The Housing Committee of Redbridge Council met on Monday 22 June 2026 to discuss the council's housing services, focusing on preparedness for inspections, resident engagement, and tenant satisfaction. Key decisions included the election of a Vice Chair and the review of the committee's work plan, with further discussions planned on improving complaint handling and resident involvement.

Housing Committee Work Plan 2026-2027

The committee reviewed its work plan for 2026-2027, outlining the topics to be covered in future meetings. The initial focus for the committee will be on the council's housing inspection preparedness, the governance of the Resident Influence and Scrutiny Panel (RISP), and tenant satisfaction measures. The committee will also consider broader housing issues such as homelessness and tenancy strategies in future sessions.

Preparedness for Housing Inspection

Officers presented a report detailing the council's preparedness for upcoming housing inspections, highlighting significant legislative and policy changes in the social housing sector since 2024. These include the Social Housing (Regulation) Act, Awab's Law, Decent Homes 2, and the Renters' Rights Act. The report outlined the four consumer standards: tenancy, neighbourhood and community, transparency, influence and accountability, and safety and quality. Progress was shown with most areas largely compliant (green), while some policies and data collection methods require further development (yellow). Next steps include finalising policies on antisocial behaviour and domestic abuse, developing competence and conduct standards, improving data on tenant equality categories, and reviewing the housing website. A new governance model, including a Landlord Services Board chaired by the lead member for housing, Councillor Saima Ahmed, is being established to enhance accountability to the regulator.

During the discussion, Councillor Muhammed Javed asked for examples of current bad practices and improvements. Officers stated that while tenants generally receive a good service, there are areas for improvement, particularly in evidencing work through governance processes. Councillor Javed also raised concerns about the lack of member invitations to leaseholder and tenant conferences, which was noted for future consideration.

Councillor Kamal Hussain Qureshi inquired about the timescale and review process for reaching targets, with officers confirming that timescales are included in the presented plans.

Councillor Martin Sachs expressed scepticism about the Resident Influence and Scrutiny Panel (RISP), questioning recruitment processes and the potential for it to dilute broader consultation. He requested a detailed report on customer service training and data collection methods. Officers explained that the RISP is one part of a broader engagement strategy and that statutory consultations will continue. They also committed to providing further details on recruitment, terms of office, and accountability for RISP members.

Councillor Sacks also asked about improvements to disabled adaptations compliance. Officers detailed a service review and proposed process improvements, with work feeding into an independent living strategy.

Councillor Rashida Chowdhury questioned whether new builds fall under the committee's remit, and was informed that new build programmes are part of the housing authority's functions and can be considered in future meetings.

Councillor Hussain raised concerns about communication with vulnerable tenants, questioning whether special provisions exist beyond online forms. Officers acknowledged the need for diverse communication methods and assured that adjustments would be made for those with difficulties.

Councillor Hussain also asked about the anti-social behaviour policy and its applicability to private tenants. Officers clarified that the policy discussed pertains to the council's landlord responsibilities for council tenants, distinct from the general council-wide anti-social behaviour policy.

Resident Influence and Scrutiny Panel (RISP) Governance

The committee received a report on the establishment of the Resident Influence and Scrutiny Panel (RISP), designed to give residents a greater voice in housing services. This initiative is a regulatory requirement under the Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard, stemming from lessons learned from incidents like Grenfell Tower. The RISP will provide a forum for residents to scrutinise services, influence policy, and offer recommendations to the Landlord Services Board and the Housing Committee. The panel will be supported by TPAS (Tenants Participation Advisory Service) to build resident skills and confidence. Concerns were raised by Councillor Sachs regarding the recruitment and representativeness of the panel, and the potential for it to replace broader consultation. Officers assured that RISP is one part of a wider engagement strategy and that statutory consultations will continue. The panel's membership currently consists of six to eight tenants, with aspirations for greater representation and geographical diversity. The terms of reference for the RISP and its governance will be circulated to members.

Tenant Satisfaction Measures

The final report presented detailed the Tenant Satisfaction Measures (TSM) for 2025/26. Overall satisfaction was 69%, with improvements noted in tenants feeling listened to and the perception of the landlord's contribution to neighbourhoods. However, complaints handling and upkeep of communal areas scored lower. Key performance indicators (KPIs) showed consistently high compliance in health and safety measures, and a significant reduction in non-decent homes, now at 3.8% (down from 15.1%). An increase in Stage 1 and Stage 2 complaints was noted, with an action plan in place with the Housing Ombudsman to address this. The report also highlighted a decrease in antisocial behaviour cases.

During the discussion on tenant satisfaction, Councillor Javed asked about the reasons for the significant increase in Stage 1 complaints. Officers explained that this could indicate both increased service failure and a greater willingness of tenants to report issues, and that an action plan is in place to improve complaint handling. The tripling of Stage 2 complaints was acknowledged as showing a weakness in complaint handling.

Councillor Choudhery asked about KPIs concerning antisocial behaviour, particularly in relation to York Road. Officers clarified that the KPI measures how the council, as a landlord, deals with antisocial behaviour among its tenants, ranging from noise complaints to abusive behaviour.

Councillor Sachs requested reports on specific matters discussed, which were noted and will be included in the work programme for future meetings.

The next meeting of the Housing Committee is scheduled for 2 September 2026.