Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee - Thursday 28 November 2024, 7:30pm - Wandsworth Council Webcasting

Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Thursday, 28th November 2024 at 7:30pm 

Agenda

Slides

Transcript

Map

Resources

Forums

Speakers

Votes

 
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

and I am the chair of the housing overview
and scrutiny committee.
So members of the committee,
I will now call your name in alphabetical order.
Please switch on your microphone
and confirm your attendance.
Councillor Austin.
Present.
And we have apologies from Councillor Ayres.
Councillor Kashi.
Present.
Councillor, Mrs. Graham.
Present.
Councillor, Kavindia.
present Councillor McLeod present Councillor Rigby present Councillor
tiller present Councillor very faraj present and also would like to welcome
Councillor Dickinham who's the cabinet member for housing and mrs. price who's
the deputy chair of the borough residents forum.
And also, we'd like to also welcome representatives
from the social housing regulator.
There they are at the back.
Hi.
Great, yeah.
Okay.
So, first item is the minutes from the 3rd of October 2022.
Are there any objections to confirming the previous minutes of the 3rd of October?
You're okay?
Fine.
Good.
Okay.

2 Declarations of Interests

So, item number two is declarations of interest.
Are there any decorations of either pecuniary or other
vegetable or non -registable interests?
I'll just start myself.
I'm a member of Community Renewable Energy, Wandsworth,
which do have dealings with the council,
but I abjure no financial benefit from my involvement.
So Maurice, sorry, Councillor McLeod.
I am a council tenant in Wandsworth.
Councillor Tiller?
I am also a council tenant in Wandsworth.
And I am a council leaseholder.
Is it Gosain or Gosain?
You can skip the H in the middle.
Skip the H, right, okay.
So, Councillor Gosain, sorry, I've been calling you Gosain all this time.
Okay.
So, the third item is the Borough of Residence forum report
of the meeting held on the 20th of November, 2024.
So, yeah, if we can remind members to give attention to the views of the borough residents
forum when considering related items on tonight's agenda.
And Mrs. Price, would you have any comments?
No, no, thank you, Chair.
The meeting accurately represents the items that we discussed that's part of the housing committee tonight
And I'm here to answer any questions that members may have
Are there any questions?
Councilor Varafraj
Hi Marlene, I was just wondering if you could tell us a little bit about how the tenants conference
went
The tenants conference, I think we had about 80 members. The thing about the tenants conference
is it's difficult to choose a day when it's convenient to everyone because if you do a
day during the day then people have to take time off work to come to the conference. If you do it
in the evening or weekend. So I thought this year we had a really good turnout. This year as well,
the housing management listened to us from the last years because the last few years we had
TPAS delivering the conference and we weren't happy with how TPAS was delivering the conference.
Can you tell us what TPAS is?
So, everyone.
Tenant participation advisory service.
Okay.
Sorry, I apologize.
So, we knew that the officers could do a better service.
We asked for the offices to do a better service and they did.
We also had the fire brigade who pointed out the difficulties of communal areas having plants and bubbies and everything in it.
It showed quite clearly how difficult it is for them to get up if there's a fire and get out.
We also had the social regulator come and talk to us, which was also really good.
That is about it.
Does anyone else have any questions?
No?
Thank you.
Fantastic.
Can we note the report for information?
Brilliant.

4 Grenfell Tower inquiry paper, Phase 2 report findings (Paper No.24-350)

Item 4, the Grenfell Tower inquiry paper and phase 2 report findings, which is paper number
24 -350.
And if, is it going to be Mr. Stewart?
Mr. Stewart, okay.
Thank you, Chairman.
The final report into the Grenfell Fire was published in September of this year,
over seven years since the tragedy in which 72 residents lost their lives.
The report is predictably critical of all the parties involved, including successive governments, the council, and the TMO,
the London Fire Brigade, and all consultants and contractors responsible for the design and installation of the cladding system.
Particular criticism was reserved for the manufacturers of the cladding and insulation materials who appear complicit in promoting flammable products for use on high rise properties.
The police in conjunction with the CPS will now decide if criminal prosecutions are to follow.
On a positive note, the report made no specific recommendations for social landlords.
and it should be noted that the thousands of blocks still with flammable cladding the vast majority to be found in the private sector
With nearly all social housing blocks now remediated
In the area of building and fire safety
The council has been extremely active over the past six years working to comply with new
Requirements and making our block safer and our residents better protected
notable pieces of work include
The stripping and successful re -clouding the three non -compliant tower blocks in Wandsworth at a cost of 18 million pound
The fitting of premises information boxes and new wayfinding signage to all high -rise blocks.
The retrofitting of sprinklers to sheltered housing schemes and hostels.
And the procurement of fresh fire risk assessments and establishment of an in -house building safety inspection team.
Turning back to the report, background is given in paragraphs 1 to 8 with specific recommendations relating to building safety in paragraphs 9 through to 17.
and more general recommendations around emergency planning within local authorities in paragraph
19.
Key recommendations include the possible redefinition of what constitutes a high risk
building looking into its occupation and use as well as the design of the building itself.
Wandsworth has 148 high rise buildings currently in scope, each requiring a building safety
case report to be produced to the regulator on each.
A possible reconsideration of the state put evacuation strategy with a possible move to
a partial or full evacuation strategy for some blocks.
However this will be difficult and costly to implement for existing blocks.
Revisiting the issue as to how residents with mobility issues can be protected or assisted
in the event of a fire.
The possibility of licensing contractors working on high risk residential buildings and the
mandatory accreditation of fire risk assessors.
Further reports will be submitted as these proposals
are developed and I'm happy to take any questions.
Fantastic, thank you Mr. Stewart.
So would anyone like to ask any questions?
Councilor Mrs. Graham?
Thank you Chair.
In paragraph five, page four, you have mentioned TMOs
what they picked up, poor working, door closers, et cetera.
But I have no information here as regards to scrutiny
of what you've done with the, is it 10 cooperatives,
TMOs in Wandsworth, you know, what has the management
and maintenance been investigated so that we,
as counselors, what is in place,
respects for flannables and fires,
you know, an e -bike now can start a fire.
And fire brigade, and also most importantly,
the training of staff, which I feel is integral
for the confidence of the staff and the reassurance
and the confidence that residents know
that they feel safe.
Thank you, Chair.
So we are sorry miss sorry mr. Crowley's and so the the co -ops the management of
those is overseen by the area housing teams and the resident participation
officers will undertake a quarterly monitoring check and report with each of
the co -ops and we've altered we altered that post granful to include more points
in relation to sort of health and safety and fire safety to help provide that
monitoring and reassurance.
And then there's an annual monitoring report as well
where those issues are addressed with the co -op chair
and also overseen by the area housing manager
within the area team.
And then we have quarterly co -op forum meetings as well
where those sorts of issues are discussed.
And we, it was quite common,
we work really closely with the co -ops.
So if they do have concerns about fire safety
or have any questions for us,
then they will liaise with our building safety inspection
team or with the area team to get advice on how they might deal with individual
issues affecting their blocks or states.
Sorry, just a further point, there's also fire risk assessments obviously for
each of those blocks in the same way that we have fire risk assessments
for blocks we directly manage. So we monitor to make sure that the actions
and issues raised on those fire risk assessments are addressed and that's
what's monitored through those monitoring reports as well as the routine
inspections that are undertaken. Do you want to follow up, Councillor Mr Graham?
Do you want to follow up the question? Yeah. The most important thing and it's
great to know that tenants want to manage their properties. You as officers
are confident and have great knowledge and you know when you actually
see the areas that have not been put into place yet because of government regulations
and checkings.
How are you actually keeping them abreast separately to the management and maintenance
so that they feel confident and it's reciprocated and residents feel safe on it?
Because there are 3 ,000 units, which is a lot.
If there are regulations that we need to act on or enforce or different or changes to how we need to manage those properties then that's communicated to the co -ops as well so they do the same.
In some cases we would do those tasks for them to make sure that they're done because ultimately we're the freeholder so we're responsible for those blocks and there are tenants in there.
It's just obviously the management that's devolved to the cooperatives.
And so I did forget to come back to you on the training point
You know we we offer the same training that we provide to our staff to the cooperative staff as well
To try to make sure that they're obviously know what they're doing and as I say if they were ever unsure
Then there's that relationship where they would come to us and ask questions anyway
Councilor given you your chair my cushion really is about common parts
both in terms of
fire risk of stuff stored in common parts, which often happens.
People leave all sorts of things, including kind of a shoe rack just outside the front door,
because that's what they prefer.
But some of them could be fire risk materials.
But also obstructions, and as Councillor, Mrs Graham mentioned, e -bikes and e -scooters,
which have a tendency to blow up at times.
So what are we doing about sort of making sure that they are inspected, inspected with care,
people advised about what to do, what not to do, and then giving them some sort of alternatives
where some of those things can be kept.
So our
State Services team and the Building Safety and Special Team, they take undertake regular
inspections of our blocks to kind of pick up on those issues. So it's not just, you know, we
We deal with them in a reactive basis.
We will go there, we will look around the block
and see if there's any kind of issues like that
that we need to address.
And what we tend to do when those items are sort of found
is we will write to residents of the block,
sometimes to an individual resident,
if it's clear that there's lots of items
outside their particular property.
And we will explain to them
that those items shouldn't be there,
that they're causing obstruction or they're combustible,
and then expect them to clear them.
We'd usually give them a deadline by which to do that
before we clear them ourselves.
But as part of that communication, we'll often, I think we always will, explain to them that
there's the option to rent a store, shed or garage and to contact us if they've got any
sort of queries or concerns.
Because you're right, it's difficult with particularly something like a mobility scooter.
We wouldn't be demanding that someone remove that and saying that we would remove it if
they didn't.
It would be a much more, it would be a much different kind of process in terms of how
we would liaise with that particular resident.
And also we take a fairly pragmatic approach
as much as we're able to in the sense
that if people have done things that are clearly designed
to just improve the feel of the communal areas
such as some plant pots or door mats,
that's not the sort of thing
that we necessarily make people remove.
It might be that we might ask them to move them
to a slightly different location
or to use a different type of plant pot,
but we wouldn't just say you have to clear everything
from the communal area.
Do you want to follow up?
Not a follow up, it's slightly different.
One of the things that, on things like fire safety,
and in fact anything that comes as a new measure to be introduced to make people feel comfortable and safe and so on,
is that authority will go at great guns and sort everything out, introduce new regimes and so on,
and everything works fine.
But it's about also keeping pace, keeping it updated, and keeping people informed and
so on.
And particularly things like safety of fire, fire -related safety measures.
What have we got in place which says, well, residents will have a refresher every whatever,
that blocks will be inspected every six months, eight months, ten months, two months, whatever.
So what regime have we got in place that keeps this both us on top of the thing and the residents
fully informed of what's being done for them and what they can do to assist themselves.
Ms. Wilman.
So on engaging with residents, so there's a couple of things.
We've, since Grenfell really, after Grenfell we had a fire safety sort of specialist version of home life
to give an update on everything around fire safety.
And then since then, in every edition of home life, we make sure that there's something in around fire safety
And it's included things like e -bikes, charging.
And we've also worked over the last maybe two years to always have something in for the borough commander.
So he feeds into what's in that article.
We also cover some of that in the annual report to residents.
So there's some issues around fire safety and we've kept residents informed of things like the building safety inspection team.
And we've had articles saying, you may notice there's boxes up in your communal areas.
and this is what they are for.
So I think home life is a great way of doing that.
And also, we've set up a fire safety steering group.
So that's just for those living in high rise buildings.
And we had our first meeting in September.
And then through the residence conference,
we've also had a few more people who
said they want to be part of that meeting.
So we're going to use that meeting to create things
like a residence portal so they can access information
about fire safety in their block,
things like their fire risk assessment,
And also to help us about how we make sure we engage in the best way possible with those residents
So they're kept informed of all those things
Council Dickey them do you want to add to that?
No, okay, so council would be
Yeah, I'm high and
Because the previous administration were quite anti bike hangers. We are starting from like
years back in where we should be.
There are still estates that have no bike hangers.
There are still estates where people are having
to carry their bikes upstairs and attach them to railings.
There's not enough bike hanger provision
to take away the risk that people are going
to be taking them upstairs.
I would urge you to do a full audit of the estates
and check, like is the supply meeting the demand?
Because I really don't think it is.
Yeah, I mean, our colleagues in the transport strategy team,
they are in the process, I think, of doing that audit as we speak.
And they have a plan and sort of program of, you know, when they're expecting to install more
bike enclosures on the estates where they've identified as being a lack of supply.
So that issue is in the process of being addressed at the moment and you know, we're always open to putting in more bike hangars
Where we can and where people want them either through small improvement budget or from external grant funding
Okay, so follow up to that. Good day
So that audits happening
Could I ask that the transport team email all the counselors to ask them which estates they think are missing?
Hangers, I mean I could I could reel off quite a few that aren't even in my ward
And also I think we need a plan for when we've got to the point where every single
Tenant who needs a bike space has one and that is something that we keep up with that. I mean we've got
the one estate I'm thinking of
has like
150 counted 150 car parking spaces and not a single place to store a bike
So I know we have a lot of years to catch up with because of how it was treated in the
past but we do need a plan for it.
Yeah, of course, I will speak to that team and feed that back to them.
Mr Price, did you want to about this subject?
Thank you very much.
Those that have got residence association know that part of your tenants agreement,
your tenants and residents agreement,
is that you're not allowed to have
any things in the corridor.
And the management, the area housing managers do,
when they do a walkabout, put notices up,
say please remove this.
When we had the fire, then we had the tenants conference
the other day, the other week, sorry,
the fire brigade was talking about having things
in the corridor and somebody mentioned you know we can have a plant pot and I
calmly reminded them a plant pot with plastic plants is very dangerous because
it's very flammable and it could damage you know if the burning plastic.
Contrary to what Councilor Rigby has saying we do not and housing management
and does not allow bikes to be hung on railings.
So if your residents are doing that,
please advise them, they cannot do that.
Another thing is, most residents association
that attend meetings, they can apply to SIBs for bike hangars
and quite a lot of residents association
have got bike hangars because they've asked for them.
If a residence association asks for a bike hanger, they can apply to SIBs at the area
housing panel.
Thank you.
Please do not have your residence doing hanging bikes on the railings.
I don't think Councillor Rigby wants that at all.
No, that's the thing I'm absolutely saying that we shouldn't have.
Some of the places I'm talking about, they don't have a very active association, so they
don't know who to ask for.
So there's like a barrier they don't know that there's funding available
And that's why they need help from the officers to do it, but I absolutely agree
We cannot have bikes hanging on railings what they need a bike shed
Say for the second half of the in the first half of the year
It's only residents associations that could apply for sibs the second half of the year any
residents association any any estate can apply for sibs and that's done by the area housing manager or the resident participation officer
Bring projects forward so they only have to ask
Yeah, I think a lot of it. I mean obviously we have don't have a majority of estates with residents Association, so it's those
Yeah, but it's those who don't have the residents associations that really need to be alerted and really need to understand
they could they can apply for this and do it and
You know if there's a little bit of proactivity around that I think that would be what what council would be I think was was
pointing out
councilor very fridge
And I've got a few questions
But the first one kind of links of discussions that's been going on when a new tenant is moving into a tower block for the first
Time do they kind of get an introduction to what it means to live in a tower block such as like how do you use?
The community spaces what can you put there?
I'm not I know you mentioned like attendance portal, but is there like an initial introduction into living in a tower block?
Yeah, so I mean, regardless of whether our new tenants live in tower blocks or not, they're
given a home safe booklet sign up, which is a really kind of extensive detailed booklet
about living in that building and the sort of things they need to be aware of, what they
do in the case of emergencies, et cetera.
And that's just being revised at the moment, actually, to sort of take into account anything
sort of new and things that have changed.
So yeah, that's handed to every new resident.
There's also obviously the regular features that we do in home life
So there's kind of those reminders that come to residents about what we do and what they should do in the events of you know
a fire or another emergency
And obviously this as miss will mention the fire safety steering group and we've got quite good membership of that now
but we're always looking for more members to join that so
We can learn from residents
I suppose about what they want to hear from us about the building and what information is important to them and interesting for them
and then obviously apply that.
My other question was kind of going back to.
Can you pull your mic down a little bit?
Just going back to the report,
obviously the recommendations for impacting
the social landlords, all of the recommendations
for higher risk buildings.
So obviously that definition said that any building
above 18 meters or seven stories
indicates a higher risk building.
Is that the only indicator or the only kind of
factor that kind of makes a building a higher risk building or is there other factors that
are kind of taken into consideration when determining that?
It's currently defined by height but as I've said in the report they're going to look at
other factors such as the use and occupation of that building so the profile of the residents
For example, sheltered housing, which is low rise,
will get a higher risk because it's sheltered housing,
you've got vulnerable tenants present.
So that's what the government are signaling,
that they're gonna be looking at,
and not just have a addition of high risk
just based on height.
I'm sorry, just my final question is,
in Wandsworth we have the highest number of tower blocks
for any local authority in London.
So can this committee get regular updates
on how we're performing in terms of fire safety?
I think we've been quite good at briefing this committee since Grenfell.
We've heard about ten reports come here and we'll carry on as things develop.
Councillor Tiller.
Thank you, Chair.
Grenfell was a horrible charity and shows how important fire safety is and I can absolutely
understand people wanting zero tolerance approach after that.
But I think there is a risk of reacting so harshly
as to create other problems, especially considering
the low incomes that many state residents are on.
And the feedback I've been getting from many constituents
is that officers have been overzealous in removing items that were not an obstruction
from communal balconies or items that were only there temporarily.
And that means quite long petitions to that effect.
So for instance, one resident lost several hundred pounds worth of building materials
this way, of building materials that were obviously new and going to be used on the
same day.
And we can debate about plant pots, but some people were very attached to them and enjoyed having them on their balconies.
And we were upset some have them taken away so quickly as these swoops by officers have done.
and so can more balance be brought to the issue
of dealing with abstractions or just items in general,
not necessarily abstractions on communal balconies?
I think some staff have been overzealous
and applied a zero tolerance policy.
We'd expect them now to be more pragmatic
and I think training has been given.
So if you look at the means of escape itself,
If it's fully enclosed, it's much more risky
to have flammable items or obstructions,
items obstructing that area than an open balcony.
So it's regrettable if some people have lost possessions,
but we should generally be putting a notice
on all of them before we remove any.
And certainly somebody who's storing
a large amount of building materials,
I wouldn't expect them to be removed without a warning.
So we'll continue to monitor it,
but I think myself and Mr. Crawley expect our staff
to be pragmatic and sensible in their approach.
Yeah, because some of the communal areas can be really well decorated and worked really
well looked after by the tenants and they're very proud of that.
So yeah, I mean that's a really good idea.
Sorry, sorry, no, no, Councillor, Mrs Graham, sorry.
Thank you, Chair.
Just following on from what Councillor Rigby is saying and following on from what Mrs Price
was saying and Mrs. Price was exactly right.
Sorry, Councillor, Mr. Graham, can you pull your mic down?
Following on from what Councillor Rigby was saying and Mrs. Price is exactly right and
correct, estate resident associations do have that opportunity, they have the voice.
But also those estates who do not have resident association do have their council estate manager
and they should be really tuned in to knowing if they're working hard with their residents.
And of course, as the training is going to be taking place further,
this is something following the discussions here tonight and in any case, that would be taken care of.
But my question is item 11 and 12.
Basically, it says, following from what Mr. Stewart was saying,
The report said it wants to have a definition widened
to take account of the nature of its use,
which is very sensible.
But when is the, you know, how long is time?
We really need to know how long time is.
And the second one is, and it's very worrying for,
especially those on high rise, or in any case,
When is the next review of official building guidance going to take place for stay put?
Because the 1960s buildings were concrete and safe but with the new materials.
It's a timing issue really and how we can get that information.
Thank you. I'd like to hear. Please.
I'm not aware of the timing at the moment but we are a member of London Council's Fire Safety Group.
So we are in touch with government.
And as things develop, we will come back to you.
But at the moment, all we have is
the summary of the Grand Final Enquirer report, the final.
And these are the recommendations.
So they will be looked at.
Some may come to be legislated on.
Others may not.
But we will keep the committee advised.
Chancellor Cavinha.
Thank you.
My reading of the paragraph 9, where he talks about PEAPs,
is that that regime is yet to be introduced.
So could you just give us an indication
as to when that regime might come in?
And then within it, what measures
will be incorporated so that the individual plans are updated
and kept, people's conditions change,
and therefore how do we ensure that those will be updated
and be appropriate?
to the public.
So a short summary of the PEAPS issue is that when we had wake and watch measures in our
blocks that we had to remediate, Sudbury House, Castlemane, and now Elliott and Wentworth,
part of that requirement is that you assess the residents within that block to identify
those with mobility issues who would struggle to evacuate in the event of a fire.
Because you've got wake and watch measures which requires a 24 -hour, seven -day -a -week
presence in the block, you have a control, so you are able to assist those people to
evacuate in the event of a fire.
As soon as statehood is introduced again, those fall away, so the peeps aren't required
and we don't collect them.
The previous government tried to look at this and there was a lot of pressure from disability
groups saying that disabled people were unfairly treated and at a significant disadvantage.
I recall that quite a lot of people who died in the fire had mobility issues in Grenfell.
So they want to revisit that.
The previous government couldn't square that particular circle and this government is trying
to do the same.
But it is very difficult to assist people if you don't have a presence or control of
the building as you would in an office or a hospital, for example.
So I think what it's going to be focused on is not evacuation but making vulnerable residents with mobility issues safer within their properties.
So looking at measures to keep them safe in the properties and a way of evacuation by the brigade.
So that's the way I think the thinking's going to go, but it's been reconsidered.
Thanks, Chair.
In a sense, I was reading this in conjunction
with vulnerable persons policy later on.
And in a sense, if we're going to have one policy says,
we're going to identify all the vulnerable people
and do all sorts of things for them and with them,
and then on the fire safety, we'll sort of say,
we'll wait for measures yet to be introduced and so on.
And its issue is about vulnerability
and having assessed vulnerability,
what measures should we put in place
that the information available is up to date,
as vulnerable it is change,
as people's conditions change.
And I appreciate that in case of a waking watch situation
where you identify who might need evacuating
and what method of evacuation
might be most suitable for them.
But this paragraph nine suggests to me
that this is like across the whole portfolio,
the council would be expected to know
who might need assistance in evacuation
and therefore presumably have that information shared
with the other blue light services
so they are aware of who is vulnerable, where are they,
what are their vulnerabilities and what are their evacuation needs.
So it's quite a lot of work, but he's just saying,
well, when will it come in and how robust will both the regime be and then our implementation
of the regime be?
So I don't want to jump the gun too much in the later paper, but the later paper, I hope,
and we were discussing previously before this meeting, that that is the first implementation
of that cross departmental.
You start with the housing team so that that is being flagged constantly, even if you're
just calling about a minor repair.
The paper will come on to it.
I don't want to jump the gun again, but then we think about what can be shared in between departments.
So this paper starts with the housing department.
We can discuss when we come onto it what is possible to share between departments.
I think when it comes to PEAPs, the key thing is that there is a clear record
that has been shared with both housing officers who will be the first respondents and the fire brigade.
So that for me is almost baked into tonight's committee is that process
towards identifying those vulnerable residents, which
as we'll come on to later, is a broader category than just
disabled residents.
And while I'm on it, I was going to come on
to the question of how we manage both the enforcement
and the, because rather you raised the same point
as Matthew has, working close is like the main example
in my inbox at the moment, which is a very heavy -handed approach
which has upset residents who rightly
feel like it's an overstep.
And obviously, the Grenfell report,
there's a balancing act within.
The horrors of Grenfell is that what
happens when you don't listen to the tenants
and they don't feel like they've got a voice.
If we are then enforcing fire safety,
a bit like some of the battles we had two, three, four years
ago, if we're enforcing it without that resonant voice
and then feeling that they're taking part,
we're kind of undermining ourselves
on some of the spirit of the learnings from Grenfell
anyway.
So please send those cases through.
And like I say we have now notified and responded on on the example of working close. Whereby we did go a bit too hard
Thank you any more questions
counts lost in
Thank you very much. Yeah, I'm just going on with the guards to the
Recommendations again, there's some things that are going to come in and planning or like secondary fire escapes
And so you're needing to stairwells on buildings and there's other recommendations
That have been made as well as far as us as the council are concerned
on these recommendations.
Are we going to commit to, and what is our policy,
and are we going to commit to implementing
these recommendations in full on all new build
council buildings going forward?
We are required to comply.
These are suggestions at the moment.
I'm not sure how many of these will come forward,
but as they do, we will prepare for them.
But we don't want to get ahead of ourselves
and do abortive work, which could have happened
And with further recommendations from the interim report, if we'd have done some of
those things, it's not been followed up.
So we will comply and we will report back here regularly on that compliance.
CHAIRMAN LIEBREICH.
Councillor Mr Graham.
MS.
Following on from Councillor Austan, in a way I'm looking at page 6, licensing regime
for contractors on high -rise buildings
It's very important that contractors working on high -rise
Buildings should be licensed and come under some scope of the new regulator
But the concern is this may narrow the pop the pool of available contractors
Increasing the the price and should increase
assurance over the standard of work so
So, when you have the new development or when there is major works, naturally you'll have
to put this in the specification.
So that's going to be quite hard when you're looking at new, you know, major works, you
know, going forward.
So when does that come into place unless I've missed something?
Is it sort of the same as Councilor Austin?
Yes, it's a recommendation. I mean, the government will be aware of the problems of if they start
licensing contractors that there will be a catch -up period where contractors need to
get themselves licensed and that can affect the work. But I'm sure the Ministry will be
aware of that and we'll take that into account. But again, with all the others, we don't know
when it's going to come into effect, if it does.
Could I just follow on? I mean, with new specs going forward, that surely would be in the
that the flammables and the fire safety is,
I just wanted reassurance that going forward
with new developments and major works,
that this would be in the spec for any,
you know, going out to tender.
Well, licensing wouldn't be,
because it's not a requirement,
but there's an understanding that building regulations
would be adhered to by all parties.
Did you want to ask a question?
No, okay.
Yeah, go on if you want to.
I was going to say for Councillor Graham's comfort, if I may, for new bills.
I'm a resident member of the Building Safety Regulator and one of the things that's happening with new bills has to be signed off by the Building Safety Regulator towards the planning stage.
So so that's a bit of comfort. That's for new bills only going forwards not bills. It's taking place now
No, because the regulation only came in last year. Thank you so much. Thank you
Council McLeod
Thank you, yeah like like I'm sure everyone else in the room I've read a lot of this with humility
Looking at the
, looking at
all of the sites on our 1000 homes
, the ones we are planning
are already in the
making
, of all the ones over 18
, I have a number of questions
, will have
dual doors and making sure we are
, sorry, dual fire
escapes, dual staircases,
that is the one I am talking about,
thank you.
I'll do them one at a time.
I just want to make sure that nothing we're planning
is going to get overrun by regulations that
might come out later.
I don't have that information, but I'll have to come back to you.
I can jump in on that, which is that we haven't got to planning
stage on any buildings over 18 meters yet, but we would.
And on one of the buildings that we are planning which is 14 story
we went back and have now implemented the two staircase rule because it it is
part of the part of the regular regulations now and yeah, it's so the the thousand homes team is absolutely
kind of up to date on these changes and
That that covers not just fire safety on taller buildings
but also all fire safety to do with low -rise and materials and balancing the
the lessons learned around insulation and things like that,
while meeting that zero targets.
So it's key on the development team's agenda.
Councilman.
Thank you for that.
And so, another question.
On the personal, I'm trying to get the correct,
the PEEPs basically.
From my understanding is that people maybe with,
So mobility issues can request having a personal plan made for them, a personal fire risk assessment
made for them, which is wonderful, but I would imagine quite costly if loads and loads of
people come forward and say they want this.
Do we have money put aside?
Will we be compensated by government?
How will we pay for this if lots of people want support?
And the PEEP is a personal evacuation emergency plan, just in case.
I think it's the other one that I was talking about.
Right, okay, so it's the person centred via risk assessment.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay.
We haven't yet done any, so we're watching what the government requires us to do,
and then we'll cost them out, and we may do them in -house, or we may get a consultant in,
and then there's always a push for new burdens funding.
But we will resource it as necessary.
So this is a, it's not a peep, it's the other suggestion
which is a person -centered fire risk assessment
which is not about evacuation.
As I said, it's about making people safe in the property.
Wonderful, thank you.
Yeah, I suppose I was just thinking,
because that's a bit of a we don't know
how many people might, if people have the right
to ask for them. We don't know how many people might ask for them and I was just making sure
that we thought about how we might pay for it if we had to. Okay and then the third one
was about the, a single regulator to oversee the construction industry. I was just wondering
what we will do in the meantime to, you know, before this is in place, before this exists,
What will we do in the meantime to make sure that any new sites are okay?
I mean that's not really my area of expertise in those builds,
but there are, there's gateway processes already in place that have already come,
and there's gateways for development in occupation,
So those processes always already have to be followed
So you they wouldn't get the right
Sign off if they weren't following those processes. So we just need to make sure that they're doing those and on our
Homes for Wandsworth and also our major works. We are dealing with consultants around those different gateways and how to navigate them
Might just come in because it's a running theme tonight
I could get planning officers to write about new build
Regulations to be sent around to this committee because obviously a lot of the social housing that we sign off isn't necessarily
Being built by the council you know we but affordable housing paper later is going to be section 106
so planners will be able to write down how it currently functions and what the
rules and you know
Regulations are around building building safety and spectra when it comes to new build housing because I mean most of the housing association
Products that we're going to be talking about later will have gone through that process
So I can get that some out
Any more questions?
Okay, we are happy to receive this report for information.
Brilliant.

5 Tenant Satisfaction Measures Submission Data (Paper No.24-351)

So on to paper number five, which is tenants satisfaction measures submission data, and
it is paper number 24351.
Sorry, 351, yes.
And Ms. Wilwin?
Thank you.
So those of you who've been around as long as I have will remember we used to produce the AQPR,
which was the Annual Quality Performance Review, and that was a requirement to government.
And every department did it, and it was basically an annual performance report on how you've done,
and that was mainly around housing management for us.
So the requirement for that stopped, and we stopped doing that some years ago.
But since the introduction of tenant satisfaction measures, which you'll remember I produced a report,
I think maybe in the summer, where we talked about the role of the new social housing regulator, what requirements are going to be set out.
So this report is a sort of hybrid of an update on the tenant satisfaction measures and sort of going back to the old days of the AQPR,
where we can give an update on our housing management performance through the last year.
So you may have seen that the TSM benchmarks came out yesterday, which is a bit late for this report.
But in future years, I'm hoping we'll improve this report and we'll be able to do national benchmarks and all that kind of information.
So for now, I'll just wither through some parts of the report.
So if you see in paragraph seven, that sets out the themes of the tenant satisfaction measures.
So they are keeping properties in good repair, maintaining building safety, respectful and
helpful engagement, effective handling of complaints, responsible neighbourhood management.
And I think this is different to that by the paragraph numbers, no?
Oh, I don't know.
Sorry.
I've got sidetracked.
That's paragraph 13, isn't it?
And then it goes on to talk about what the TSMs are.
So there's 22 satisfaction measures,
12 of which are satisfaction measures.
So they are what they say really.
They're based on an annual perception survey.
So things like satisfaction with the landlord,
satisfaction with repairs, cleaning and maintenance.
And then there's 10 management measures
which are around fire risk assessments,
water risk assessments, asbestos assessments, gas safety, those sort of measures.
So I just wanted to highlight some areas of good performance.
So we've got 64 % for our overall satisfaction, so that has been a significant increase from
54 % in the previous survey.
But also there are some areas where we weren't in the position we wanted to be at the end
last year so measures such as in paragraphs 20 to 24 around some of the
building safety measures so for example on the water safety assessments we
weren't where we wanted to be at the end of the year but we're now up over 95 95
percent now and what I would say about the water risk assessments is we've
always done water quality testing and we've been at 100 % on those tests so we
We're always ensuring that our water is safe, but we weren't in the position we wanted to be on the water risk assessments.
But hopefully with some of those figures we've added in, you can see the reassurance that we've had a real push.
And at this point in the year, we're in a much better position across the border in the 90s.
So that was all I wanted to say on the report.
Apologies, I got a bit lost there somehow.
But then just open to any questions really.
You are covered admirably.
If the committee would like to indulge me, so I can ask the first question.
Our tenant satisfaction is down at 53 % on repairs.
That has dropped from 57 % last year.
Is this a worry?
Yes.
Yes, it is.
I mean, we, as I think you're aware, we put a significant amount of work into improving
the position in relation to repairs and repairs completed within Target.
So that did improve quite significantly from 2022 -23 to last year.
And we were expecting to see an increase in the satisfaction with the repairs as a result
of that.
And the latest figures we've received on that measure suggest it's now at 58 percent.
There has been an increase now, but it's not a big enough increase and it's still not where
we want it to be.
So there's a lot of work going on at the moment, undertaken by me in terms of the ongoing contract
monitoring, so that's looking at the repair satisfaction measures that we receive from
the transactional survey.
So that's when a repair is completed, a text message is sent to the resident and then they
say how satisfied they are with that repair.
So we're looking at those figures that we get on a kind of ongoing quarterly basis and
and then raising them with this specific contractor
and if there's issues, obviously working with them
to see how that could be improved.
But more broadly, we obviously want to speak to residents
and find out what their concerns are,
why there's this discrepancy between the repairs
completed within Target and then the satisfaction.
So we'll be talking to BMG who undertook these surveys
for us to get a bit more data from them,
a bit more information.
BMG.
Sorry, they're the surveying company
who undertook these for us.
And then we'll also have a focus group next year
where we talk to residents about essentially
why they're not satisfied and what we can do to alter that.
I mean the air repairs contracts run until October 26th,
so part of those conversations I think
will be looking at whether the model we have at the moment
is the right one and whether it's serving our residents best
and will take our residents' views
and that will help inform what decisions we make
in terms of the next round of repairs contracts.
So, first hand I saw was Councillor Goswami.
Thank you, Chair.
My first question really is about the overall satisfaction metric and the rise in that because
that may be the metric, which is the headline metric that this administration could use
to say that things are getting better.
But it's quite a vague and nebulous metric, really.
I mean, what does overall satisfaction mean?
It means different things to different people.
So for example, a refugee family,
that's been recently settled in the country
and are grateful for a roof over their head.
Obviously, you've got to see things very differently,
let's say, from somebody who's been a tenant for 20 years
and has been paying rent and is concerned about value for money.
So even though it might be used as the headline metric,
it's really the most meaningless metric of all the metrics here.
I think if we dig down further into the measures, the two most important metrics, I am a lease
holder but lease holders share many of the same concerns as tenants.
The two most important ones are repairs and maintenance and complaints.
Those are the two areas where the council has been performing at least well.
Council White has partly stolen my thunder but why are we falling back in those measures?
So you partly answered regarding repairs and maintenance, but what about complaints as well?
The complaints figures obviously are another one that stands out as being not where we'd like it to be and again. It's one where
You know I could speculate about why it might be that residents aren't satisfied with our complaints
Sort of process in the response to those, but I think the way to
and having those focus groups next year.
I mean, again, the latest figures suggest
an improvement in that area.
I think it's up to 22%, Ms. Wilma, correct me if I'm wrong,
but that's still too low.
It's still not as high as we'd like it to be.
And I think the work that we're doing
with the Housing Ombudsman, reviewing their kind of
spotlights that they do on particular areas,
and the learning from complaints that we receive,
whether that's cases of maladministration
or occasionally the odd cases of severe maladministration,
it's working out where we've let residents down,
compensating residents appropriately,
and then also looking at what we can do
to stop that from happening again.
And sometimes that's changing our policies and procedures,
sometimes it's training issues.
And they're the kind of things that we've been
much better at over the last year, 18 months, two years,
than I think perhaps we have done historically.
So I'm expecting that to continue to improve,
But like I said, we're not gonna rest on our laurels
We we know it's not what I want it to be
So we need to speak to those residents to actually find out what they weren't happy with about that process
Thank you
I think part, you know part of the explanation might be difference in expectations between you know
What success means to the council and what it means to residents and I?
Imagine some of that sort of opportunity for feedback the residents are given will help to sort of fine -tune that so that you know
the council and residents see things from the same perspective.
As a leasehold, one example is lift repairs.
I once put in a member's inquiry regarding the success rate or the number of days that
lifts are operational in the borough.
I think the success rate is something like 95 .2 % or something like that.
I can't remember the exact figure.
That figure was presented to me as a successful one.
and in most walks of life you get 95 % out of 100, it's good.
But if you think about it in terms of lift,
that's two weeks of the year when the lift isn't working
and that has a huge impact on people's lives.
So could the problem be that perhaps the expectations
that the council has for its own performance
doesn't really match with residents?
Can I ask,
about, okay, Mr. Crawley.
Ms. Warman.
Well, I was just going to say on lifts, I think we're at 98 % now.
But yes, I agree with you.
It's difficult, isn't it?
Because we might say we're at 98 % and it looks good.
But if you're the resident who's then got the lift that's not working,
it doesn't really matter that you say it's at 98%.
So I think all these overarching percentages, while they're useful,
as well as overall satisfaction with the landlord, you're right.
They're perceptions, aren't they?
So some people will answer as the landlord.
Some people will answer as the council.
So I think these are just one part of reviewing our performance because residents experience,
they're not necessarily interested in that big overarching number where you say,
well, when I add it all together, the percentage is X.
So that's why we've got lots of other areas in place where we're inspecting the lifts, for example, to make sure they're working.
And we do work closely with residents if lifts are out in those blocks of making sure they're aware of what the issues are.
Putting in adjustments for example if we do major works and replace the lifts for those who you know
Require the lift to get out of their properties we it may even move them into temporary accommodation for the times that we're
Working on those lifts so i agree with you i think i think satisfaction and overarching percentages are useful but they're
Not the be all and end all
Council
I don't know if you're gonna be happy or disturbed that the exact same point was paid by council the hog today regarding lifts
In our actual interview with the regulators, so I'm sure very happy to hear that
Um and so we actually have a paper that we want to bring forward which goes into that specific detail because we have done a deep
dive on the lift performance
whereby we've worked out that the the
Measures by just going off of the timing of how long the lift has been in service is not like a useful measure in terms
repair. So that we can definitely bring that forward. And I was just going to come in on
the point you made around satisfaction with a landlord's approach to handling complaints,
because exactly as you framed it in regards to how people interpret different things,
I think we can improve on this 100%. I also think baked into this data, a bit like the
question about safety in the tenant satisfaction measures is whether sometimes the question
is people are reading into it different things. So if you're satisfied with the landlord's
If you lost your claim, you're going to be unsatisfied, right?
Because you didn't, it wasn't the outcome that you wanted in the same way that the safety question is sometimes ambiguous
because like you say, it could be read into as to do with the ASB on the estate or fire safety, right?
It's a hard one to dive into.
So we are aware of those ambiguities and we're trying to slice them up to think like what would the tenant think about when they're answering that question?
I think you might want to reflect on saying we're going to try and improve on that 100 %
or we'll improve on that because I'm not sure we'll hit 100%.
But Councillor Austin.
Thank you very much.
I'm just wanting to, sorry, I'm going to jot down a little bit more on the detail and just
from Councillor White's point with the 53%.
Obviously, the cost of repairs has gone up over £1 .5 million in the last 12 months,
But the satisfaction rating of those repairs has gone down again consecutively for the
last two years.
So when we say we're looking into measures, are we looking at performance management of
contractors or ceasing contracts with contractors that are not performing?
We got KPIs to look at with regards to the contractors and measures like that because
we've got a significant increase in the amount of money we've input into repairs, but a decrease
in the satisfaction of those repairs.
So the two, we need to close that gap and marry them up.
I agree totally.
I mean, the measures we're looking at in this report were gathered early part of last year.
I think this will correct me if I'm wrong.
So there's a lag between obviously the position now and the position back then in terms of
what I think residents would experience.
and we know the latest figures are 58%,
so an increase of 5%, and as I said before,
that's positive because things are moving
in the right direction, but it's not enough.
There needs to be more investment there
in terms of time and resources
and trying to improve the position.
And we are meeting with, as I say,
the main contractors on a monthly basis
and looking at this particular issue,
satisfaction with repairs and how that could be improved.
We also, sometimes things don't work out
with our contractors because they can't necessarily improve to the level that we would like them
to.
So two of our tenanted contracts did come to an end by mutual agreement at the end of
September and we have a new repairs contractor dealing with two of those tenancy contracts.
So I'd expect to see an improvement that's linked to that as well.
So action is taken and contractors are also defaulted if their repairs aren't completed
within Target.
So there's a kind of ongoing financial penalty for them if they're not performing in that
But when we dig deeper into the survey results with VMG
and then when we also do the focus group,
I think we'll find out more about why residents aren't happy.
It may be to do with things like the quality of work.
It may be the fact that contractors are maybe not doing
a first time fix.
They may be turning up and then having to go
and get materials and then come back.
It could be those sorts of issues.
And that's what I think we need more information on
before I can come back to you and say,
this is what the issue is and this is what we're going
to do to improve that satisfaction level further.
Thank you for that.
Could I just ask that once we've got that, will you come back to the committee and give
us that answer?
I'm assuming the answer, yes.
And just two, on the overall satisfaction and on the building satisfaction, what is
the satisfactory percentage?
What are we trying to get to?
I know 100 percent is the answer, but at what point do we go that's satisfactory?
So on overall landlord satisfaction that's been a key performance indicator for some years and there's one for tenants and there's one for leaseholds
So although this report only covers the tenant tenants satisfaction those questions are also asked of resident leaseholders
I can't will come to that paper, but we have got targets
But yes, you're right ultimately you want it to be a hundred percent
But you've got to be realistic based on what you've what you've achieved and then what you aspire to get up to so I?
I will come to it and then I'll remember but our it's around the mid 60s
I think around 65 67 based on previous targets, but yes, I think ultimately you'd aspire for it to be even higher
To Rigby
I've got three questions
so I'll do them one by one and the first one is and so BMG did this survey and
And it was like 1063 participants.
How were those people selected?
And can we please have as an update the demographic breakdown of who those people were and how
they matched the demographic profile of tenants, please?
So the BMG, who are our marketing company that do the surveys, they get all our resident
data and they use that to pick a representative sample.
So the full report has the demographic breakdown and gives the explanation for why it's a representative
sample of our resident population.
So that's published on our website and we also, I'm happy to send the link to that so
people can see where that's publicly available.
Brilliant, thank you.
And so we've achieved the highest SAP rating of any London borough of a C, which is brilliant.
How difficult would it be to move to a B, and does this indicate that we would be getting
to net zero?
That's a big question.
So I think we should take positives in the fact that we're at a SAT rating of C, and
that's a sort of, it's like an average across the stock, but actually each individual property
has got an EPC, and we've got a system called parity portfolio where we are putting in all
our energy data and we've got a project at the moment where we're looking at
those where we've got low EPCs or no EPC data and we're going out and doing new
EPCs. I think we've got a whole program of green and sort of energy
efficiency work some of which are just ordinarily through major works like
reef and winder renewals where that should increase the overall energy
performance of the blocks and also we are investigating new technologies like
infrared technologies.
We also look at solar panels on our roofs
as standard when we're doing roof renewals.
So there's lots of work going on.
I don't think it's not a simple question to answer
that we could move to a B, because some of our properties
are old.
Some of them, it's difficult. Some of them,
you get in from a D to a C. Some you could easily
get from a C to a B. So I think that's a longer term plan,
where, yes, we should be aiming to get them as any energy
sufficient as we possibly can. Thank you. Final question. This is going to be a
tough, this is a tough one. This is, so noise complaints, I think most
councillors, their inbox is like heavily skewed to noise complaints. It's kind of
wild that you can get graffiti removed in three days but it's going to take
five days for someone to deal with your noise complaint which is going to have a
a much bigger impact on somebody's mental health and wellbeing, their sleep.
You know, we get people coming along to our advice sessions who, you know, I've had a guy who lost several jobs just because he couldn't sleep.
I think we all know that the service for noise complaints is not where it should be.
It's not being brilliant for a number of years.
and I think it's probably because, you know,
it's something that does need a bit of a fix,
so it's not an overnight one,
but I would like to get to a stage
where you can get your noise complaint sorted
as fast as you can get your graffiti taken off the wall.
How do we get there?
Those figures relate to the kind of written response,
I suppose, to a noise complaint.
So the way our system works is that if someone is concerned about or experiencing noise nuisance in their home
They can call the Joint Control Center and a state services officer will come out usually within you know, half an hour and
Be able to witness that noise. They will then report back to the
area housing team
Usually the next day report will go to them about what they witnessed, you know
whether there was noise nuisance, how loud it was,
whether they think it was a statutory nuisance.
These figures relate to what happens after that,
so how quickly a kind of Section 80 notice is served
or how quickly a letter is sent to the perpetrator
to warn them about the issue and to advise them
that obviously it shouldn't happen again
and the consequences if it does.
So I think we're pretty good at doing that quite quickly.
Sometimes there can be delays,
particularly with the service of a section 80 notice because if it's a
leasehold property for example and you've got private tenants in there
that notice has to be served on a named individual so you need to try and
work out who the people are in the property and if it's private tenants of
a leaseholder we don't always have that information to hand it can take a little
bit of time to find it so those tend to be the sort of cases where we there's a
bit of a delay and we don't necessarily meet the target I think in terms of
serving residents better it's to an extent it's it's about what happens
after that, that's just the initial report and the initial response to it.
If it's an ongoing noise use issue, it's about how we support that resident by giving them
a nuisance diary, by speaking to them relatively regularly to let them know what's happening
in relation to that case.
And if they're really suffering and they're, say for example, a vulnerable resident, it
might be appropriate that we do a risk assessment and we do also an action plan with them to
say set their expectations about what can happen and when.
Because a lot of the times with noise usage complaints,
it's also a bit about managing people's expectations
because it isn't something you can necessarily resolve immediately.
But in many cases, you can
because you just warn someone and they don't do it again,
particularly if you scare them with a Section 80 notice.
But there are lots of cases where you will have someone
that which perhaps might be their children playing,
or it might be everyday living,
they would go as everyday living noise and
the other person might not regard it as that.
So it could be an issue to do with floor covering.
So they're often complex cases and sometimes they do could take a long time to resolve as I say, I think it's more about
Making sure we communicate effectively residents and we manage their expectations about what is going to happen and when?
And a section 18 notice is
Apologies, it's a notice under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 essentially warning the perpetrator of the noise users that they could be fined
Taken to court. Thank you. Mr. Crowley
council give India
Thanks, Jay.
And I think the TSM regime is an innovation,
and I think a good one, in that we'll have a national benchmark
in due course.
I think it'll be one where everybody
will have a clarity as to how well their authority is
or is not performing.
So that's to be welcomed.
I hope that it's going to be an ongoing review of what
are the right measures and what are the right ways of doing it.
and so on.
So I think that's, I hope we will have some input
in that process in the future.
One I was confused about this paper
was that the data was collected between April 23 and March 24
and submitted afterwards.
And then was found to be not as good as it should be.
And then we corrected it very, very rapidly.
And it seemed to me to say, well,
if it was so easily correctable, why the hell
did we get it wrong in the first place?
So it's a kind of a question that I'm
sure Mr. Worth and his team will have asked.
On water and asbestos, for example,
I mean, they're both critical things.
And we corrected them quickly.
So in a sense, it's not like it was a mammoth task.
It seemed to be a manageable task.
But then, so I want to know whether the data we submitted
Is the data with that snapshot as of March 24,
or is it the one after the remediation on water
and asbestos was done, so in a sense, which is the data?
And then moving forward, next year when we get
the annual report and subsequent years,
what's the kind of timetable we're looking at?
Will it again be April to March data collection analysis
and perhaps the first autumn post -recess meeting,
we will have a TSM submission,
and therefore we'll know what is what.
And each year, it'll be a kind of September, October thing.
And his regulator also going to, in a sense,
release his information at the same...
roughly the same time in the year, so that we are in...
There's not a time lag between data and analysis and so on.
So that's my first question.
But the other is that 50 % of our stock
is occupied by leaseholders.
And I know we do a similar kind of assessment of leaseholder
satisfaction as well.
Would it actually make more sense
to have the leaseholder satisfaction results
and tenant satisfaction results in the same committee at the same time, so that we are
actually looking at people who live on our estates to whom we have varying degrees of
responsibilities and duties, and that we read the needs and wants of both those groups at
the same time rather than do it in bits.
I hope that that's something that you'd consider.
There are a whole series of areas where there are kind of we find wanting or whatever, and
I think these analyses are always problematic because this is a snapshot and there's a perception.
Individuals will have a different perception, and of course if you are at the receiving
end of the poor repair, then you're going to give zero out of ten.
And even if you get a good repair, chances are you're not going to give 10 out of 10.
So in a sense, that's the fact of life I've set in your place looking at these figures
and to turn my hair out occasionally.
But what I am hoping we're going to do is certainly just to recap.
Tenants and least of the data together and add some clarity on the timetable
when we collect, we release, and we discuss the TSMs.
I can confirm that my hair has been pulled out.
Well, that's actually the fun of joining the council.
Do you want to talk to me?
Well, I'll let Kate join us up.
Oh, come on.
Yeah, so these are from the end of the last financial year,
from perception surveys we carried out last summer.
And then you submit them in around June,
and then the regulator has to sort of approve the figures and undoes a bit of auditing of the figures that have been submitted.
I think especially this year because it was the first year, so they did some auditing and querying of different local authorities and providers figures and how they've calculated them.
And then I'm hoping it won't be as late as November when the figures come out next year because they're learning like we are about these submissions of data.
I agree with you. I think generally our annual reports tend to go in September
And I think September makes more sense because it's less of it's less of a lag isn't it?
It's it's closer together, and I also agree with you about ten and an leaseholder satisfaction because we asked the survey at the same time
Obviously a cup a couple of the questions are different, but they're mainly the same so yes next year's report
We'll have ten at least hold it together
Just to get my, in the sense that the dates right.
So summer 23 is when the data was collected.
And June 24 was when it was submitted.
Am I right?
So yeah, June 23, well it was around June, July, we did the perception survey, which
was the satisfaction survey.
Then the management measures which were around water safety and asbestos, they were an end
of year figure, so they were as of 31st of March, and then you had to submit them by
June.
So there's a bit of a lag, but it's sort of up to us.
At some point in the year, you have to have done that satisfaction survey, so we choose
to do it at that time.
Council Verafras.
Thank you very much.
I've got a very specific question on mold, which is referenced on page 23, paragraph 37.
We all know mold is a significant problem.
I'm sure the councils across the table get a lot of casework, especially for me when
I'm doing walk arounds on the Henry Prince Estate.
It's almost guaranteed there's going to be at least one resident who's bringing me into
the house and showing me all the molds.
And there's often infants and children.
They say that somebody from the council has come out, the mold's gone away, but it's come
back.
And obviously it's great that we've got an introduction of the mold removal team and that 364 washes have been done and whilst
Washes can eliminate mold. It's sometimes just temporary. So are we doing are we taking any other measures to permanently?
When we establish the mold removal team
Obviously what we didn't want to do is what you describe really which is just do a mold wash and then
Leave it and then obviously that mold would come back without the other kind of measures that
needed
So the way we set up the process was the the mold removal team would go in and remove the mold
They'd provide some advice at the same time
But what would happen after they've removed the mold and taken before and after photos is that it would start it was sort of
Automatically start a process whereby the estate manager would then visit after that
To the property to speak to the resident and said look at the other
elements of the property whether that's the ventilation or the heating and you
know the setup there and basically give some more advice but also to make sure
that you know the extraction fan is working properly or it's a you know
humidist at fan for example or the heating system is working properly and
is being being kind of used correctly so there are other things that follow on
afterwards and should follow on afterwards and you know even when you do
some of those measures.
Mold does still sometimes come back
because particularly if you've got an overcrowded property
and it's very difficult for the residents
to sometimes manage the situation
despite us having extraction found, et cetera.
So if it does come back again,
that's the sort of stage where we would then think,
well, possibly something like a positive input ventilation
system might be the answer,
which generally speaking, when we put those in,
even though they're quite expensive,
they do tend to resolve the situation for those residents.
And then I think something that we need to improve on and we are going to improve on is
You know there's post inspections after that works undertaken
But it's also then following up with the resident to make sure that the mold hasn't come back and what we're looking at the moment
Is perhaps a kind of automated text message that goes maybe say for example six months after?
The molds been removed to kind of check in with that resident say contact us if they you know the molds come back and if you
Still have issues in your home
I suppose the PIV systems are, you described it as expensive, but it's a lot cheaper than
mechanical ventilation, heating recovery system or something like that.
Yeah, and cheaper than going back to remove mould and, you know, exactly, yeah.
Mr Graham.
Thank you, Chair.
Yes, indeed, mould.
It really does come back.
and what you're saying is, and in previous papers,
that you've got your contractors to get rid of the mould, which goes,
but then you, of course, it could have been by extractor fund,
non -working in the kitchen, also heavy, there are a lot of people,
lots of washing and stuff like that,
also central heating.
I think that the the lack the lapse of time that takes place in
somebody coming and checking the windows like the maintenance and
As well as extract as the central heating I think if there's if there's a timeline quicker
So that they could actually be in place rather than where the residents saying oh, I've I've been told there's an extractor fan
But when is it coming and did they begin to ring up?
And I think that is possibly where the council sadly is falling down on its response time.
I think that comes back to what I was referring to earlier about our repairs completed within
target figure, which I think we would admit wasn't where we wanted it to be in 2022,
23, but has improved quite significantly.
So I think residents now will find that they're getting a much quicker response in terms of those sorts of repairs being completed
after the mold wash
You know occasionally they're still there's still going to be the odd issue
Whether that's with contract performance or possibly with you know access to the home and the type of works that are being undertaken
And unfortunately we do have cases where you have
You know solicitors that are acting on behalf of the resident who aren't keen on letting you know
inform, ill -advised the tenants so they're not keen
on letting us in to undertake those sorts of work.
So sometimes it'd be a bit of back and forth with solicitors
where we want to get in and do the work,
but perhaps it's not as easy to do so as you might think.
One more question.
We've talked about TSM's, but you haven't mentioned TMOs.
So what kind of process or what kind of review
or training do your management for TMOs
and how do they get the feedback
and do they get the feedback and send it back to you
as regards to going forward?
So TMOs are supposed to carry out
their own satisfaction surveys.
But I'm not sure how consistently that is done.
So what we are moving to from,
well actually we've done it
because we've already completed next year's survey
this year.
That has included residents of TMOs, so we will have that information and also within our report, like we can break it up by leaseholder tenant,
we'll also be able to break it up by those in co -ops and their levels of satisfaction.
We have in the past specifically done satisfaction surveys of TMOs, co -ops, RMOs.
We call them everything, don't we?
And we've gone to the co -op forum and then we've presented those figures.
So we have done those things in the past, but yes, I think consistently going forward,
we're going to make sure they're included in all these satisfaction surveys.
Any more questions?
I'll just come in and say that for me, how these interact with our KPIs is how we're
going to measure this.
So on repairs, the last two years on this committee was speed of repairs.
And now we're on to quality of repairs.
We can measure that in our KPIs.
And if that's reflected in the tenant satisfaction measures,
then it means that they are a useful sample.
And I think that it's that interaction that
is the one that is going to be most important.
Because if our KPIs are completely
out of whack with our tenant satisfaction measures,
then there's something going wrong.
And that means we're not capturing what the Council
of India has said is not a perfect snapshot,
but a useful snapshot.
So hopefully your experience on this committee
has shown that there is an interaction between that.
And yeah, I mean, I think repairs is certainly
the issue that we have the most conversations about
and the one that comes to this committee the most
and is probably the ones that we have most conversation
with officers around.
And yeah, I mean, insourcing is, as you know,
I'm a fan of his LinkedIn Council
and it's in -house repairs.
And that is a model that we are very
interested in following up on.
And so there will be lots of discussions
going forward around this, because I think
it is the kind of, the quality of repairs now
is where the next six months to a year looks like
we want to be going in the right direction on that.
Okay, so can we note this report for information?
Yes.

6 Vulnerable Residents' Policy (Paper No.24-352)

Excellent, okay, so moving on to item six,
which is the vulnerable residents policy,
which is paper number 24 -352.
And it's Ms. Wilwin.
Hi.
So this report, well, this policy
is really an overarching policy of lots of approaches
and processes and procedures have already
got in place for dealing with vulnerable people.
For example, we've got joint working protocols
for both, with both adults and children's services
around safeguarding and dealing with those vulnerable people.
So this isn't our first stab at how we deal with those who are vulnerable.
It's putting that into one overarching document where we can show how we would make reasonable adjustments.
And I think perhaps the nature of calling it vulnerable people is a bit misleading.
Because in some ways as well, it's just about knowing where people require reasonable adjustments in how we communicate with them.
and those people might not necessarily consider themselves vulnerable,
but they might have an adjustment that they need us to make.
So paragraph 13 of the report just sets out some of the instances
where people may be vulnerable.
So it's not suggesting that you're automatically vulnerable
if you fall into one of those categories.
We're not trying to say being over 70 means you're vulnerable.
But what we're saying in paragraph 13 is these are some of the factors
that might lead to vulnerability.
Paragraphs 21 to 22 talk about how we'll manage that information on the system.
So we, at the moment, we are able to manage vulnerability information in a number of ways.
So that will be when they first approach the Department for Assistance as homeless, also
when we sign up new tenants and their household members.
So we can record vulnerability information in lots of different ways, both in W2, which is our document management system, and also in NEC, which is our housing management system.
And there are currently multiple places where you can record that information and we want to move to a position where we're recording it in a central place.
So within housing, a resident doesn't have to keep ringing up and saying, well, I've already told so and so.
That I need everything in large print or I need contractors to wait at the door for
longer because it takes me longer to get to the door to answer it.
So we're moving to that approach where within housing,
we've recorded it in one place that we've all agreed is the same place.
So those people don't have to keep reiterating the same information to us.
And we're doing a lot of work on that.
We're working with our frontline staff and once we've got approval for this policy,
we will do some training for staff around how to record that information.
So just any questions really?
Any questions, Councillor Givindja?
.
So on the first point in paragraph 13, it's perhaps not explicit.
it's not referring specifically to the tenant, I suppose it is all household members, but
it doesn't really say one way or another, does it?
So it could be clearer.
On the Equality Impact Needs Assessment, yes, I agree that should, where we can, that should
have thorough demographic information, so I'll get that reviewed with my team and make
sure that gets added in.
Councillor Kishan.
Thank you, Chair.
Nobody around this table I think is going to argue with the sentiment and aspiration
of the policy, but I think politics would be an easy game if it was all about the aspiration
and sentiment.
At the end of the day, this is something that has to be delivered, and there's nothing in
this paper.
I mean, it may come in a later paper about how this policy will actually be measured
and evaluated in terms of its effectiveness, because without that, I mean, how do you ensure
that staff are remaining compliant?
I don't know you spoke about additional training
and how staff are going to be held accountable.
Presumably there'll need to be accountability mechanisms
in place to ensure that taxpayers' money,
which we'll be funding this at the end of the day,
is being spent wisely.
Sorry, I'm a bit slow to answer that question.
Mr. Worth has asked whether he could take us.
Thank you, Chair.
Just conscious I've been quite quiet so far, so I thought I'd try and contribute.
So it's a fair question.
I mean, as Ms. Wilman has said, part of the actions falling out of this report are we
we will put on our system what in the jargon we call a flag,
so it's an alert that flashes up on the screen the officer
accesses.
It will say what the vulnerability is,
what the adjustments are.
Linking back to the previous paper, when we get a complaint,
if a feature of that complaint is that this policy was not
adhered to, then naturally the relevant manager
it would be talking to the member of staff,
clarifying the training needs.
And ultimately, hopefully very, very rarely,
if the breach of this policy were serious
with serious consequences to the resident,
then we may have to have recourse to the formal HR codes.
Obviously that's not an outcome that we want,
but it's one we're prepared to take in an appropriate case.
So what I'm saying really is compliance with the procedure
will in many respects be done by exception or looking at the complaints, making sure
that the management team, the wider management team have got an awareness of this and that
they've got it in the forefront of their mind when they're dealing with complaints.
I don't know whether we would be able to do something that's more systemized around that,
But we can certainly make it a point that where managers are looking at performance
in the job as a whole through the appraisal system, the compliance with the policy, the
frequency with which they're flagging vulnerability is just picked up day to day, which should
be a feature of the appraisal process as well.
Did you want to add to that, Ms. Moreland?
No, sorry.
Well, I knew it was in the report somewhere, but in the summary, the last paragraph talks
a bit, but it's really what Mr. Worth said about, you know, periodic audits of how vulnerability
information is stored and also learning through complaints and tracking complaints where vulnerability
is highlighted as an issue, because obviously that's come out in the housing ombudsman,
one of their spotlight reports, not specifically for Wandsworth, but around complaints and
vulnerability. So we would track that and where vulnerability is in a complaint, we
will make sure that we're recording it in the right way and make sure we can learn from
that if we are not.
So I guess we will get periodic updates, future committees about the effectiveness of the
policy and how it is being implemented.
Thank you.
Councillor Tiller.
Thank you, Chair.
It is good to bear in mind reasonable adjustments with regard to risk assessments and accessibility
of information.
But can such reasonable adjustments also be incorporated into other situations, especially
when disputes arise between the council and residents with regard to something other than
accessibility?
I've had several pieces of case work where a resident with clear vulnerabilities has
been the subject of inflexible, unfeeling bureaucracy, for example, in the case of housing
benefits overpayments.
It's difficult for me to comment on the housing benefit
overpayment sort of scenario because that's not
an area that sort of comes under my management.
But I certainly would say that there's
one part of this policy and what we're
trying to do, which is about recording the data
and making sure that we have that information
on our residents so we understand
what their needs are.
But in many ways, the kind of more important part
is what you then do with that data.
It's about making sure that officers, whatever department they work in, but obviously I'm
speaking on behalf of the Housing Department officers, see that data and then acknowledge
it and then act on it in terms of the adjustments that they make.
And it's difficult to say kind of what hard and fast rules there should be about what
adjustments you make, but part of the training that we're going to do that will follow
on from this policy being approved is about that.
It's about what you do with the data.
It's about what officers should do in certain scenarios to make sure that residents feel
Supported and they're getting the service that they need
Because of you know, whatever vulnerabilities they may have
Council mr. Graham
Well, I think so one on a tour with me, please
Listening and to what's being said
You know the residents say oh I've got to go and see the doctor, you know, and that's another
You know medical
a certificate and ultimately, you know, if somebody's got Lyme disease or unseen disabilities
or ME and also suffering cancer, how is that going to be sort of taken into consideration
with the adaptations and stuff like that.
That's really one of the issues.
But also, will you actually inform the medical profession
that there is not as a change,
but you are looking at different ways of
investigating health of the client or the resident?
I think to an extent we're always going to be reliant on residents telling us what their
vulnerability is and also maybe how it affects them so that we can understand that and then
respond accordingly.
Because obviously we have good data on when a resident becomes our tenant, but obviously
things change over time.
The examples you gave are things that might not affect someone when they became our tenant
but might do years or months later.
So it's partly about them informing us of that, but partly us recording that properly.
It's about talking to them about how it affects them and what issues they may be in terms of, you know,
adjustments in the service we provide to them.
And that's really, I think, what this policy is about.
I think basically what you're saying is that the doctors check the medical certificates, don't they?
Do you have doctors coming in and assessing and...
We have a council medical advisor.
So where there are, you know, we're provided with medical information often by the resident.
Sometimes we receive medical information from their doctor.
But we also have a council medical advisor who can provide us with advice.
And sometimes we might decide to make a referral ourselves because we have concerns about a particular resident where we would want to make sure that they're being kind of responded to and acted on.
I think it is a good idea to have a rough idea of how many of our most regular contacts
into the department actually fall into this vulnerable residence group.
And I guess the short answer is no, I don't know the dates at hand.
But I would imagine it is quite a significant number and in some cases it would be the case
that those more vulnerable residents are the ones that contact us perhaps the most often
as well.
And I think that's what's quite positive about the system that we have at the moment with, you know, each resident has an estate manager so
They can contact really quite easily. So with that state manager hopefully being there for some time
They've built up a relationship with those particular residents and understand their needs better than perhaps if you know
They were speaking to someone in a call center or they had
Yeah, that didn't have that ratio with them
Thank you any more questions I
I might come in and say that the I guess what good looks like is
Someone not having to tell their story over and over again
Particularly if it's one that's a difficult story
That
It will never be it can never be too much because this will be in many ways and correct me if I'm wrong
This will be information that will be accessible by quite a number of officers because it will be throughout the department
So it can't be the super
kind of
a deep dive into more complex issues.
But I think it is an important part of the way
that any interaction with the council service,
having something that is flagged,
so if you've got one of these vulnerabilities down
and you book in repair, they might ask you a question
about how they can meet the requirements
without you having to constantly explain
those requirements over and over again,
which can be very suspecting for our residents.
But it's also a means to which we can offer
and signpost to other services
whenever we're doing routine calls as a housing service,
because we want to be able to signpost people to say cost of living if we know that a certain
person might have a likelihood to be in fuel poverty or be able to access some of the cost
of living services.
So it's helping us move in that direction, which is that kind of seamless ability to
give people as tailored an approach as possible.
But there will always, I guess, be limits on it.
And some of, I mean, on your point, Ravi, about the children, I mean, children serve
the safeguarding element on some of the stuff that we,
because at BRF we talked about how it would co -create
with children's services and then some of that data
obviously can't be on this kind of level.
But there might be a note which is contact children's
services or something like that.
Yeah.
Sure, I think it's quite, welcome what Councilor
de Carim just said, because I think it's right
that we don't collect all data and everything
about our council tenants because you and I
don't want to readily give our data to everyone.
And I think the tenants should have the same sort of chance
to say no.
But what is important is that in so far as the housing
department and the council needs access to somebody's home,
then they know what to say and what not to say, in a sense,
how to be careful and not be careful.
But I think there is a lot of information in people's home
life that it's no business of authority to know.
Any more questions?
Okay.
Can we support recommendations A and B for this paper?
Yep.
So on to item number 7, which is the ones with corporate plan actions and KPIs.
The performance report.
and the paper is 24353.
Who's going to introduce this paper?
We don't normally introduce this paper, I just haven't left because I've got the paper after.
Sorry, it's just been amazing.
Okay, question for officers.
That was almost your big moment, baby, sadly taken away.
So any questions for the officers?
Councillor Givindja.
A question to officers, but perhaps also a question to the cabinet member.
Because there is nothing in this paper about Winstein and York Road.
We discussed it two committees ago.
We came to some views and discussions, decisions there.
And there is complete silence in this paper.
Now I appreciate the nature of the issue.
I'm perfectly happy to have that information shared with me separately and outside this
committee, but I just want to register that it should not be forgotten.
But the question to officers is there are several places here where we are quite close
to the deadline.
I'll just illustrate one.
The Lavender Hill hub where opening is likely to be between December and March, we are three
days short of December.
So perhaps there is a sharper window there, and perhaps you could give us that sharper
window.
Something like quarter three and four, well, we are at the end of quarter three, and so
clearly it's now going to be quarter four.
So in some ways, nobody has gone through this paper, if I may be bold to say that, to say
we are not very far from some of these deadlines, and can we make sure these deadlines actually
are either real or updated.
I mean, there's one where the tenants conference,
which already happened, and it is yet to happen,
according to this paper.
So really, I do think that somebody
ought to have read it more carefully before it was published.
Thanks.
Yeah.
Thank you, Councillor.
Part of that, and taking the Lavender Hill hub as an example,
is the leading time for the paper.
So when this was drafted, sort of four or five weeks back,
it was possibly fair comment.
I take your point that they should have been updated.
And just on that one, we're looking towards the back end of that time scale rather than
obviously two or three days' time.
So...
One, if I may indulge, Mr. Chair, which is on the Daha.
It doesn't say why.
It says it's going to be delayed and so on, but it doesn't say why this has happened.
So what is the point of, in a sense, an updated report which doesn't give us the full story?
I can, sorry that's my fault I could have put those explanations in.
So there's two reasons.
One unfortunately the main officer who was leading on it went on jury service for a long
period of time so that meant we delayed it.
And then of course we're currently being inspected by the regulator of social housing so we've
asked to delay it then.
Yes, yes.
But also with Daha, I think they are so busy that often the delays come from them as well.
So it's I think two very good reasons, a bit unusual.
And Daha is domestic abuse.
Housing Alliance.
Paul is helping the viewers at home big time.
I was going to say this is you're you're right. This is the hardest one to
Monitor for tenses because it's a live document and it it was you know, it's like our manifesto basically written into a corporate review
So we're constantly adapting. I mean on the on the hub. I mean on Monday, so it will actually be in December
We're doing the first of the you'll be interested in this with you're doing the first of the neighborhood
engagements with those residents
Who came to the original one who were upset about the planning process?
So it is a bit of a live document, so apologies.
We'll try and keep up.
But the way that it was written and the way that it then
has to be amended is a bit precarious.
I mean, corporate plans are entirely
driven by the manifestos of the administration.
But the report back, I mean, then they
become the council's responsibility.
And they become part of the administrative machine.
And I just think that 10 days before tonight,
when the publication date was, somebody
could have clearly gone through it and say well and change this I mean I it's
just a point worth making so the next time it doesn't have very well taken on
board and the point about York Road is I'll because of commercial sensitivity
of it I'll talk to you afterwards but I completely understand it and we are
desperate to bring something forward when we can could I ask a question
quickly about the house purchase grants it there seems to be low take up of the
house purchase grants I mean how does it compare for instance to right to buy
Is it higher than right to buy that we are having the numbers?
Or do you think that the money available is adequate?
In terms of the house purchase grant, the take -up to date for the current financial
year is we have a target for 40 properties.
And excuse me, I will just find the relevant section.
So yes, so during 2023 -24 the Council received 70 applications resulting in 26 moves and
further 30 applications carry forward to the current year and the target for 24 -25 is to
complete 40 grants.
And just for information, the current position on the house purchase grant year to date is
six completions with 31 live cases which are either applicants looking for properties or
going through the legal process.
Is the target 40?
Are we talking about 24, 25, because the target seems to be 20?
Yeah, in the paper that I've got, I've got a value of 26 for 23, 24, quarter to 17, value
for the quarter 24, 25, 12, and then target of 20.
That was the target, I believe, back in June.
You need to come to the microphone, baby.
This is your big moment.
It's just to clarify that all these targets were set in June this year.
So that was the annual refresh of the KPIs and the corporate plan actions.
And so this was the target that was provided for the house purchase grant.
So that's the target that's set for 24 -25.
Well, sorry, I'm going to clarify that.
Sorry.
That's the target, that's the profile target for this midyear.
This is a midyear report, it's a six month, it's the profile target for midyear for Q2.
So the target, I'm going to make sure and look that up.
Sorry, we've made the answer as complicated as possible.
Sorry, so yes the target, the total end year target is indeed 40.
Yeah, the total end year target is indeed 40, the mid -year target halfway through the
year is 20.
Thank you very much.
Just to answer your second bit around right to buy, the house purchase grants, the levels
have always been loosely related to right to buy discounts.
Obviously, right -to -buy discounts have reduced and we've had a big influx of right -to -buy
applications in the hundreds, but I think those are all because the discounts are reducing
and therefore it's difficult to predict, but we imagine those numbers won't be that high.
But I think it'll be a chance to look at the house purchase grants and say, well, should
they be changed to meet the right -to -buy, the new right -to -buy discounts, or should
They remain the same because it's still cheaper than building a new home.
So there's all those things that have to be looked at.
But given this is happening just at the moment really, we haven't had a chance to review
that but I think that will be something that will get reviewed in the next financial year.
Excellent, thanks Miss Wilman.
Councillor Fariff -Farrage.
Oh, you're all good, okay.
Councillor Austin.
Thank you very much, Chair.
Just on page 61, the first bit with regards to the thousand new council homes, on the
fourth paragraph it says the council has been allocated 16 ,588 ,500 to acquire a total of
56 properties in the borough for temporary accommodation for illegal, local, homelessness
pressures and properties.
So far, I'm going to say was that 56 is the whole year target or the half year target?
It's suddenly because I've now confused myself, which might change my percentages slightly.
And so far we've purchased four.
As somebody who runs also, so firstly, where are those four and what were they?
Were they flats?
Were they houses?
And which wards in the borough were they?
And were they one, two, three, four, how many bedrooms?
And secondly, as somebody who runs an estate agency, if you were to come to me with 16
and a half million pounds and tell me that you wanted to buy 56 properties.
I do a deal on the whole stock.
So why are we only at four at the half year point?
So that is the full year target.
So we got government funding for some of that money to contribute towards it and there were
some delays in that government funding being approved and that is why we've been slow on
getting the acquisitions off the ground.
But as I'm sure you're aware within VAMS which now sits in the place directorate, they're
excellent at getting those acquisitions completed.
So we're confident we're going to be able to make that target.
Sorry to cut over.
Just to say as Kay said, the contracts that we had to sign up to with MHCLG didn't actually
get signed until the end of August.
So the team started acquiring properties as soon as they could after that.
And so from September, properties have been acquired and they have actually increased
to ten already.
Thank you.
Sorry, just as a follow -up on that, what were they and where were they?
Were they houses, flats, ones, twos, three beds?
I don't have that information on me right now.
Would you be able to send it to me?
Yeah, absolutely.
No problem.
Yes, of course.
Okay.
Any more questions?
Councillor, Mrs Graham.
I'm fascinated by the hub.
I remember when you first came in, you had this vision.
And you were going to have doctors, all sorts of stuff.
How many beds is it and how are you?
I mean, there's no information here about how many will it hold or what is your vision?
I know it's still got to be done, but I'd love to know what your vision is.
Yeah, so the target in the corporate plan highlights that we wanted to get it in by
December and that has rolled back to January and obviously in the corporate plan there's
wiggle room on that. So me, Michael Shearer, who's the officer who did the first public
engagement with us, are going down to Battersea Arts Centre to set up the neighbourhood forum,
because you'll be aware that, you know, opening a service like that, where it's located, has drawn
some concerns from the local community. And so we're doing our first resident -led engagement
process with them. Last time I remembered, but there might have been a change because I know that
they were creating a female -only space within the hub as of about a couple of months ago, but there's
roughly 12 beds between 12. And like you say, a number of services. So we're, you know, give credit
where credit's due. We're learning that the purpose of the hub is to learn from the experiences of
what took place during the Everybody In program during COVID when your administration was given
this the central government funding to end homelessness.
You know, we can do it.
We learned from the pandemic.
It's possible.
Homelessness, you know, is a political choice.
And what that why that was so magic is because our officers
had a fixed abode for a number of rough sleepers who were
really able and to get back onto their feet through getting
medical banking support drug and rehabilitation and it was
it was an incredible pedagogical experience basically for
the team then that funding runs out then the hotels reopen.
and we don't have that local space.
So in many ways, and Dave can jump in as well here,
because he's obviously the expert,
is that re -bringing that what had existed during COVID
into our own in -house service,
first in -house service in the borough,
primarily targeted at those rough sleepers
who aren't the, who are trying to get back
into settled accommodation.
So you'll know around Cappen Junction,
there are some kind of what we would describe
as long term rough sleepers who aren't quite in that place yet and require quite a lot
of work and SPEAR and the outreach team do a lot of work with them.
But they're, you know, this service is for those who are looking to try and get into
access to accommodation and some of them won't be in that journey.
And I think where resident concern has been is that we're opening a kind of hostel, which
is for that very sharp end of rough sleeping.
and instead this is much more of a kind of giving someone two, three, four weeks to get back on their feet
and get access to our services so we can start that journey towards settled accommodation.
Thank you, Chair. If I could have another quickie on another.
Mr Wirth wants to say something.
I was just going to add, Councillor, that, yeah, as we said at the Planning Applications Committee,
The intention here is to be a good neighbor to our neighbors.
And Monday's event is the start of that dialogue.
We want and we will have regular access to the premises by the neighbors.
We want them, likewise, we want them to be our good neighbors as well.
So you're right, we are pulling in a range of agencies who will be based at the hub.
So part of the setup for example is really boring domestic stuff like working with IT to make sure that all those agencies
Can actually print documents there whereas a council setup you've got to have a council ID
So we're sort of innovating around that and at the same time as our contractors are fitting out the building
We are assembling the team. So we've just appointed our hub manager
We're shooting just about to appoint the deputy manager Michael Sharon Weller and Chantal Condesour are pulling together
the other agencies, and they're all mobilizing
towards opening.
So it will be something that there are similar schemes
in London, there's a couple of them that I know,
one up in Westminster and one down in Lambeth,
at Roxworth Bus Station, but this kind of breaks
new ground beyond what they do.
So it is an exciting project.
We are definitely going to be good neighbors
to our neighbors down there, and being listening
and cooperative where we have problems.
Just to echo Councilor Dickerton's comments,
this is not for what somewhat unkindly
can be called chaotic rough sleepers.
This is for people who are, we will risk assess
and we want people who are there to benefit
from the multi -agency support that will be provided
and we don't want this clogging up.
So we want people, we'll fast throughput
and we want people to move in, identify a pathway,
get them into a different housing solution and importantly allow them to tell their story once,
going back to our earlier discussions. So I'm sure once it's open and up and running,
we'd be more than happy to invite members of the committee down for a visit. I'm sure you'd
be fascinated to see how it's working. Yeah. And there's also an effort to address
drinking and drug issues as well amongst them. Yeah.
Actually following on from what Councillor Govindo was commenting on about the KPIs tonight,
I'm looking at Solidity and promoting the temporary accommodation forum and I would
very much like to know a little bit more, it says cabinet member for housing meets with
cross -section of temporary accommodation residents, but it's around three times a year.
When is your next one? What is the outcome? How does it come to committees so that we can share
what you... Yeah, so this is where we allow... We want people to be able to hold us to account.
So the Southwest Legal Law Center, I think, got some funding for Trust for London to have
kind of community organizer to organize residents in temporary accommodation to make sure that
their standards are up to a good standard, you know, and make claims against us as a
council. And I met with, she's called Rhiannon, and she's an organizer in Croydon as well
as Wandsworth. And we as administration really struggled with the politics of the fact that
we are responsible for tenants who don't have a vote in Barra because of occasional out
of Barra placements, you know, not a large amount, but Lambeth and Croydon host Wandsworth
residents and so they don't have access to the same democratic structures as our
tenants and leaseholders would through our residents forum and things like that.
So that democratic deficit exists across London and we've had a problem with that
so we have started working with Iran and and we set up this temporary
accommodation forum which is where the residents that she works with at her
workshops as an organizer as an activist are invited into meetings with Dave,
Gazelle, myself, officers from the temporary accommodation team to talk about their lived
experience in Wandsworth TA and that is throughout either council controlled TA, a private rental
placement or a placement outside of borough.
So the various different types of TA be it a kind of we've got we've got residents who've
come from I think elsewhere we've had residents who've come from our decanted blocks.
If you would like to come to one of them I'm sure you I'm not going to invite everyone
because I do want it to be a space where they kind of are the main players but if you're
interested I can send you much more information on it.
She came for a speech didn't she? She spoke here a long time ago.
Yes she spoke here. And I think she's doing, I think South West Law Centre are doing something
in your ward soon Councillor Ferguson, a kind of workshop with a similar, they work out
of Ronald Ross sometimes as well to speak to parents there.
Councillor Rigby.
Yeah, it was on the subject of the hub.
Last night at the health committee, we had a really good paper presented.
It was the first time in about 10 or 11 years there'd been any assessment of homeless health,
and a lot of the findings in this paper are driving what's actually going to be offered
at the hub.
So I would like that paper to come to this committee because it's it's so informative
When what this week
Well, thank you for making us check our inbox is a bit more in detail because I didn't catch that yeah
I think if people didn't receive it, if you can contact me and then make sure he can get that.
Brilliant.
I missed that.
I bet that was Michael.
He's very good.
Any more questions?
Councillor McLeod.
Hi.
Just fairly straightforward ones, I think.
So the rents are concerning, of course.
I think we have a figure of about 7 ,500 homes in the rears.
I just wanted to be clear about what counts as rears.
I have one of those letters and I don't feel, for once I am not that skint, but what happened
was my letter came in a couple of days before, I have to get a job, a couple of days before
We are about 15th when we get our pay.
And so there's a false sort of, oh my God, you're six weeks over, no, I'm about to pay
five of them or four of them.
So I'm just wondering how we're calculating that and making sure that it's an actual genuine
reflection of where our residents are.
So that's a question and also a plea for higher allowances as well.
I can probably answer the question but I can't deal with the allowances.
I'm Mark Davies.
I'm the financial controller for housing and regeneration.
I mean, it's throughout the reports tonight.
There are various stats on the RIs and it was brought to my attention before the meeting
that you received this letter.
As far as I understand it, it's a snapshot in time so they will literally take the number
accounts on a given day that are in arrears when they run that report.
So if it just so happens that you were paying one day later or a payment hadn't cleared
and actually registered on your rent account, unfortunately you'll be flagged as being in
arrears.
We can't foresee what might come in two or three days, therefore it has to be the way
it's presented.
I mean, there'd always be an element of payments that might end up in suspense because they've
come in with the wrong rent account number on it and there'd be matching exercises done
to try and get those to the right accounts,
but they'll be limited in number really.
So most people have got the means nowadays to pay
and have a direct correlation with their own rent account.
Well, that makes sense.
Can I have a follow up?
No, not a follow up, another question.
Okay, thank you.
And this isn't about rent arrears.
I'm looking at our repairs,
and it feels like, yeah, we've put a lot of effort
into speeding up the repairs, and that's kind of good.
But it still doesn't feel like,
I know we've been talking about it,
it still feels like people aren't,
I'm worried that we're doing these repairs quickly
but not doing them thoroughly
and then having to go back again
and people don't feel very satisfied with what we've done
because as far as they're concerned, it's not finished.
Can we say a bit more about that?
We've definitely got some good checks and balances
in place in relation to that
because we have a vigorous post inspection regime.
So a high percentage of orders are post inspected
by officers at the council who will either call
or visit the property to check the repairs
have been completed satisfactorily.
Obviously that's not necessarily gonna capture all of them.
And there will be some cases where a resident will ring up
and say that they might not be satisfied
and will obviously then have respond to that
by sending the contractor back.
I think this probably comes back to the point
I was making earlier really about us working out
why residents aren't as satisfied as we would want them to be repairs even though repairs appear to be completed generally speaking within target
There's some kind of disconnect there and it may well be as you say something to do with the quality of the works it may
Be to do with the expectations of the resident or it might be the way that
The repairs have progressed as I say it might be someone who?
Has an order raised repair the contractor turns up
Maybe they don't have the right materials the first time so they come back a few days later
So the repair might be completed within target,
but they've had maybe two visits from the contractor.
And that's taken up their time and been frustrating for them.
So those are the sorts of issues that we
will be exploring further to try and work out what's going on
and how we can improve it.
So I'll go further.
The contract meetings that we do take place,
we look at how many post inspections are outstanding
and then what the issues that are raised with those.
So obviously if there's a theme with the contractor where not supposed inspections are failing then that would be raised with them as well
Thank you that and that is helpful
Like again, I'm not making it about my own
Tenancy, but I've had a number of bits of work done and what will tend to happen if someone show up
I've got a problem with boiler. They'll show up
Really quick brilliant. It's all done. We've let out and I'm okay. Have you great? Thanks, and they leave
And then a couple of days later I work out that it's not working and it's quite hard
then you've got to start again from scratch.
You said that there's post, you check on the contracts on a percentage of them, what percentage
are we talking about?
I'm trying to remember the percentages off hand.
I think it's about sort of 10, 20 % of orders under £250 and then those percentages increase
depending on the value of the order.
But with certain things that more sort of health and safety related though damp and mold and leaks
We do a hundred percent post inspections just to make sure that those issues are definitely resolved
This woman has this Norman has the exact figures
So up to 100
Up to a hundred pounds is 10 % post inspected
101 to 399 .9 is 20%, then 400 up to just under 1500 is 33%,
and then 1500 is 100%, and then like Mr. Crawley said,
around leaks and repairs, it's 100%.
Fabulous, thank you so much.
Are we happy to receive this report for information?
Yeah, brilliant, okay.
So we're going on now to paper number eight,
which is the affordable housing update,
in this paper number 24 -354.
And Ms. Rossi.
Thank you, Chair.
So there are two elements to this report.
The first provides an update
on the property acquisitions program
and seeks approval for maximizing
future grant opportunities to expand the program.
The second aspect of the report provides a summary
of new social rented and affordable housing supply
during 2023 to 24, and other relevant policy developments
and housing initiatives over the past year.
So starting with the property acquisitions program,
during 2023 to 24, the council completed
39 property acquisitions for temporary accommodation
with the support of grant funding from both MHCLG,
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Low Governments,
and the GLA.
As we have already touched upon, for the period 2024 to 26, the Council received an allocation
from MHCLG of 16 .6 million to acquire a total of 56 properties in the borough for temporary
accommodation to relieve homelessness pressures.
Match funding for these property acquisitions will be met within existing approved capital
budgets as previously reported to this committee in January which is an amount of 28 million
pounds over two years.
So property acquisitions provide an opportunity to increase the supply of temporary accommodation
and social rented homes within relatively quick time frames.
And this requested delegation will enable the council to respond swiftly to bid and
secure grant funding opportunities and to quickly grow the number of properties acquired
to meet housing needs in the borough.
So moving on to the delivery update.
During the year, financial year 23 -24, a total of 799 new build affordable homes were completed.
And these are set out in table one, paragraph eight.
Of these total completions, 49 % were social rent or London affordable rent to tenure,
and 51 % were intermediate tenure.
By comparison, which is also shown in the table, the number of homes completed during
20 to 23 was 577 of which 46 % were social rent or affordable rent and 54 % were intermediate
tenure.
This shows that the balance of tenure has started to shift in favor of social rented
completions, London affordable rent completions compared to the out -to -in position in 2020
which is reflective of the administration's commitment to increasing the supply of social
rented homes.
If we add in 39 property acquisitions which we previously mentioned, overall delivery
in terms of tenure increases to 51 .2 % for social rent and affordable rent and 48 .8 %
for intermediate tenure homes.
So just moving on to planning permissions during the year,
a total of 374 overall affordable homes were secured in all planning applications.
And in respect to planning policy, a partial review of the local plan also commenced during the year.
And this includes provision to strengthen the supply of homes for social rent for local people.
Significantly, the revised policy will require at least 50 % of dwellings as affordable homes
to be delivered on site with a 70 -30 split in favor of social rented tenure.
Just moving on to an update on other housing initiatives.
We've already touched on the house purchase grant and apologies, I sort of maybe confused
matters earlier, but the position is there is a target
of 40 homes, a target for 40 grants.
During 23, 24, 70 applications were received,
resulting in 26 moves, and a further 30 were carried over,
as I mentioned before.
And so, of the target for 24, 25, the 40 grants,
14 completions to date with 33 live cases,
as previously mentioned.
In terms of just moving on now
to the council's intermediate housing policy
in respect of income thresholds,
there are no changes proposed.
And whilst the council is prioritizing the delivery
of new social rented homes,
as highlighted in the above changes to the local plan,
it's also necessary to ensure that intermediate homes
Continue to prioritize and meet the needs of residents
Therefore there's a small adjustment proposed to the council's eligibility criteria
To provide clarity for applicants and this is the applicants must provide evidence of a residential address
So very clear that it's a residential address. So that is one of the recommendations in the report
In terms of Section 106 committed sums, during 23 -24,
the council utilized just over two million pounds worth of Section 106 committed
sums to support affordable housing programs and scheme costs.
That included phase one of the Afro -Dean scheme, which will provide 113 council homes for rent.
The sort of balance of affordable committed
sums at the end of the financial year was 31 .326 million.
There is a possible pipeline of just over 16 million pounds, but that is subject to
completions and various trigger points being met within the Section 106 planning agreements,
which means that these payments need to be made.
The remaining balance of funds is fully committed to schemes that continue to support provision
of social rented homes through the thousand homes program.
And there's also an amount for supporting developers to improve their provision of affordable
homes and social rented homes in particular through the planning process, albeit that's
subject to the financial liability process.
So, just to summarize briefly before questions, the requested delegation, as I mentioned,
is intended to enable us to swiftly move to secure grant funding from either MHCLG or
the GLA for future property acquisitions and also just to note that the social rented
homes during the year also increased and we also ask for the recommendation to make that
small amendment to the intermediate housing policy in terms of eligibility.
And I'll take any questions that members might have.
Thank you very much.
Questions.

7 Wandsworth Corporate Plan actions and KPIs - performance report (Paper No.24-353)

8 Affordable Housing Update (Paper No.24-354)

So first hand I saw I think was Councillor Austin.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
On just on point four, the same question, if you could provide that as well with the
39.
Thank you.
Of course, yeah.
I sit on transport and strategic planning as well.
So I've already had the meeting on the local plan.
And there's a discrepancy here.
In the paper here it says 50 % of dwellings, whereas in the local plan paper in transport
it says by habitable room.
Which is it, dwellings or habitable room?
Apologies, it is habitable rooms.
We will make that change.
That's defined by the GLA.
Councilor Kishore?
It will take some getting used to.
It has only been two years.
It is a question about tenure really.
There have been various papers at this community stating this council commitment to the
to a mixed tenure.
But at the same time, putting the priority
on increasing social rent in particular.
And I understand the arguments for that.
There is a need for more social rent homes,
and I can understand that this is perhaps an area that's
been neglected in the past.
So there's a balance to be redressed.
I guess my question is, what happens
when the balance is redressed?
Because it's not just about these 1 ,000 homes.
the national government will want you to build
a lot more homes than a thousand homes
over the coming years.
What happens when you reach that threshold,
whatever that threshold is or however you define balance,
at that point do you start to focus the same energies
and resources on promoting home ownership,
on promoting private rent, or do you continue
as you are now prioritizing social rent
to the point where we have some kind of socialist nirvana
where that's the primary, yeah, see the race face there,
the primary type of tenure.
So yeah, that's my first question.
So just in the violence sounds pretty good.
So I'm up for that.
What I'd say on the tenure balance is it depends
on what you're talking about.
So are you talking about private sites,
you're talking about council sites,
are you talking about negotiations in section 106, right?
So obviously on council -led delivery,
it's it's unlikely that in the next decade or twenty years we will be
building
from a council delivery perspective at the same scales the private market so
it makes sense for the council and the council is using his own funds to build
social housing public housing
that's well you know we think it would make it makes
a lot of sense for the council to be building social housing
let me come on to a private sites of the negotiations
such monastics
Your leader at Conservative Party Conference
describes shared ownership as hell.
So it's not just me on a panel.
So I wouldn't say it's just me that has some misgivings
about some of the products that were built
in very high numbers under your administration.
The balance, how long it will take to rebalance that
is roughly from our estimates on the policy
that we want to change,
there's a kind of missing 4 ,000 social units
that we would want to try and get back.
And that would just be lost units,
lost in the decade in which negotiations were being
led by the Conservative Party.
So but even if we got to the hitting
on absolute maximum targets of delivering 70 -30 split at 50 %
within a private scheme, that's still leaving the other 50 %
as market homes to be built and to be sold.
So, you know, I think there's a kind of misnomer here,
which is that we are somehow going to build
too much social housing within this administration
or the next administration or the administration after that.
The project that I believe in is going,
trying to get back to the levels of social housing,
which are the levels in which my parents benefited from it.
And that is gonna take a long, long time.
So I'm not nervous that we're overemphasizing
in one direction.
Private sites and the private market will continue
to build homes that are the most valuable in terms of speculative return. We can't control
that. What we're doing is we're making sure that if private development happens in this
borough, it delivers a public good and a social good that is accessible to both those at social
rent at 70 % and then 30 % to the intermediate quote unquote affordable housing that is part
of the LGA's plan. So I hope that's a full enough answer for you.
Well, you know smells like left -wing teen spirit
I guess the answer that I want and I guess the answer that wanted for the time that I've been on this committee is you know
What this council is going to do to promote homeownership and what message it has to aspiring homeowners?
I mean that there's something that's so curious and you know, it's sort of struck me
You know attending these committees now we have you know, we at the beginning of the committee, you know
We declare our interests.
It's the same thing.
We have two members of this committee who are council tenants and absolutely legitimate
choice and myself, a council leaseholder.
But that leads me to assume that the majority of you aren't people who benefit from social
rent.
You benefit from a choice of different types of tenure.
So I'm wondering, you know, why you don't believe that wants of residents should benefit from that same level of choice that you as members of the council do?
I mean, I benefited from social rent and it wasn't a choice by the time I got to the point where I would live in my own home.
So, because of the sell -offs right to buy, that choice no longer existed.
And I think what Councillor Dickerton is saying is that we're not even approaching the levels that we used to have.
So that choice no longer exists for a hell of a lot of people who desperately need homes at the moment.
Yeah, I mean that's the point is that the choice is non -existent.
Those who have choice are those at the top end who can afford to buy or own multiple properties
and therefore rent it out to other people.
Mostly my generation, right?
So like, if you want my personal circumstances, right,
in order to afford to stay in Wandsworth,
I rent the downstairs part of my mum's place, right?
I'm going to turn 33 tomorrow, right?
Like, that is not the ideal housing.
Thank you very much.
The housing crisis is one in which like,
my life has been shaped.
It's not the ideal situation that I've,
in order to fulfill the, you know,
fulfill life decisions in my life,
it has had a big cost, right?
If I could have access to social housing,
that would be the tenure that I,
I would have no problem with having that tenure
because it's secure, that you know,
you're not gonna get a 250 pound rent charge,
10%, 15%, 20 % at the end of the year.
So the idea that there's choice, I think, is,
or that it would be possible,
under the current market conditions to offer that level of choice to the many and rather than the few,
I don't think is possible at the moment. And I think the best way of trying to tackle it is
to start with trying to rebuild that social housing base, which gives people a real choice.
And then the bit that is left to the market, the bit that is about, you know, because I know what
you're getting at, right? You're saying that, like, what is the offer to someone like me,
who is private renting and paying large amounts at the moment.
And like I say, I think we've got the balance right,
because the market will still build homes for sale.
Sadly, I don't think those homes will be the homes that
the people privately renting will be able to get access to.
So the bit that the market is in charge of is the bit that
isn't going to solve the crisis either.
If I had my way in a magic wand, then I think we're getting really close
there with the renters rights bill, protecting those who are currently in
private rented sector and making sure that they get longer tendencies that
aren't changed every year and that the rents aren't increased constantly means
that people can save up for a deposit. Yeah I think there should be fewer landlords.
I think there should be fewer landlords. Well I know see that's where you're
wrong because I think when a landlord sells that's precisely that's a supply
into the market of the kind of people that you think want to get access to the
housing market. So think about the hundreds of thousand people currently in
and poor quality private renter sector
and temporary accommodation.
If those people were all adequately housed
in good quality social housing,
there would be hundreds of thousand plus properties
in London which would be available to either renters
or sold by those landlords to first time buyers, right?
So trickle, you have a kind of trickle down mentality.
I haven't, we lift everybody up by freeing up
at the lower end and it's more equitable
because those at the sharpest end get access to a tenancy
that otherwise they don't survive in the market.
You know, like it's not nice for me
but I can survive in the market.
There are people in the type of accommodation who aren't surviving in the market at the moment.
And so that's why the party has to be at them first.
And then you unlock the possibility for people to say, you know what, social housing isn't for me anymore.
I'm earning enough money.
I'm going to try and move on to another another tenure type.
And frankly, you know, with the changes to right to buy the social contract says I will leave that social entered home and I will enter to go buy another place.
I won't buy that social entered home because my issue with right to buy was that it wasn't replaced.
We get to a stage whereby we replace every council at home by two to one, fantastic,
but we're not there yet.
So you say those who have the means can make the choice to enter into the market, but we
need to look after those who don't have the choice.
That is the political position of this council, my politics, what has led me to the decisions.
That was a very long ideological discussion, but that is, yeah, yeah, yeah.
I think choice exists for people with the resources and in a market with...
I'm not against choice, I'm very pro -choice.
No, that's right.
But that exists for those people with the resources.
And in a very tight market like housing,
that choice is being reduced every day.
So what we're doing in this council
is trying to push people without resources
to be able to have at least a small choice.
Councillor Rigby.
Yeah.
Actually, while we're on the subject of changes
around housing and helping people,
Could the cabinet lead just talk about some of the changes that are coming in with
Leasehold because obviously one of the barriers to people buying a home is because so many are getting ripped off with these
Annual fees they have to pay could you talk about how that might help?
some of the private renters
yeah, so
uh
service charges in private rented blocks
a perennial problem I've had.
I get lots of case work about it,
and it's quite a hard one because the council,
the council can give advice and give support.
If it's a housing association shared ownership,
we can get more directly involved
because we have relationships with housing associations.
Our service charges have gone up,
but they remain incredibly competitive
compared to the private sector.
There is inflationary pressure in service charges,
and I've written personally to all our leaseholders
to explain the position we're in.
And you know, I know the other side
would be facing the same challenge that we are on that.
But we are as transparent as possible.
We explain what's going on.
We try and consult early, particularly
on things like major works.
But if you're in some of these private management
organizations where the developer is kind of checked
out, given it over to a management organization,
maybe moved further away, it was once an affordable scheme,
but now the service charges are almost like a rental cost.
There are some places where it's like 9 ,000 pounds a year.
So that the aspirational point about having home ownership becomes false
and I think I think that's what your your leader was talking about at the conference was that shared ownership had become hell because
That the affordableness of it was no longer affordable because of those additional charges and that the model wasn't working anymore
So yeah, I mean that's the thing in the housing crisis. There are currently no winners, you know mortgages are going up
If you're trapped in a in a privately rented shared ownership or lease or block you can be hit with very hard service charges
It's why I think a mass social housing building program is a way of trying to level the playing field.
Councillor Kivin, yes.
So, three separate questions here.
Firstly on the delegation.
Was the delegations agreed?
Will we be informed of the bid when the bids are made?
Because I'd like to be told that the bid has been made, etc.
I'm not stopping the bid from going, but I want to know that it's being made and scale
and all of that.
On the question of the amendment conditions, the applicant must provide evidence of a residential
address.
Does it have to be a one -zoth address?
And if it does, do you not think that condition should be made as clear as possible so it
isn't any other residential address?
And my third point is this is about the house purchase grants.
That perhaps is a question to the cabinet member.
You see the demand is quite significant, 70, and your target is 40.
And in a way, it seems to me that it's an area where you might consider changing your
target from 40 upwards to say that it
genuinely reflects
What the current demand is I mean otherwise there is a real risk that
people get
Excited about putting the bid in and then they're told to wait forever or whatever so the three separate points
Which one to take the first point?
Yes, so in terms of
Updating on when grant funding is received for a new program.
Yes, so when the bid is made, this will be reflected through the corporate plan updates.
So those updates on when we bid and been successful.
Maybe something for Mr. Worth to take a stand on that.
It's just the saying, as an opposition spokesman, I'd like to be told that the department has made a bid
and this is it and this is the amount we are seeking.
I'm not stopping that bid being made.
I am just wanting to be in the loop that the bid's been made.
And it's just a way of sharing that information.
I'm not...
All our GLA grant bids or...
Yeah, it's a bit basic.
We are asked to delegate to officers the right to make the bids.
And I'm just saying that when they have exercised their delegated power,
that I be told that they've exercised and this is the amount they're seeking.
As in, well, if we're successful or just if we've made the bid.
Which we're making a bid.
It says knowing that you've bought a lottery ticket is just as well as knowing that you've won the lottery ticket.
Because I think when you've won the lottery ticket we'll find out anyway.
I might have to come back to you on whether, you know, because every time we fail a bid you'll kind of,
is it we're going to play politics with bid making? I think it's just, no.
I'm sorry, I don't really understand.
Actually, I could end up asking you a high question.
I don't want to go down that way.
Okay, you just want to know.
Actually, when you made a bid and you're unsuccessful,
the GLA will inform me.
So I'm not sure that is in secret here.
Okay, I don't see a problem with that.
I was just going to add that through the course
of the committee's normal business,
we regularly update the committee on the amount
of grant funding that comes in through papers like this and so on.
In terms of like a real -time update, we'll happily take that away.
I personally don't think that's a difficult thing to achieve.
So yeah, if you leave that with us.
So, the second part of the question.
So, the second part of the question actually will be the central address, whether we should
make it very clear.
That's the ones at the address.
Yes, Councillor Govindia, in the first instance, absolutely, there's a cascade process for
eligibility and the amount of time that properties are marketed to residents of Wandsworth and
then it cascades out if there's no demand.
So for a set period of time, the eligibility criteria states that these properties must
to be marketed to residents with an address within the borough.
The rationale for being very clear about the residential address
is that some applicants have tried to apply and make the case that they
have an address in the borough, but it's not a residential address.
And that is something that we want to be very clear.
It must be a residential address, not, for example, a hotel.
to a borough residential address, or can it be a residential address anywhere, even outside
the borough?
It's a residential address for the application, and residents outside of the borough can apply,
but their priority is lower than if they live within the borough, and the process of marketing
those properties will go through a cascade for set periods of time, which are agreed
during the sort of planning process.
So the Section 106 agreements will require
that a marketing strategy is agreed with the council,
and then the properties are marketed for set periods of time
and there's a priority and a cascade.
But everybody has to have a residential address,
and that's the key to the request here,
that it must be a residential address
and not any other type of address,
because we have had situations where
people are sort of staying in hotels,
and that isn't really in the spirit.
Could we add what Councillor Windy is getting at,
which is to just clarify that priority is made
for Wandsworth residents, because I think that is important.
I do agree with you, yeah.
Yes, so that's set out within the intermediate housing policy
that the council has, but we'd be very happy to review that
and bring that back to members.
That's something that we would be happy to do, yeah.
The bird element as well, isn't it?
Increasing your target of 40 upwards to reflect the demand for home purchase grants.
Happy to take that away and come up with a target that we think is better.
No problem with that.
Any more questions?
Councillor Austyn.
Thank you very much.
As the cabinet member alluded to earlier, I'm a fan of buying stock back.
It seems on this that 56 properties seems to be pretty ambitious.
And I was trying to get my head around the cabinet members thinking about leveling everybody up.
And I'm trying to work out, I think the way he was doing it was by crashing the property market
and bringing the property prices down to meet the people that he's bringing up.
But there is a serious point here, which is we don't have a supply issue.
We have an awful lot of stock on the market on the open market and we have a very big checkbook
Why don't we go and acquire some of that stock we could get 250 units?
We could get thousand units we could we could buy entire buildings in the Bassey power station development. There is still
42 flats available in Riverside quarter, which is a building that was finished four years ago, and they still remain unsold
We've got the new acres site, which has got 400 flats coming online.
Shortly I know they're PRS, but we could look at, why can't we buy more stock and solve
the crisis more quickly?
I've just done a quick maths, that's like £300 million.
And then you'll be complaining about us borrowing loads of money.
We voted on a loan of £450 million, so we've got the money.
Yeah, but that's building council loans.
but you want to loan another 300 million pounds,
is that what you're telling us?
So 300 million is fine, but 450 million is leaflets
going about.
We've got available stuff, why don't we buy it
instead of build it?
So, a one bed studio apartment in Batsy Power Station
goes for 1 .2 million pounds, so I wouldn't say
that that is the best value for money.
You're literally in the power station at that point,
not around the power station?
I've never heard someone ask me to buy market sale
flats around the power station.
That is an interesting one from one's a from.
I think you must declare your interest in that.
I wouldn't say that would be the best value from taxpayers money
if we were to do that.
So when we do buy back units, it's
based on an evaluation about around the cost for us
to build and we factor in the land price. So the thousand homes program, we're not buying
any land. So that's why it's a very effective use of public money because every pound is
spent on bricks and mortar. Now the rough cost to build a council unit when you're factoring
grants, so without grant, just raw cost at the moment, but we obviously get grant from
the GLA for building it, which reduces the cost. So the balance between where we buy
back and the thousand homes is a balance between cost per unit and obviously the like asset
that we're gaining. So if we so we will often buy you know leasehold flats are being sold
in our own estates. That's a very easy way of getting a buyback. We did that the first
year in office we got a grant to do it. But for a similar price you know there are some
units that are going for 350 or 400 ,000 pounds on our estates,
dependent on the bedroom sizes.
And we'll buy those when we're being offered
grant, because then that will lower the grant.
But then when the grant's gone and we're just
buying at market.
Now, with 1 ,000 homes, we are building assets
that on market sale, we're building them for 400 ,000
pounds.
That's not including grants.
Obviously, there's grant, and obviously, there's variation.
And I don't want you to use these exact numbers
in your next leaflet.
But you get, you know, we're building homes that are,
some of the market value of these homes
are gonna be like 800 ,000 pounds.
They are green, brand new, highest space standards
available, often built to the needs of existing,
we're not selling them off.
You're not selling them off.
No, I think like the value of that asset
that we're building is like so much higher.
It's so much higher than we could,
Yeah, I'm trying, exactly.
I'm trying to speak in the language of conservative party members.
Um, it's so much higher.
Yeah, exactly.
It's so much higher.
No, no, but the quality and the value of that asset is so much higher than what we
can buy on the, buy, you know, back necessarily from our own existing stock.
So, you know, we're talking about units that can be wheelchair accessible for two
people with like four other people living in those properties, like really difficult
properties that you cannot find on the open market.
We're talking about down so that homes built specifically for down sizes so that have a garden or on the ground floor or one beds
We're talking up
I was on the font the way which actually is one of your schemes rally and
Be on the balcony and the builder said so that that's a that's a two million pound view from this balcony
You know, that's a beautiful view of Richmond Richmond Park. That's council housing. That's
Yeah, yeah
High quality really really high quality housing
So I think it's completely like it's comparing apples and oranges to compare what we can buy and what we can build based on the factor
of using
every pound that we spend
Every pound that we spend because it's public money has to be the most bang
most bang for buck most bang for luck and so the thousand homes program is on our own lands no land price and
incredibly
Valuable bespoke high quality asset that we're building for local people that will be owned by them for a hundred years
compared to getting grant to buy back old properties,
which we can use,
and which are also a very important strategic arm,
but they cannot be compared in the same way.
They just can't.
They are adding to the supply of social housing.
But if we were to take all the money from the 1000 Homes
and just go on a buying spree,
you know what would happen.
You're an estate agent.
Then there would be a run on the market, right?
One of the councils is about to splurge,
then prices rocket up. You know the market better than I do, right?
So, you know, that would not be a smart thing for us to do as a council and that's why we do a mixed thing.
We do, you know, we do a mixed economy. I know it's a radical idea, but...
We're getting discounts for building quality homes from the GLA, so I mean...
Just think of the... Why would they sell at build cost?
Why would a developer sell to me at build cost unless there was a?
Okay, if I can find okay if I come if I thought that that's true that's true
So if we find blocks if we plan and this you're totally right if we find a scheme that is going under
That wants to sell to us at build cost with their
Building contribution added in we've done that and we did that on the Higgins site
We flipped we flipped homes that private developer on one of your schemes
Into social rent houses at a very very good deal and we intervened in the market
We're happy to do that, but I can tell you that those chances are not
They're few and far between that is not the norm that developers in Wandsworth with land values and house prices in Wandsworth
The bar that has the most houses valued over a million pounds in the entire country
It is not often the best the best option for us and the homes are going to be a massive
Legacy for you know for the future for Wandsworth whereas you know if we're buying older homes
so that there's a bigger maintenance cost,
there's a bit, you know, there's also
that they might have to be torn down
within the period of time, you know,
that these other houses will be going.
The best benefit is speed.
The best benefit is speed.
So the reason why we do do it,
because that's what I'm saying,
I'm not saying it's not a bad model,
but the best benefit for us is speed,
because you can get houses much quicker
than going through the entire planning process.
So we're doing, we're covering all our bases.
We're happy to go and allocate money
to purchasing more.
If you, Councillor Austin, if you have loads of secretly cheap properties to sell us at
discount price, you know, we speak to ABDIS, the lawyers, and we make sure you're conscious
of interest, but we do want to, we do want to purchase.
We do want to purchase, but what I'm saying is, Wandsworth is a very, it's a very tight
market, you know, some of the highest house prices.
I think we have gone from a housing committee to a game show very quickly.
Is there any other questions?
Can we support the recommendations for this paper?
Okay, brilliant.
So on to item number 9.
So the housing services activity update, paper number 24355.
We've only got 15 minutes to go.
So can we go straight to questions with this?
Is that okay?
Fabulous.
Is there any questions?
Any other questions?
No, okay.
Marley has taken over the chairing of this meeting.
So are we okay to support this for information?
Brilliant, okay.
So, sorry it's a decision paper, sorry, yes.
So we're happy to support recommendations A and B.
Okay, and then we're on...
I kind of think you should discuss this paper.
I'm just saying as the cabinet member that I think you should, because it's for decision.
Marlene's looking daggers at you.
I'm thinking of.
Are there any questions?
I struggle to see what is different from the paper that was presented a couple of cycles ago.
The only difference I see in the figures is, A, the date and the reasons for the 56 properties.
But the rest of the table is exactly the same as it was before.
Am I missing something here?
I think that if that's right, and I'm not saying it isn't, that sounds like too big a coincidence to be right, if that makes sense.
So I want to go away and check that.
24267 has all the figures the same apart from the date and reasons for the 56 properties.
If, well, apologies on the assumption that there's been an error there and the wrong
documents have been attached, but we'll certainly check that for you.
And correct it, appendix B.
Thank you.
Any more questions?
So can we support the recommendation?
So can we vote yes.
So who is in favour?
Okay.
Who is against?
and who is abstaining.
And then we've...
Sorry, Mr Choate, but there's been...
Yes.
There's been no questions, unfortunately.
I feel... I feel awful.
But, yeah.
But, yeah.
It was next time.
Ms Thworth said it was a good experience.
Oh, sorry.
We'll go on.
Sorry about that.
So, moving on.
We've been told now that you can stay on for the next one as well.

10 Housing - Q2 Budget Monitoring Report (Paper No.24-356)

So, item number 10, housing.
Quarter 2, budget monitor report, so paper 24 -356.
And Ms. Davies.
I'm happy to take any questions on this one.
Basically, the position presented is showing a 5 .187 million overspend for services under
the remit of this committee.
And as we didn't discuss in the last paper, it's for the reasons that are set out in the previous paper.
So I sort of stole my explanation a little bit.
Okay.
So any questions on this one?
Councillor Givinha.
So therefore, my question really is, is the forecast of 5 .187 realistic,
Given that we have had an drifting numbers, upward drifting numbers in Quarter 1 and Quarter 2
and the prospect of that ebbing isn't there. Previous people didn't suggest that.
So all I'm saying is, is that a realistic forecast or are we going to say in the end of Quarter 4
that we missed the revised forecast by X again?
Okay, Mr. Wirth.
Thanks, Councillor.
Just to say that the numbers in this paper have been based on the revised forecast just
dealt with in the previous paper.
So it's reflecting the latest numbers.
It's also reflecting the latest unit rates and applying to those an assumption of continued
inflationary increases over the balance of the year.
So, using that methodology, and, you know, everyone around this table understands, I
know they do, that this is a very dynamic thing.
We've got a raging homelessness crisis across London, as the previous paper said.
So, you know, I can't give you a cast -time guarantee that these numbers are going to
be the year -end numbers, but they are based on a different methodology to previously and
on our latest forecast.
So, hopefully, they're reliable from that perspective.
Second point, which I was back of six.
I mean, I made this point last time,
which is about the language about increasing competition
from central governments to house asylum seekers.
It's the same language again.
And I really, I mean, I know what it is saying.
And I just do think that this is an area of sensitivity which
perhaps we could try and make it less overt as it states here.
That's just that.
Yes, I think firstly an apology for not picking that up from the previous comment.
I think that's valid and we'll look to do that in future updates.
Any more questions?
Do you want to speak on it?
I just think because the other two, I know it's late at night, but the other, these two
The papers are very serious, but they're very important.
They are significant overspends on a statutory service based on a large increase in
demands that was not factored in at the July numbers that we got, which shows that demand for
temporary accommodation has gone up in a way that we hadn't planned for.
And we just had a big discussion about why we're doing all the things we're doing.
And it is largely because of the unprecedented pressures that are being placed on this statutory service.
So the paper prior reports on the fact that our preventions are going down.
A lot of our staffing, a lot of the reforms that we've done to try and tackle this, they are effective.
They are working, but the scale of the problem is going faster than we are able to catch up with.
And that is not a place that we wanted to get to.
We will be bringing forward options and ideas
of how we can reform further.
But like I say, the previous paper highlights all the areas
in which, on performance grounds,
we should be getting on top of this.
But the scale of presentations in August
was higher than any previous time in the 18 months, right,
which was meant to be a low period for us.
So, you know, this is the reality of what we're dealing with.
This is why, you know, we just had a back and forth on social housing.
This is why that supply of social housing is so important because currently this is
a lot of money being spent on temporary accommodation that is just public money being taken into
unproductive rents and often outside of Wandsworth.
So you know, it's a serious issue and we take it very seriously as a council.
I just wanted to have that on record because even though I know it's late, I think it's
important that we recognize that.
I think those preventions were going up rather than down.
Sorry, sorry.
Yeah, it's late.
So, for once, I actually agree with you.
I mean, it's an important matter of taxpayers' money that we're discussing here.
Isn't there an argument for having a paper like this earlier in the committee?
Yeah, so it was because we knew we had a company who don't actually cover housing services.
They just cover the tenants issue.
So it was almost like a courtesy to them that we would cover this a bit later on.
What I can say though is that this paper is informing you of the challenge that we are now facing at a period when we didn't think we'd be facing it.
And so papers will be coming forward with reforms that we're coming up with to try and
tackle this overspend and also get on top of, while I say things are going in the right direction in terms of the service provision.
how we really deal with what is a major financial challenge to the capital.
Like in Wandsworth we are in a place whereby this isn't an existential risk.
There are other councils in London that are not in that place, right?
Like this is general fund spend.
So this is bigger than Wandsworth and so we want to be a council that leads on this stuff.
And so we will be talking in that spirit and coming up with reforms,
but also working with colleagues across London to how we can get on top of this.
Because this is a crisis that must be solved.
We cannot have this number of people entering
into temporary accommodation at this rate.
It's just not sustainable.
I'm sorry.
Cabinet member makes a point about general fund.
Well, of course, all homelessness is on general fund
and all boroughs have the same thing.
And in fact, there are boroughs in the worst position than us.
And in fact, the way in which this borough has historically
discharge that statutory duty is largely within its own geographical boundaries,
and if not, very close by. So in that sense, it's got an enviable record
compared to the rest of the thing. One of the things that neither of those two
papers kind of talk about is in a sense arresting the flow of
homelessness and the success. We've got staff to do whatever is work, but
don't get the full flavor of exactly what is it that's
happening, it's trying to do it, and how much.
I mean, there's a piece in there about people
like to be homeless but staying with friends and family.
Clearly, there is more to explore,
for example, in that area.
There is perhaps tougher gatekeeping to explore as well,
because there will always be cases where tougher gatekeeping
might at least delay or avert the issue.
And a greater engagement with private landlords
where there are sometimes Section 21
notices without much regard.
And all of those things, and I know
we've done that in bits in the past
and with differing success.
And perhaps what time has come for actually a paper that
pulls everything together and say,
what we've done, how successful it's been,
how it can be further tightened, improved, and so on.
So there is almost a need to say,
do a complete audit of what was done.
And then what are other options available?
And of course, before long, what we're doing,
somebody else is doing, and somebody else
is doing, we need to do.
So we need to learn from that as well.
And there may be a solution, which
is not just a borough solution, but a regional solution
or a London -wide solution.
And there have been in the past, certainly I know of it
and was involved in it, London -wide conversations
about creating stock or certainly creating
TA stock in a way that was both of good standard
and easily serviceable.
So perhaps that's a paper that is worthy of producing
and that's what the paper was about debate.
Just to try and reply to that in a sort of general sense.
So you'll be aware, and some of this
is obviously politically controversial,
this paper references the Renters' Rights Act.
It was mentioned earlier.
This paper mentions the turbulence
that almost certainly will flow from that reform.
It's the biggest reform of the private rented sector
for 30 years odd.
More widely, but once that is in,
The hope is, given that Section 21 no fault evictions are 25 % odd of our presentation, there'll be a benefit.
The size and scale of that we don't know.
But what they did want to say is on Friday, I attended a meeting which brought together and
was the first sort of tangible sign of the new government's intention to, well they've done it,
to create a cross departmental working group and approach to managing homelessness.
Because a lot of the issues that drive it are structural and not within the control of any council.
They must rest with central government.
So there are encouraging signs and I think the things that you mentioned there,
Councilor Govindia, are things we're happy to come back and report on.
And pulling it all together, as you say, within what we control, we can do.
But a lot of the solutions have got to be the structural problems in the housing market, some of which we've touched on today.
Thank you.
Is that last question, you wouldn't like to add anything to that, Ms. Cho, just so that everyone has had a go tonight.
Just to say really in regards to some of the things just mentioned,
and we're trying to coach and train our staff on the front line because I don't know if
you're aware, but homelessness, finding people with homelessness experience now is like gold
dust. So we're having to recruit. And when we are, we're training them in regards to
learning about the act and applying the right principles in terms of prevention. And we
We are actually now doing a roll in contract where recruitment, where we are looking to
get people in but as soon as we have recruited into the post we are going back out on advert.
Just to give a bit of flavour, in the last recruitment round we had 18 shortlisted staff
members.
Only 20 % of them had homelessness experience.
When we did interview, there was only six candidates that were selected and we ended
up recruiting three of them because 50 % of them got jobs elsewhere.
Only one of those officers had previous homelessness experience previously.
So it's just to give you the sheer size of what we're having to do and the things that
we're trying to embrace with the prevention agenda and trying to get our numbers up in
in terms of helping support the residents of Wandsworth.
Thank you so much, Ms. Joe.
Is there any more questions?
And I hope there's not, because it's half past 10.
Yes.
Are we okay?
Okay, so can we note this report for information?
And thank you so much for squeezing everything in
within a lot of time.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, cheers, bye -bye.
.
.
.