Agenda item

Councillor Homan explained that the council had focussed on improving performance by increasing resident involvement. She noted that this work had led to a significant fall in the number of repairs complaints which had been escalated to her as the Cabinet Member for Housing and that improvements had been made across the department. The Council’s intention was to give people a good impression throughout their time as residents; recently a group of tenants had reviewed the process for new tenants and the information they were given which would ensure that residents first impression was a good one.

Kath Corbett explained that officers reviewed a wide range of performance indicators to ensure that the service was performing well. Jane Martin said that contractors also had performance indicators and that those for Mitie had recently been reviewed; these and improved contract management would lead to improvements in Mitie’s service to residents.

The Chair said that whilst performance indicators were a useful tool, it was important that residents’ experiences were used to improve services, especially in more complex cases. Jane Martin said that more difficult repairs were an issue which she would be looking at in detail over the coming months as there were still unacceptable delays in some cases.

Councillor Phibbs said that he felt that performance indicators ought to be published on the transparency section of the Council’s website.

Councillor Phibbs asked whether there was a mechanism by which the council decided to stop repairing lifts and instead replace them and whether it would provide better value for money to replace lifts more quickly. Councillor Homan said that there was a large lift replacement programme which was ongoing, however, the programme was limited by budgetary constraints, the need to ensure value for money and effective project management and the need to sometimes decant residents whilst a lift was taken out of action.

Councillor Phibbs noted that the void time was significantly worse in the South of the Borough than in the North and asked why this was. Kath Corbett started by explaining that the number of void properties was quite low, and so the impact of the delays was smaller than it might otherwise have been. She also explained that properties void because of major works were not included in the figures. Jane Martin said that the letting of properties on the West Kensington and Gibbs Green Estate was taking longer as it was being used as temporary accommodation. Councillor Homan explained that she monitored void times closely. Councillor De’Ath asked that a briefing note on void times and the main reasons for delays was sent to members of the PAC.

Councillor Connell asked what the financial impact of having void properties was. Kath Corbett explained that the impact was small because of the low numbers of voids, but that delays did cost the council both through lost rent and because the property could be used to move people out of expensive temporary accommodation.

Councillor Phibbs asked whether a joint inspection was carried out when a tenant was moving out. Jane Martin said that a joint inspection would take place if the tenant gave the Council notice that they were leaving. Councillor Phibbs asked what the number referring to Anti-Social Behaviour cases meant. Jane Martin explained that each report of Anti-Social Behaviour was a case, even if multiple cases were perpetrated by one person. Councillor Homan said that unfortunately it was very difficult to evict a resident for Anti-Social Behaviour; she said that she met with Housing Officers and the Community Safety Team regularly to ensure that progress was being made on difficult cases.

Councillor Connell commended officers work to keep the number of families in Bed and Breakfast Accomodation at zero. He asked referred to the indicator called ‘% of lettings to households making a community contribution’ and asked what defined a community contribution. Kath Corbett explained that a wide range of activities were included, but that all were making a difference in the community.

Councillor Connell said that the rent collection achieved at 99.09% was very good. He asked how the ‘Properties Recovered – Fraud’ target had been set. Kath Corbett explaiend that this had been a target based on previous performance.

Councillor Connell said that he felt the tolerance for Caretaking Quality Inspections was too great. Kath Corbett said that a number of changes had been made to the Pinnacle contract and that deep cleans were ongoing across the borough which would hopefully improve the score. A resident said that Robert Gentry House had been deep-cleaned and that she did not feel that this had been good enough. The weeding of a communal yard area was also not up to the standard she felt was necessary.

Councillor Connell said that he was pleased that the Council had received many more raves than rants, meaning that generally residents were happy with the service they were getting.