The Head of Housing presented the item by explaining the report set out the proposals for the re-procurement of the Housing Capital Programme, which was part of the Transforming Homes programme.

He continued to inform Members that the programme would bring significant improvement to the long term viability of Council housing and to the living conditions of residents and ensured the Council fulfilled its duty to provide warm homes with modern facilities.   Members were notified the feedback from residents was positive with 82% of residents rating the contractor as good or excellent and 84% of residents rating the overall delivery of the programme as good or excellent.

It was stated that once out for advertisement, the Council’s current contractors, were also entitled to bid for the contract along with other suppliers. 

The Chair of the Committee enquired as to the financial impact of the government’s 1% rent reduction. Officers explained that following the government’s announcement £2.5 million would be removed from the housing budget.

Members sought as to how the key principals noted with the report were to be achieved. The Head of Housing informed the Committee that the second principal was to be accomplished with the support of a third party and the first would be achieved by monitoring the progrmame, working with the Liaison Officers and making visits to ensure that the process was explained to all tenants.

It was further queried as to who made the decision to continue with two main refurbishment packages. The Corporate Procurement Strategy Delivery Manager advised that it was recommended that the Council continue with two contractors, as the competition between the two would keep works to a high standard and should the work of one contractor begin to lack, work could be given to the other.

During discussions the Committee were advised that any feedback rated under ‘fair’ was not satisfactory, only ratings of good or excellent were considered a ‘pass’ under Key Performance Indicators and Officers were able to see comments left by residents, which could be used to improve the service.

The Housing Tenant Representative commented that at her complex many of the contractors could not speak English, which for the elderly and vulnerable people living there made them uncomfortable and they would often not allow them into their homes. She continued by stating the manager did a good job at assisting residents.  The Corporate Director of Adults, Housing and Health, stated all contractors’ especially those visiting elderly or vulnerable people were required to wear ID badges and speak English as a basic need.

It was finally enquired as to why void properties within the borough were being left, for at times up to a year. The Corporate Director of Adults, Housing and Health explained that the Council had a 30 to 40 day turn around period for void properties. He continued by commenting if a property had been left then it could mean that substantial work was required or the property could be privately owned.

RESOLVED:

Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee were recommended to comment on the proposed process and contract package as set out in the report for re-procurement of the refurbishment and strategic cost management elements of the Housing Capital Programme.