out under this programme sought to tackle the root cause such as structure and ventilation as well as increasing resident education. 

The Spending Review 2015 had reduced Council rents by 1% a year for the next four years; this meant that there would be a financial deficit by the end of year 8, which would be tackled in the HRA business plan, which would be presented to the Committee in December.  The plan moving forward would be to maintain the resident focused position of the programme, continued engagement with both tenants and lease holders, strict governance of contractors and maintained improved performance.  The next year would also see the commencement of procurement for arrangements to deliver years 5-8 of the programme.

Councillor Pothecary noted that the presentation as a whole had been very positive but raised concerns that whilst officers reported positive feedback this was not being reflected in the emails Councillors received from residents within their wards.  There were often complaints of customer service issues, lack of response, work not having been done, tradesmen not having arrived or having arrived at unscheduled times and tradesmen not having ID cards on them.  She asked how officers hoped to ensure good practice on every occasion since there were still a large number of complaints being made to Councillors about fairly simple issues.  Councillor Pothecary then raised the issue of the security entrance to blocks in Seabrook Rise.  Installation should have taken place in June and had still not been completed, with the doors forced to be permanently open since. 

The Housing Asset Investment & Delivery Manager assured Members that there had been significant investment in resident liaison and whilst there had been a decrease in complaints officers would urge residents to contact the Council immediately if and when there were issues.  The department was getting better at addressing issues and turning situations around so that even if there were a problem, by the end of the process residents would have a positive opinion of their experience.  In order to address the issue of workmen without ID cards the department had undertaken random audits and many contractors had introduced systems to ensure that their staff were always carrying identification. 

The installation of the new door entry system at Seabrook Rise was a part of the planned programme of works and did not come under the Transforming Homes programme and as such the Housing Asset Investment & Delivery Manager, though she was aware of the situation, did not have all of the information to hand and assured Councillor Pothecary she would liaise with her outside of the meeting.

Councillor Redsell echoed Councillor Pothecary’s concerns that the report did not match feedback Councillors were receiving directly from residents.  Referring to damp and mould, Councillor Redsell deemed that though it was right to educate residents the issues were not necessarily their fault, as many of the properties were simply no longer fit for purpose.  She was concerned that the Council continued to spend good money after bad as there had been cases where cladding had been fitted over mould, rather than eradicating the issue beforehand.  Councillor Redsell suggested there had been issues with MEARS having employed a contractor who in turn employed a further sub-contractor and she believed this was worsening situations; she quoted a situation whereby tradesmen had informed residents that they could repair a door if they were to light matches and put them in the holes, which was obviously very poor practice.

The Chair reminded the Committee that it could not discuss specific cases in detail per se, however if Councillors were concerned they could approach officers outside of the meeting and the matter could be discussed more clearly.  He agreed that certain contractors seemed to have strange ideas and that quite possibly a lot of the concerns did not reach the ears of Directors or Heads of Service as residents felt exasperated and so gave up and contacted Councillors instead.  The Chair continued to raise concern that some of the housing stock was simply in such a poor condition, such as Ruskin Road in Chadwell-St-Mary, that it would need a great deal of work.  He had heard that there had been an incident whereby MEARS had come to apply emulsion on the walls but had only applied it to patches, at which point the tenant lost their calm and cases like this created friction because, after all, these properties are the tenants’ homes.  He agreed that all Councillors seemed to have stories from residents.

Councillor Jan Baker interjected that she recalled problems being raised two years before and now other Councillors were seemingly reporting similar issues, which was a concern.

Councillor Redsell stated she had only received such complaints within the past two years, and Councillors were being contacted as a last resort as residents felt there was no one else to turn to.  She admitted that it was very difficult to contact the Housing Department through the Council’s telephone system and this was probably part of the reason residents were turning away and contacting their Councillors instead.

The Chair asked officers how they planned to tackle these issues.  The Corporate Director of Adults, Housing & Health assured Councillor Redsell that he was aware of the three blocks within her ward that required attention.  The Committee heard that officers would need to think of a longer-term plan as there were clearly some fundamental issues that would not be easy or quick to resolve.  There would be a review of the HRA Business Plan but the options of new builds, estate regeneration and maintenance and repairs would need to be weighed up and the HRA was having to be completely recast due to rent reductions.  He continued that these facts did not excuse poor performance, which evidently had not been simply about money but the poor quality of work, and he assured Members that the feedback had reached officers too. There had been regular meetings with all major contractors and the Chief Executive and Leader of the Council had both taken a personal interest in improving the service, though changes could not be made overnight.  Although the service was still not where it should be there had been some improvements particularly given the new manager of MEARS and the improved relationship between the Council and MEARS.  There were a whole series of issues which would need to be assessed with certain estates needing long-term work, a need to review customer care and to hold contractors more tightly to account.  The Committee heard that Officers were aware and that there would need to be a fundamental review of the service.

Councillor Redsell insisted that on a positive note MEARS had been very good recently and that the issues seemed to arise when contractors and sub-contractors were brought in, so MEARS could not watch everything.  She recalled that inspectors used to go out to properties and assess the work carried out, but that seemingly was no longer the case, and many of the tradesmen did not carry ID or could not speak English well.  MEARS themselves seemed to be doing well, but were falling foul of subcontractors.

The Vice-Chair reiterated the concerns regarding the work carried out by some of the tradesmen and that many residents had been unhappy with tradesmen with whom they were unable to communicate due to a lack of English.  He was particularly concerned that these issues might cause elderly residents stress and anxiety.   The Corporate Director of Adults, Housing and Health agreed that he would take the feedback on board and discuss it with MEARS.

The Housing Tenant Representative informed the Committee that she had just gone through the Transforming Home process and had had a very positive experience with no problems.  She did raise concerns that the door closers which had been put on fire doors in their complex were too strong and too quick; particularly for the elderly residents, she had attempted to go through the kitchen door to test it and had been hit as it shut on her.  As a member of the Excellence Panel she felt the Panel was not being used to its full potential as they had previously been consulted prior to work taking place and now they were not brought in until the work had been carried out.  With regards to damp and mould she asked whether there might be a clause put into the tenancy agreement which could prevent residents covering their airbricks, as many residents did so but this increased the problem.

The Housing Asset Investment & Delivery Manager thanked the Housing Tenant Representative for her feedback and added that it was interesting, particularly regarding the fire door safety closers which, though necessary to comply with regulations, were available in different types and some were slower than others so officers would look into what types had been used and how these could be improved or adjusted, particularly within sheltered accommodation.  She continued that the matter of residents blocking air bricks was a very good point.  Members heard that there was to be a specialist damp and mould team set up within the housing department who would work to improve education as this was a continuing problem, and similarly some residents were insistent that they did not want fans installed in their kitchens though these were necessary to increase air circulation and prevent damp and mould.

The Corporate Director of Adults, Housing and Health agreed that at present the Council was not making the most of an asset such as the Excellence Panel but that the Leader of the Council had shown a keen interest in attending meetings himself and hoped to bring reports to the Panel so as to utilise them to their true potential.

The Chair returned to the Thermal Efficiency programme and asked whether elderly residents, either in sheltered or general needs accommodation, would have to wait for the programme or whether the Council would be targeting elderly residents to improve their homes.  The Corporate Director of Adults, Housing and Health advised the Committee that the department could not continue to divert from the scheduled sequence of events and as such elderly residents would have to wait for the programme to reach them, they would not be targeted specifically.  The Chair clarified his question, asking whether those residents whose repairs had already been completed, with new boilers and such, would be contacted.  He asked whether it would be possible, even if the Council could not afford the insulation, to direct elderly tenants to other options such as SAGA, or the energy companies as it seemed silly to improve the boiler and heating without improving the insulation on their homes.  He insisted that elderly residents should at least be given some direction as to where they can go to improve the insulation within their homes if the Council could not do so.  The Corporate Director of Adults, Housing and Health assured Members that this would at least be on the department’s radar moving forward.

The Chair referred to the recommendations and outlined that the Committee did take the comments that there had been improvements however the issue of the language barrier many residents had faced would need to be addressed, it was unacceptable for groups of tradesmen to go into a residents home without at least one of them being able to speak English to communicate with the Resident.  Councillor Redsell agreed and added that it seemed to affect elderly residents more as there was simply no one to ask what was being done.  The Housing Tenant Representative added that in her experience, although the tradesmen had not been particularly fluent in English their manager was and had been easily contactable.  The Chair continued that though the experience of the Housing Tenant Representative had been good, there were some instances where this had not been the case and it was very important.

RESOLVED:

1)    The Committee noted the progress with the Transforming Homes programme and the key benefits that will be delivered through year for of the programme for 2016/17