Transcript

[ Silence ] [ Silence ] [ Silence ] [ Silence ]

Good evening everyone. Welcome to the Welland Hatfield Borough Council's Cabinet Housing Panel. I now need to make a number of statutory announcements. Those present at this meeting should be aware that by law it can be recorded by anyone attending. Therefore, the meeting can be filmed, audio recorded, photographed or reported electronically by the use of social media. Anyone recorded must cease as soon as the meeting is declared closed. To confirm, this council meeting is being live streamed. Therefore, anyone present should be aware that they're being recorded and broadcast via the internet. For this meeting, should a vote be required, we will do so by raising our hands. Please can I remind members to indicate when you wish to speak by raising your hand and only turn on your microphones when called upon. Thank you. OK, we go on to the agenda. Number one, apologies and substitutions. We've received an apology from Councillor Lass. Councillor Fitzsimons is here tonight as a substitute and we've received an apology from Councillor Margaret Balasim. Agenda item two, can I ask members to please confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held 31st of January 2024 by a show of hands. Thank you. Agenda item three, can I invite members to raise any urgent business to be considered under agenda item 11? Yes, Paul. I'm not sure whether this is the appropriate point at which to do this, but I'd like to suggest that we vary the agenda so that we look at the work programme, so item six, we look at that after item 10 because there may well be aspects of the work programme. We want to adjust in the light of the issues that will be raised in item 10. And it seems to me sensible to agree the work programme once we've agreed what should be on the work programme. So, that's my proposal. Yes, I agree. Thanks, Paul. So, we'll move agenda item six to after agenda item 10. Can I invite members to make any declarations of interest in relation to items on the agenda? Yes, Paul. So, yeah, it's County Council just in case. Thank you. Number five, public question time and petitions. We've received no public questions or petitions. I will now hand over to Chris Barnes to explain how the panel works. Thank you, Chair. We have a number of new councillors at the start of the committee cycle. Similar to last year, we're just going to run through a couple of slides to provide some context on what cabinet housing panel does. So, in terms of cabinet panels, they're set up to deal with policy and development in individual and specialised areas. So, we do have a number of them. This is one of those panel meetings. There's cross-party political representation with the chair, vice-chair and members that have already been selected. We operate in line with the constitution. So, the constitution sets out what cabinet panels there are and what they consider. And essentially, we consider reports and make recommendations to cabinet. So, in terms of cabinet housing panel itself, it's been established to consider items that relate to the council's housing functions. As you'll be aware, we do have a significant stock of houses that we own and we also have a number of housing services as well. So, there's a few examples on the slides of what we do, housing maintenance and repairs, housing needs, the homelessness and allocations, housing development, income and home ownership teams, private sector housing, independent living and housing strategy work as well. Our panel includes representatives from our residents panel and the meetings are scheduled on a quarterly basis. In terms of the scope of consideration, so the panel considers results of performance reports in relation to the provision of services to tenants and leaseholders and the repair and maintenance of housing properties. We monitor the progress of a number of strategies and plans in the housing area. We consider reports arising from scrutiny of our housing operations and we receive updates on the council's housing development programme as well, where we're building new social housing. And in terms of the format and content of meetings, the content is managed through the CHP work plan. So, at the start of the year, there is a draft work plan as a sort of initial starter which identifies topics or items that are likely to come up at future meetings. There will be other items that come up during the year as well. There are some standing items at every meeting, so you'll see us discussing the latest performance reports and reviewing the work plan on a quarterly basis. There are some regular items that don't come to every meeting, but you'll sort of periodically have updates on, such as the delivery of the Affordable Homes Programme. Members are open to identify areas where you'd wish to receive more information or reports. That might be that we ask officers to come and present or it might be that we circulate information in between meetings. And directors, assistant directors and senior managers will be present to respond to queries and support the committee in doing their role. So, thank you. -Thanks, Chris. So, we're moving agenda item number six. So, we're now on to number seven. I hand back over to you, Chris. -Thank you. So, this is one of our items that you'll see at each meeting, our performance reports. So, officers have prepared just a brief covering note, but the detail is in the appendix, where it sets out all of the performance indicators for Q4 of 23/24. I'm happy to open to any questions. -Thank you. Does anyone have any kind of polls? -Yeah, I'm a bit bemused by me appearing as seat four on the thing, but that is me. One of the things that I wanted to ask was, I think it would be useful for those who have not seen this kind of performance report before, to clarify why the numerical order of the indicators is not sequential. -I think it's just how the system pulls them out. I don't think there's a logic behind it. -Jill? -Thank you. I'd like to ask about the performance with voids, because this inability to reach the targets has been happening for some time, I think. And I know it's fair enough that there are improvements, we are told. But they do seem still to be wildly out of sync with the targets for the ordinary work, 18 days, and the numbers are 60, 85, 157, 132, and so on. And then for major works, 45, that's not quite so bad. And in a way, there is an explanation for why the major works voids are taking longer, which is that we've changed the way we do it in that we do everything at once. So obviously, it's going to take longer, and it makes much more sense to do that. But where there's just a few repairs to be done, I can't understand why it really is so much, so much out of sync with the target, and whether the target needs to be made a bit higher, or whether there are things still not having been sort of improved that are causing us not to be able to meet the target. I'd just be interested to know what reasons there might be. Thank you. -Thank you, Councillor. So you're right, this is a topic that we came to CHP several months ago, probably around this time last year, around voids. So there has been some improvement in the quality of the voids that we're getting back. So that definitely has improved, but we still haven't -- we're not getting them back as quickly as we would like. And that is partly because of the works that we're doing in the voids. Some of them are major works, major component replacements, windows, doors, and so forth, rewires of property. But some of them are still quite substantial repairs, even if they're not the major components. But we are working with a contractor to try to drive those timescales down, because it's good that we're meeting the quality standards that we require, but we also need them done in a more timely fashion. There is a point about the actual targets, as well, and I think that has been something that's been discussed in this forum before, whether we need to revise those. And I think that's something we'll look at. We'll look at what other providers are setting as their targets, because there are benchmarking figures out there, and that's something that I think we need to review, particularly in the light of the additional works that are being done in voids. So we'll take that back as an action to look at, as well. -Paul. -Thank you. I'd like to ask about the targets that are set on here and who it is that has set those. Are they a mixture of us as the Cabinet panel? Is it the administration? Is it the government? Because there's one particular one that seems remarkably low, I have to say. And the one I'm referring to is BPI 31, where it's the percentage of housing repairs where the work is completed right first time, and the target is 70%. Now, call me someone who's demanding in terms of getting a decent outcome, but three out of 10 times a contractor turning up and it not being done right seems a bit high to me. I think if we're aspirational as an organisation to have a really top-notch repair system, that target should perhaps be higher. -So, I may start this off, and I may ask for assistance. So, in terms of the setting of the target, that will be in the contract. They're not national targets. They will be something that is set in the contract. And there is a delicate balance to be achieved between getting the repair done right first time, which is really, really important, especially for those simpler, more straightforward jobs. And so the target does look quite low for that, and actually the achievement is much greater, the achieving above that target, which is a good thing. And I know there's been discussions about whether that's the right target. Should it be raised, or should we focus on one of the other repairs, KPIs? But getting the work done for the more straightforward jobs first time is a good thing for the council, and it's a good thing for the residents. I don't know, Elliot, is there anything else you wanted to add to that? -No, just one thing. Sometimes what we need to do is look at what the job is. So, certain jobs we won't be able to complete first time -- roofing works, potentially fencing works. So, it's getting that balance right. The targets are contractual. I do believe they do increase as the contract will go on, so they will progressively get higher and higher. And obviously we're not that far into this contract, but it is to alleviate the jobs where we know we're not going to be able to complete them right first time. -Yeah, I do think also it's an interesting way of phraseology, completed right first time, because you mentioned a roofing job, but, you know, a roofing job is going to be, you know, somebody surveying it, then somebody going back, and then somebody going back after that. But I would classify that whole operation as the first time, if that makes sense, because you've done the roof the first time. So, it would only fail on that context in my perspective if the roof wasn't put on properly, the wrong tiles or, you know, one of the ridge tiles came off or something like that. That would then trigger it having not been done right first time in that context. Is that different from how that's measured in this KPI? -Yes. So, in the contract, the definition is first time fixed, which is why the target's slightly lower than what we'd normally expect. -And it's probably just worth adding, as well, that in terms of the general list of targets, they're set through cabinet and full council. And so, there will be ones that are set in line with our contracts, but the rest are through that process. -Thank you. Any other comment? Oh, hello, Lynn. -Thank you. I was just going to say, we sort of go slow on what everybody else has said. I think it's the terminology that needs changing rather than the targets at times, because if you're doing a washer, you can do a first-time fix. That's fine. As you say, if you're doing roof, perhaps that needs to be more fixed in the time. You know, a specified time ought to be a different target. So, if something -- if you put a new roof on, the normal time, you don't expect it done, you know, less than two months, then, as you say, if it's done within two months, it's first-time fix. But I think for anybody from the outside looking in, it's the terminology that makes it look bad rather than the actual work. So, perhaps that's something that could be considered, so we're not comparing fish with fowl, which I think sometimes we're a bit in danger of doing. Thanks. -Thanks, Lynn. Julie. -Thank you, Archer. I would just like to say, I agree with Paul and Lynn, which is unusual. But also, I had to ring our plumber 'cause we had a plumbing issue. And he said, 'cause we know him well, Oh, can you take a picture of the problem and send it to me? I know not everyone can do that. Not everyone has the facility. But would that also help? Because if you send a picture, they can see what the issue is and be better prepared for it, just a thought. -So, we do request people send us pictures for repairs. -Thanks. Any other comments, Roger? -Yeah, I just wondered on the inaccessibility of certain properties for electric tests and gas even, do we actually charge tenants for our legal costs? And we're -- -We do, indeed. -We do? -Yes. -So, it hangs over them. Thanks. -Anyone else? Okay, can I ask members to note the contents of the report? So, Agenda Item 8, Housing Compliance Report, for which we'll hand over to Elliot. -Thank you, Chair. This report follows the last report on the 12th of January, 2024. Details all of the areas of compliance. As noted in the KPIs, there are two that aren't 100% in the areas of compliance, which is gas and electric, which is due to no access. I'm happy to answer any questions. -Thank you. Any questions? Okay. Can we please note the report? Number 9, Tenancy Strategy and Policy, for which I'll hand over to Sue. -I just have a couple of slides just to summarise the report. -There we are. So, this revised Tenancy Strategy and Policy came to CHP in January of this year to ask the panel for approval to go to public consultation, and they set out our commitment as a provider of social housing to high-quality housing, good-thriving communities and sustainable tenancies. And as a part of the Tenancy Strategy, we're required to consult with registered providers, such as housing associations. So, the consultation took place for four weeks from the 2nd of February, and we also, as well as registered providers, we also consulted with private landlords and landlords registered through our PAL scheme. We received seven responses from 19 registered providers, and they were 100% were in support of our move to end fixed-term flexible tenancies, which the panel had a report on that last year and approved that. All of the providers do provide assured lifetime tenancies, which was good to see. Many of them also have introductory tenancies, which we don't use, but that's pretty common within housing associations. Of those that responded, just under half offer or issue fixed-term tenancies, but half again of those say that they plan to cease using those in the next five years. So, it looks like there's more of a move towards more secure tenancies, which is a good thing, and that's what the aspiration of this council is. So, in terms of the Tenancy Strategy itself, it covers the types of tenancies to be granted. It talks about fixed terms. If there are fixed-term tenancies, the length of those terms. And it talks about other matters around the tenancy itself. In terms of the four key objectives of the strategy, the primary aim is to secure lifetime tenancies, as we've said, that's our preferred approach in the borough. But we also want tenants to be able to have a clear understanding of their tenancy, obviously to try and keep their tenancy for as long as possible. And if their tenancy is threatened with ending, that they're given advice and support to prevent homelessness. In terms of the tenancy policy, the second document in the pack, this is our policy about how we go about tenancies in this council. And as I say, the preference is for lifetime secure tenancies. It sets out our approach, and it also talks about things like tenancy sustainment, and we do put a lot of work into sustaining tenancies. It talks about tackling fraud, subletting in our properties, and obviously managing discretionary succession rights, passing on tenancies within families. So it covers all those sorts of things, and in those bullet points there around fixed-term tenancies, which we no longer have, mutual exchanges, and how we offer tenancies to new tenants to us. So that's a very brief description of the paper. If I can take any questions? Julie? Thank you very much, Chair. How is it handled if, for instance, a mother and son, or mother and daughter, or that kind of relationship are living in a council flat, and one of them dies, how do we tackle the resultant fallout? Because obviously, they're going to be distressed. They're going to be worried. And to have a housing worry on top is not the best thing. So how do we handle it, please? Thank you. So thank you for the question. That's a good question. So first and foremost, we would look at what the tenancy agreement says. And in most circumstances, there will be provision for that in terms of daughter or son and succession of the tenancy. If it doesn't say that in there, then we will be looking, obviously, to deal with it as empathetically and sympathetically as possible, particularly in a time like that, this, that. And it may well be that we need to then look at our discretionary policies around succession. So we would look to see what we could do within those policies to ensure that the family is catered for in terms of a tenancy, because it wouldn't be in our interests or theirs for them to the surviving child or daughter or son to be homeless. Paul? Thank you. It was also an area that I noticed when reading the policy. So I'm on page 37 of the pack. Right at the bottom, it talks about succession. And correct me if I'm wrong, but the expectation is that a parent and a sibling-- sorry, a parent and a child don't automatically have joint tenancy unless they're both assessed as having a housing need as under statute. So it seems to suggest that it would only be where there is discretionary succession. So is that the only mechanism where succession in that circumstance is allowable, that it's a discretionary aspect of it rather than a policy-driven one? Yeah, that's absolutely right. So I mean, we act within the law. And obviously, whatever is said in the tenancy agreement. And so if it's not catered for in the tenancy agreement, then we would look to our succession policies, which we are reviewing at the moment. And that will give us the ability to be able to apply discretion in certain circumstances. And we are revising those at the moment. The concern that I perhaps have is that it goes to a piece of casework I had a little while ago, where the child of the person that had been the tenant and had deceased was left for a fairly significant period, I seem to recall, a couple of months, without any certainty that a succession process would actually occur, because they were awaiting the decision of the discretionary panel. And I just wondered whether there was a way of perhaps easing that concern. Because obviously, it's loading stress on a period of time where they've just lost a parent. It's already quite a stressful time. So I just wondered, when we're looking at that policy and the policies around that, are we going to be taking that into account and trying to make sure that that works, perhaps, a little better than it might have done in that specific case? And I understand that that's just one case and not everyone. Yeah, absolutely. Actually, we've had a case fairly recently where very similar circumstances. And we can, whilst we're exercising that discretion in terms of succession, we can issue a license to occupy so that they know that they can stay in that property until decisions have been made about succession or moving to another property. So we will be very mindful of that when we look to revise our succession policies. I don't know if Janice, our new assistant director, wanted to add anything to that. Well, I mean, before you do, if I could just say, I mean, one of the things that would be a concern for me, straight away, is if we say to them, no, you can't succeed, we do give them a reasonable notice period to be able to exit the property, don't we? Yeah, absolutely. OK. So we do have to formally end the tenancy, which is done by serving the notice to quit, which is four weeks. But during those four weeks, the neighbourhood officer should be in contact with the occupier. And then, yes, we should be issued with a license to occupy. And sometimes it's about then what we've got to do is what we call right sizing. So depending on what that accommodation is and what that accommodation now needs to actually be, then they will actually be supported in regards to completing a housing application. So I would hope that the staff stay in contact. But I can appreciate the process is a legalistic process. Therefore, serving the notice to quit can give the appearance that actually we're throwing you out, but we have to legally end that tenancy before we can actually move forward. Yeah. OK. I think it was the notice to quit that was the thing that triggered the stress and anxiety from the tenant that I was particularly referring to. And obviously, yeah, it's just adding stress into a very stressful position already. But if it's the law, it's the law, isn't it, I guess. I do have a second question, if that's OK. And it refers to Appendix C, the tenancy strategy policy EQIA. And I was really surprised to see that the assessment of the tenancy strategy and policy has a neutral impact on all protected characteristic groups right the way through it. And the evidence and comments was identical for everyone. And I just wondered whether cutting and pasting in that particular context was an appropriate approach. It wasn't a copper and paste. But what we were struggling with-- we had discussions about this-- is what evidence we had, hard evidence, to be able to make a positive or negative statement about those things. But I accept, I think, in the first draft, we had put in some statements about positivity or negativity, but didn't have the evidence to back that up. But yeah, I take your point. Can I ask, in relation to that, have we looked at our tenants and assessed whether they are a equal diversity group in all those protected characteristics compared to our wider population? Because actually, there are intended and unintended biases. And it would be, I think, illuminative if we were to assess the age range of our tenants compared to the population of Welland, Hatfield, as a whole, for example, to see whether there is a bias there or not. That's a really good question. Because that's a piece of work that we intend to do this year. Because we feel that our data that we've got on tenants is not as comprehensive as it could be. And obviously, it's an ongoing, updating exercise. And we may not be able to hold all of the data on protected characteristics. But there is some information, like age or disabilities, that we should be holding. And we're just not comfortable that it's as comprehensive as it could be. So that is a piece of work that we're doing, actually, as part of the Social Housing Regulation Act, in actually updating our data that we hold on tenants. And then, we will know if it is representative of the general population. Yes, Tim. Yeah, my question related to demoted tenancies. And I see that we don't use them. And I guess, if we don't have introductory tenancies, that sort of makes sense. But the reason I raise it at this point, we're going to be looking at the tenant satisfaction survey later on. And satisfaction with how we deal with antisocial behavior is not good. And it's just whether we've actually looked at this and decided there are better ways with dealing with antisocial behavior, rather than demoting tenancies. And it would be nice to understand what that is. Or is it something that potentially should be looked at? In other words, if I am somebody who's not been behaving well, what is the escalation process, short of going to court and seeking possession? Thank you, Councillor. That is a really good question, as well. So there are a number of tools that we can and do use when dealing with antisocial behavior, either caused by our tenants or actually is affecting our tenants. But perhaps in relation to antisocial behavior being caused by our tenants, there's a whole host of toolkit of different enforcement powers that we can use. And ultimately, if it's serious enough or persistent enough, we do seek possession of that property. And we do-- even in the time that I've been here, I've seen quite a few cases which have gone to that stage. Below that, there are other-- and Pete said that we've taken back properties and the tenants moved on. There's other powers, such as injunctions that we can use and others that were community protection warning notices to address the antisocial behavior. And if they don't work, then we can look at more robust powers up to seeking possession of that property back from the tenant. So if I can just follow up. So this is actually a conscious decision that what we do is actually better, is it, than having demoted tendencies? Because you say that other authorities do have demoted tendencies. I'm just seeking, I suppose, the reassurance that we've looked at it. And we think that what we do is better, as opposed to we don't do it simply because we don't have introductory tendencies. And we don't do it because we don't have introductory tendencies. And therefore, to have demoted tendencies when we don't have introductory tendencies would seem a bit of a anomaly. So I suppose the fundamental thing is that we strive for security of tenure. That's our prime kind of concern. And yes, you're right, we could use introductory and demoted. And other authorities do that. And housing associations do that in particular. But I think our policy comes from the place of wanting to give that security to our tenants. But where it proves that that trust is not-- or that the behavior doesn't reflect good tenant behavior, then we will take the enforcement powers. And we do take them. And there are a number of cases where we've done that. But it's not every single tenancy. It's a smaller proportion of the total tenant population. Any other comments? OK, can members agree to, A, recommend to cabinet the introduction of the tenancy policy and tenancy strategy? And B, request that cabinet recommend approval of the policy and strategy to full council. Thank you. Agenda item 10, tenant satisfaction measures results 2023-24, which I'll hand over to Sue. Thank you, chair. I've just got a handful of slides. And I will go through them fairly quickly just to summarize the paper. There is a lot of information in the paper. So the tenant satisfaction measures comprise 22 measures. 12 of them are perception survey satisfaction measures. And 10 of them are management information from our own data that we collect. So I'll talk about those. And obviously, one of the most important things is we've got this feedback from our tenants is what our action plan is to address those themes coming out of the survey. So the TSMs, this is 2023 straight 24 was the first year of all social housing providers collecting this data. And that's housing associations as well as local authorities. And it's a requirement of the Social Housing Regulation Act, the regulator of social housing, and one of the consumer standards listed there that we do collect this data and publish it. And it's a requirement that we do publish that by the 30th of June every year. And as I say, this is our very first year of doing that. So we commissioned a research company to undertake the satisfaction survey for us. And that took place between January and March. Just under 3,000 households were randomly selected to be sent the survey. And the response was just over 800 responses, mostly online, but some postal surveys as well. And the tenants had the opportunity to ask for a hard copy survey to complete manually should they want that, and some did. That figure of 800 is just over 800 is statistically valid. So it means that we have confidence in the results that have been provided because it's achieved over the 563 that we needed to make it valid. So overall, satisfaction with housing services was 60%. And then the perception survey results range between about 41% and 63%. And that is a slide summarizing them all and ranging from-- well, actually from 26% satisfaction in handling of complaints through to 63% I think is the highest result. Yeah, 63%. So I'll just give you kind of an overview and some general observations about the results. So the purpose of the results is really to get feedback from our tenants. They can give us their feedback about how they feel about the housing services at the council. And over time, it will give us an idea of trends. And obviously, we would want to be looking to seek to improve upon the results that we get and get greater levels of satisfaction. We're told by the research company that conduct a lot of tenants satisfaction surveys for different providers that generally they've seen an 8% decrease in satisfaction levels since COVID. And that's probably to do with people re-evaluating their lives, the space that they lived in, particularly during COVID, and the bricks and mortar, as they say, of their living situations. As well, of course, we've had cost of living crisis just on top of that as well. Overall, in our survey, older residents 65 plus were generally more satisfied than other age groups. And also, tenants living in sheltered housing were also more satisfied. And also, those living in flats more satisfied than those living in houses. And that probably is a reflection that flats are generally newer than houses that were built pre or post-war. Our working age residents were generally more dissatisfied than our older residents. And respondents from black and ethnic minority population were more satisfied than white British respondents. And having looked at a couple of other surveys conducted that have been published by local authorities, that seems quite similar, actually, in a couple that I've seen published so far. Sorry, were you-- Thank you. I was just wondering, is the reason for the higher satisfaction in the more elderly population the fact that they haven't had to take a day off work? They're not unhappy with being told, well, save the day. Whereas when you work in things, it is a major gripe. Do we know that? We don't know that for sure. Because what I probably should have said is the questions that we have to ask are all standard worded in a certain order. And every local authority and housing association have to ask those. You can ask supplementary questions. And we did ask some. And I'll talk about that. But I think you're right. I think that part of it is that taking time off work for appointments, being in for repairs, or other council services probably is part of that. And we can explore that in more detail in future surveys. So the-- sorry, was that-- It's OK. So you can finish, if you like. Can we take questions at the end? Yes, that's fine, yes. Thank you. So some of the key-- when the research company looked at the results, they did some statistical tests that pulled out what the key drivers of that overall satisfaction level is. And it's those three things there. Not surprising, and it's common, I think, in many surveys. The repair service, how our homes are maintained, and tenants feeling like they're being treated fairly and with respect. There were lower levels of satisfaction, as Councillor House mentioned, around handling of ASB. But unlike some of the other questions around complaint handling and whether you've made a repair request in the last 12 months, the standard questions don't ask if you've made a report of ASB or not. And therefore, how satisfied were you or not with the service that you were provided. And it may well be that some of the dissatisfaction were around things that the council might have no control over. It might be, perhaps, potentially a crime or a police matter. Or maybe it might be that, actually, the complaint was handled, you know, courteously, in a timely manner. But it wasn't, perhaps, the outcome that one might have hoped for in terms of the end result. But we're going to put some supplementary questions in the next surveys to explore that, in particular, going forward so we can get a little bit richer data about what it's telling us. In terms of the complaints, 26% of the respondents had made a complaint in the last year, 12 months. And 26% of those were satisfied with its handling. But that may not just be formal complaints as in corporate complaints like we know it. It could be any level of concern or dissatisfaction that a tenant may have raised with us. And it's possible. It may not even be about a housing service. It might be about something else in the council, some other service like the bins or something else. So again, that might be something in future surveys that we drill down in a little bit more. So there was a strong positive rating in terms of tenants feeling that they're treated with respect and treated fairly, 63%. That was one of the highest scores. Lower satisfaction when they're not being listened to and their views acted upon. Again, that might not just be council housing services. It could be any service, perhaps, that the council is providing. But we did ask them in this particular survey some additional questions around customer service. So quite a high percentage, 79% of the tenants said they had made contact with housing services in the last 12 months to report a repair. A high proportion of the top three reasons were around repairs, about rent accounts, and then and there's another category making up a mixture of things. Perhaps a positive aspect of this is that 82% said that the staff that they dealt with were friendly. They were easy to get hold of in 60% of the cases. Slightly lower, just over half, reporting that staff being able to resolve their query, I think, probably at first point of contact or soon after. And the satisfaction was lower when it was queries that were being raised around ASB or communal grounds maintenance. Again, that may be for a whole host of reasons. And that's something that I think we need to explore in future surveys as well. It may be that it wasn't a quick answer there, and then we could deal with it. It might be something that was a little bit more protracted. But I think we need to explore that a little bit more. So there are some positives in that, but clearly some things that we want to work on as well. So in terms of the management data, the 10 measures that we report to report on tenant satisfaction measures as well, they are then listed. So the corporate complaints are measured in terms of the rates per 1,000 homes. So just over 70 complaints on stage one, just under 10%-- sorry, 10 complaints per 1,000 homes for stage two complaints. And then just under or just over 50% of those responded to within the time scale in the code of-- the code, the complaint handling code. Just one thing to say, on the stage two complaints, our current timeline is more stringent than the actual housing ombudsman's complaint code. We seek to resolve them and respond within 10 days, whereas the code allows 20 days. So we're revising our complaints policy at the moment, and it will come forward for approval to adjust that in line with the housing ombudsman's complaint code. And then we've got ASB cases and hate crimes open per 1,000 homes, just over 28. And then data that you'll be familiar with, because you hear it from Elliott every quarter here, is the compliance with the big six safety measures-- gas, electricity, water hygiene, and lifts, and so forth. With the gas safety checks, as we've seen in the performance report, the ones that are outstanding are the ones that go through legal process to get access to be able to undertake that. So for us, I think the most important part of this is having that feedback from our tenants, listening to what they're telling us, but also having an action plan around addressing some of those key bits of feedback where we want to improve the satisfaction levels. And we've themed them under these themes. So safe and well-maintained homes. You will be aware that we're doing stock condition surveys at the moment will be finished by the end of the summer. We are getting data from that as it's going along, particularly if they're identifying things that we need to deal with more rapidly. But the information from those will help us inform our future programs around planned works, major works, our cyclical decoration program, and so forth. And I think it's important, probably, going forward that we publicize those programs so that tenants know when they're happening. And I think that will improve awareness and may also help contribute towards increasing satisfaction so they know when things are happening. Similarly, for our cleaning programs and grounds maintenance.

• Sorry, Sue and Chair, through you, Chair. I know that a couple of the residents on next door were saying, I've just been told about wrong regarding a stock condition survey. Does anyone know what this is for and what's happening? No, I know some councils are proactive on social media are saying, hey, look, at the moment, we're doing this so that people are more aware.
• You're right. And those letters are being sent out. I'm sure we've done some social media posts, but we can double check if there's anything going out at the moment. And certainly, there's information on the website. There's QR codes that can be scanned where they can get some further information. And it's right that they check that it's bona fide, and they should have some identification to show that they are from the surveying company as well. But we'll double check that the social media, we've got that going on at the moment as well. So the other theme around the action plan is around the repair service. So we'll be reviewing our customer satisfaction surveys to see if that gives us any further information to work on. We're constantly reviewing our repairs performance, but we're particularly looking at that. Well, we'll be looking at that in more detail as well over the coming months. One important thing and piece of feedback that we get regularly from tenants is making sure that they're kept up for-- that they know when the repairs are happening, what's happening, and we're keeping them up to date. So obviously, we're doing a lot more work in making sure that that's consistently happening as well. We may well include some additional questions in subsequent surveys this year to get a little bit more information from tenants about the repair service and their experience of it. And kind of come in and link it into the question that you raised about working age tenants, we do have a limited number of appointments in evenings and on Saturdays. So again, we probably need to publicize those a little bit more for tenants that have difficulties to allowing appointments during the working week. So we will be doing some work around that. And that's something we discussed with the tenants panel fairly recently as well when we were talking about no access. So communication with tenants, this is also a very key workstream for us. We do have a comms plan. And Alison and her team working with comms do a lot of work and with the housing teams as well around comms with our tenants. And we'll probably just have a more formalized plan throughout the year of certain topics that we want to hit at certain times. I know that happens already, but we'll kind of plan that out even more so. And where we are doing works in areas, decarbonization works, we are making direct contact with tenants. But we probably need to just make sure that we're doing more of that so there's more direct communication, greater awareness with our tenants. Lots of what we're trying to do, as you said we did, in the community edit, the tenants newsletter, Alison does a lot of work on that. You've given us this feedback. And we need to feed back to our tenants what we're doing about the tenant satisfaction survey and other things they raise so that we can get that sort of communication loop closed. Working with the tenants panel, the teams have been looking at the tenants handbook. And that's being revised. And that's being proof read and getting ready for printing. So again, once we publish that and get that out to tenants, I hope that will improve awareness of the council housing services and what they need to do if there's any issues with repairs or other matters. And we've now got our mobile devices for tenancy audits. So we're rolling out those on a five-year rolling program. And that's to look at who's occupying our properties, but also the condition of the property inside. But also, really importantly, it's an opportunity to engage with tenants, talk with them about housing services, answer any queries they've got. And I think that will help, that cooperation and engagement, we hope will help with satisfaction levels and awareness. Neighborhoods is a theme. So again, we'll be looking at ASB satisfaction. We need to be clear about what we can and can't do on the outset of an ASB complaint, what powers we've got to deal with, and also what work we're doing in the vicinity to improve neighborhoods. So again, that might be direct mails out to communications out to tenants about neighborhood improvement bids that we're doing in the area. Again, help show that the council is investing in the local community. Complaints, we will be revising the complaints policy and our letter templates. We're doing a lot of work on that already. And that will come to approval as well. We are looking to put on some refresher customer service training for all our housing staff. And we will obviously be publishing our housing data performance and complaints and lessons learned from complaints as well. So we're doing a little bit more work on that at the moment. And that's the last slide. Thank you. Thanks, Sue. Saman. Thank you, Chair. I have two questions, actually. So you have mentioned about the figures and percentage we have achieved. So I can see there is a reg rating in the agenda pack as well. Now, if I talk about complaints, we can say that 26% was very satisfied, and then 41% were very dissatisfied as well. My question is, do we have KIs or targets set for the next survey that we have to achieve these figures at this level after one year or 18 months when the next survey is due? And my second question is related to complaints taken to ombudsman. So do we have the statistics included in this pack that these many complaints or these percentage of complaints were taken to next level to housing ombudsman, which we dealt with? Thank you. So your first question about targets. We haven't set targets in the action plan. This is the very first year. What we're looking for is improvement. So we haven't set targets as yet. But what we're looking for is to be better next year than we are this year. But I think over time, as we see the trends and we get further data, it may well be that we'll set targets going forward. From where we are now, we just want to get better levels of satisfaction. There are some targets already. And some of it will be in the performance report for CHP, but also that go-to cabinet around complaints and response times. So there are targets in there for complaints. And in terms of housing ombudsman complaints, we also do report on that. We don't have a target as such. We'd rather have no complaints and no housing ombudsman complaints. But we do. So for complaints, it's about the timeliness of the response. We need to improve our timeliness of response for housing ombudsman complaints. Then obviously, we want to see that we don't have a target around that. We do report on it. But we're striving to try to make sure that we're dealing with them promptly and we're not having findings against us. No, thank you. Just a secondary question on that. When we take the complaints figures, do they include the housing ombudsman complaints as well, or they are just level one complaints within the council? Oh, apologies. Yes, so if it had been a complaint-- so yes, it may, but not as a housing ombudsman complaint. So it goes through our stage one and stage two. And then if a resident's not satisfied or a tenant's not satisfied, they would go to the housing ombudsman. So at some point, that would have been included in the complaints data, yes. And then we will report back on the number of housing ombudsman complaints we've had and the findings. Thank you. Jill? Thank you. Two questions. One about the communal areas in blocks of flats. Because I heard somehow that there aren't necessarily always contracts in the contract for communal area cleaning, which has to be fixed, surely, just to be fair to all tenants. And the second question is 1%, I think, somewhere in the report, it said 1% of properties and homes don't meet the decent home standard. And I've heard on the grapevine that the decent home standard isn't really that high. So we've got to fix that, haven't we? I know it amounts to 90 or so homes. But we should be hitting that target of 100% with that, shouldn't we? Thank you. Thank you. So in terms of communal areas and cleaning, there are some blocks that don't have a regular clean. And that is part of the action plan. We absolutely need to address that. It's more on an ad hoc basis. So that is definitely one of the actions that we're driving forward. And I think in the action plan, we hope to complete that by December. So we've got a more timely resolution on that. So absolutely, we want to improve that. In terms of decent homes, I know Elliot's going to jump in. It will never be zero, but I'll leave the rest to Elliot. So the 1% of the decent homes are two categories. Some of them are the non-compliant properties that we've not been able to gain access to that are going through that legal process. And the others are the work that we're doing on the decarbonization projects at the moment, because decent homes means they need to meet a certain thermal comfort, which is why we're doing that decarbonization works. Roger? Yeah, I just wondered how we compare the 60% with other authorities, either in Hertfordshire or nationally. That's a really good question. Because in isolation, those figures can feel meaningless. In time, it will give us a trend, and we want to be on the upward trend. At this point in time, we don't know. But all local authorities and housing associations will be having to submit their data to the regulator by the end of June and actually publishing them. So we've already published ours on our website. We know that, for example, to Corum, published theirs a few days before ours. And actually, they're very, very similar. Some of their measures are slightly better by 1% or 2% than ours, and vice versa. Some of ours are a couple of percent better than theirs. We're aware of another authority not very far away that will be published in their results. I can't say who, because it's going to be fairly soon. But also remarkably similar results. So it will be interesting when everything's published to have a look at how we compare to other similar local authority sized stockholders. That's what we'll be looking at. Tim? Yeah, I've got a couple of questions. One links to the satisfaction with repairs, because we looked at the KPI pack. And I think that Morgan and Sindel used Rant and Rave, and they're around 85%. And then you look at this data, which has come from this. So is it 61%? So there's a big gap there. And I suppose two parts to that question. One is, do we understand that gap? And are there any plans to get some ownership of the satisfaction survey from Morgan and Sindel? Because ultimately, they are carrying out the repairs. And at the moment, I feel, as a Councillor, I'm sort of accountable for that 61%. But my contractor at the moment is using an entirely different measure, and I'm not comfortable with that. Perhaps if we deal with that question first, and I'll come back with my second one. Yeah, you're absolutely right. So both are measuring satisfactions to some degree, but perhaps in slightly different ways in the questions that are being asked. And actually, that's true of-- and I should have mentioned it earlier about the ASB as well. So we know in the TSM survey that the satisfaction was 41% for the handling of ASB cases. But when we do our own surveys, it's 100%. So they're both measuring the same things, but maybe asking slightly different things at different times. So I think there is a little bit of triangulation of the data we've got, and kind of unpicking what that means, and understanding it a little bit better. But I do agree, we do need to have a look at perhaps what Morgan and Sindel are measuring, as well as what we're measuring through the tenant satisfaction survey as well. And absolutely, we want ownership of that, and we want our customer satisfaction to be better than it is at the moment. That's great. Thank you. My second question actually linked to neighborhoods and antisocial behavior. And clearly, part of the context, we've not-- I can understand antisocial behavior is never going to score that well, I guess, would be my instinct. And it would be interesting to start comparing ourselves with other local authorities. But when I look at the action plan, review communications to ensure we're clear about what ASB is and what we can act on. And then in brackets, it is likely that dissatisfaction is about matters the council has no powers to deal with or unable to act on. I'm just a bit concerned that that could be a cop-out for us, to say, here's our strict definition of antisocial behavior. And you don't-- and I understand, on the one hand, you've got to guard against somebody who just doesn't like their neighbor, and it's like a vexatious complaint, which is something different. But it might be that they are very upset that they can't walk along the path because their neighbor doesn't cut their hedge, whereas they cut theirs. And they would consider that as antisocial behavior, and we don't. I don't know. But what I would ask with this is that at some point in future, we come back with a clear definition of what we regard as antisocial behavior in the context of the housing questionnaire, so that we, as counselors, go, ah, right, I understand that is antisocial behavior, or no, that isn't. Yeah, absolutely. And when the guidance that accompanies the TSM survey measures, it refers it back to the act where ASB is defined, but it doesn't tell you exactly what ASB is. But you're right, I think we could put some context about what ASB is in the survey. And actually, we're asking a few more questions this time, this next quarter around ASB, just to try and pull out a little bit more richer information from the tenants about satisfaction. Anyone else? Lynn. [AUDIO OUT] Antisocial behavior, I think we also need to be aware, once we define something, it's very difficult to do anything if the person who's reporting the ASB is one of our residents, but they're in their private home, because there's less that you can do legally than if they're actually a resident in council stock. So I think the way we do it, we just need to be aware that we don't have a them and us type barrier between the two. But the other thing I was going to say, it's great to see someone from residents panel here, and always pleased to see them. I know at one point we had more leaseholders than we did tenants. How are we doing in trying to attract any good ideas for trying to get more tenants to come and join the residents panel? Thank you. You must have worked magic somehow, Lynn, because actually, we've had a few more tenants join the panel over the last few meetings. We've had a handful more. But we're never satisfied with that, because we're always wanting to attract more tenants. So there's lots of community events. The panel, actually, our data and colleagues, they go out to lots of community events promoting the residents panel, and the community days as well that the neighborhoods team and Alison run, that has attracted more people to become interested. So yeah, we have. We still want more. We always want more. But actually, it's improved quite a lot over the last year. Any other comments? OK. Oh, Paul, yeah. Yes. So I wanted to just trigger a discussion about the action plan, because I think one of the things-- it's one of the reasons I asked for the change in the structure of the meeting to put the work program at the end-- is I think that this is an area that is really critical for this panel to look at and monitor the progress towards getting better results, because I think the results, from my perspective, are not great. And it would be nice to know that we are on track and moving towards and improve a significant improvement the next time this runs. But I think unless we monitor that progress, there will be uncertainty in the administration and around in the council chamber that we're actually achieving that. So I do think that part of what we should do here is say, OK, we've got an action plan. We've got dates and times in the action plan. When this panel meets in future, it should be looking at that action plan and progress of it. And I do think that's really critical to do, because it's only by having that open and public scrutiny, if you like, of how it's moving forward that we're going to be certain that we're heading in the right direction, and we're going to pick up and be able to address any challenges that come down the line in delivering a better result next time. And I'll give you a particular indication. One of the things that I did notice with just looking at the action plan was that there was nothing particularly overt about reviewing maintenance, so plan maintenance and responsive repairs don't really seem to appear on the work program as presented in item six. And I do think there needs to be something in there. It's part of our remit, as Chris said at the start when he was presenting what our remit is, that we look and scrutinize that. Not scrutinize it, but we look at it and monitor what happens in the maintenance service. And yet, the work program doesn't seem to cover that. And this report perhaps suggests that it does need to be in there. And I think the way to put it in there is to say, OK, well, we have an action plan. It's going to be progressing towards getting a better result. The ultimate goal, of course, is to making our tenants happier in their homes. And actually, that's what we should all be buying into. And I think the way we can do that is to say, OK, next time we meet, the action plan will be on the agenda. And what we'll look at is progress towards it. And it can be as simple as a RAG rating, as officers are well used to in terms of how we're progressing towards delivering some of those components. I do think we also look as well really at what those components might actually look like. Because if we take you to the action plan in Appendix A of item 10-- sorry, there's something really weird with the format of this paper. When I go through some of the earlier pages, it resizes things really, really strangely. So if you bear with me a second. So there's the themes that Sue outlined earlier. So the safe and well-maintained homes. That doesn't include commentary about the repair service, because that's in a later theme. It's in the second theme down. But the maintenance program is looking at once-- what it says in the paper is once the 100% house stock condition survey has been completed, to analyze and prioritize findings and incorporate them into planned work programs. And the time scale on that is April 2025. Now, I appreciate that the stock condition survey won't be complete until 2025. But I do think we should be looking at how the stock condition survey as it develops might be informing our maintenance programs. And I think some commentary around that, personally, I would find very valuable to understand officers thinking about how that developing understanding of our stock is influencing the planned works programs. When it comes to the repair service, I note that the time scale on all of those-- well, one has already passed. One is this month. One is next month. And two are September. So by the time this panel meets next, we should have answers, if the time scale is right, on all of those aspects. And we may be able to be in a position where we have-- or we challenge to say, OK, well, we've got the information about-- we've reviewed the processes within the repair service. What are we going to do about them? Because reviewing it and doing something are two different things, aren't they? So maybe what we should be saying at this point is, on the work program for the next meeting is completion of that action, part of the action plan. But what's the next action that comes out of that after the review? Does that sound like a sensible modification to the works program to everybody, a sensible way forward to make sure that we keep on top of this and make sure that we go forward correctly? Good. It seems to be consensus. Thank you. No, I think that's a perfectly sensible idea. We will be tracking this, in any case, this action plan. So I think it's entirely appropriate that CHP sees it as well and gets feedback on it. And you're right. We don't know all the answers to some of these things at the moment, because we just need to review what the information is telling us or the performance telling us in order to inform further actions that are needed. And I mean, I think the key is that if the review of the repair service is that some action is needed, policy changes, operational changes that interact with policy, then it's this panel that would be recommending to cabinet what those changes might look like. So we do have a really important role in making sure that this gets better. And I think it's really useful to have that focus. Thanks, Paul, keeping us on track there. OK. Can members agree to A, note the tenant satisfaction measures results from both the perception survey and those generated from management information, and B, note the action plan in appendix A of the report to address the findings of the tenant satisfaction survey results? OK. So back to agenda item six, work program. And I will invite comments from members for this municipal year's work program. Anyone? I'm clearly going to propose what I just suggested, that I do think we need to change it. I do think it needs to have added to it the review of the work program of the action plan going forward and commentary and expectation that there are items on the agenda that come out of the review in terms of potential papers for recommendations to go forward. I'm assuming Sue's got that all nailed down and knows exactly what we need to do to modify the plan. So my proposal would be we accept the plan as proposed, subject to Sue updating it in line with what I think is a consensus around the room. Does everyone-- should we have a vote on that? Agree. Yeah, I think everyone's nodding. I think we're OK with that. Any other comments? Salman? Anyone else have any comments? OK, well, with no urgent business under item 11, I think that's the meeting closed. Thank you. [GAVEL POUNDING] [BLANK_AUDIO]