Introduced by the ADH, the report provided an overview of the Housing performance for April – August 2017. 65% of targets had been achieved which was up from 48% in quarter one and performance compared against indicators in August had improved by 17% overall. The report highlighted the following key and local performance indicators:

·         The performance related to Housing’s Key Performance Indicators remained largely on track.

·         The general tenant satisfaction with services provided by Housing was below target but had improved by 3% and had received positive comments from residents.

·         The number of households in temporary accommodation had improved and was 10 below the target threshold of 125 at the end of August.

·         Tenants were dissatisfied with the anti-social behaviour (ASB) service and the Housing service review would be looking at centralising ASB reports to improve record keeping, case management and accountability.

·         The Council planned to engage with landlords in the private sector to encourage them to make properties available to those in receipt of housing benefit.

Referring to the Housing Performance Scorecard (HPS) in appendix 1, Councillor Redsell queried on the outcome of damp and mould which was low in the summer but as the winter was coming, would the outcome change. The ADH confirmed that damp and mould was on the increase again. The indicator in the HPS was designed to capture the data as it stood and sub-divided data into categories of a) what a tenant could do to prevent mould; b) what treatments could be used such as vents; and c) building fabric works. The stock condition survey was almost complete and would provide the service department with improved data on the severity of the damp and mould issues and whether it led to structure damage within council properties.

Councillor Allen referred to the re-let voids data in the HPS which had a reduction of six days and mentioned two cases where the quality of work carried out was unsuitable which led to a longer delay of the re-let time. The ADH replied that voids were carried out by contractors but the service department could carry out a full review of each case.

The Vice-Chair was pleased to see a breakdown for the figures of the Housing Register and he went on to comment on the amount of collectable rent paid by travellers which had risen from 95% to 98% before falling back to 97%. He would be interested to find out in the next Committee meeting where the new sites would be placed for travellers.

The Vice-Chair and ADH discussed cases regarding Economy 7 central heating in specific areas of the Borough. Individual properties would need to be investigated as the Council was not in the business of updating. Although a few properties in the same road were being upgraded, it did not mean the whole road would also be upgraded as upgrades were based on the needs of households in each case.

Referring to the Council’s private tenants team, the Vice-Chair pointed out the issue of overgrown trees within a private tenant’s garden which would grow over onto a council tenant’s property. He questioned how the private tenants team could instruct private tenants to trim their trees. The ADH replied highways may have more power in encouraging private tenants to trim their trees but each case varied as there was no direct power from one organisation. The Council could recommend the affected tenants to get an enforcement order through the courts.

Councillor Pothecary sought clarification on the corporate performance reports in particular staff sickness, staff turnover and absence of staff which was stress related. She asked whether there were figures from other directorates within the Council to compare to and if there was a plan in place to resolve stress related absence from staff given the 40% seen in April and May. The ADH said the figures were based on an account of all staff in a given month and the department was doing well compared to other services. Some of the individuals in the April and May timeframe were no longer employed. Councillor Pothecary went on to say that it would be good to see Corporate Performance Indicators (CPI) benchmarked against other departments. The CDAHH stated that CPIs were regularly reviewed at Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee but these could be brought to the Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The housing department had historically higher figures and there was a target of nine days per employee but had continued to remain at ten and a half days.

Councillor Redsell and the ADH discussed a case regarding the Transforming Homes programme. There had been some homes missed out in the programme but the department was looking into this. The programme had two and a half years left to go with a third of the homes remaining to be transformed so it was ahead of schedule. The contractors should be able to finish on schedule as there was a set target of 15 days to finish per home. The Chair queried whether there was a plan to bring repairs back in house to which the ADH replied that the preference was to use contractors but it could be considered.

Referring to the tenants satisfaction with the Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) service on the HSP, Councillor Allen pointed out that ASB was on the increase in the Borough. He felt there was room for improvement on how ASB was dealt with. The ADH referred to paragraph 6.5 which reported tenant satisfaction with the ASB service was below target. The reported level of ASB was not on the increase but as mentioned at the Full Council meeting last month, ASB was probably underreported. There was the bigger challenge of centralising ASB as in which department it should sit in and whether it could be shifted. Reassigning some of the tasks could help or increasing the level of tenant participation as there were low levels of tenant representation. Addressing ASB would help to prevent it from escalating but the service department was trying to find a good model to follow for ASB.

Standing Orders were suspended at 9.20pm to allow Members to complete the item.

Councillor Redsell felt it was a good idea to have tenant representatives for ASB services but there were people who were not willing to come forward to give information on ASB if they felt at risk. The ADH stated the service department was doing their best to address ASB and looking at different ways to gather intelligence. No residents had been forthcoming when the ASB service attended a community hub. He agreed it took courage for people to come forward on ASB and felt perhaps the service was stuck within their case management model which needed to be looked at.

Councillor Allen and the ADH discussed a case of ASB between neighbours where CCTV had been relied on to gather evidence in order for the move panel to move the victims. The Chair queried whether good behaviour agreements were enforced between neighbours. This was an informal agreement and CCTV was not usually required as evidence in a move panel. The Chair also sought clarification on the Community Protection Orders (CPO) within his ward of Aveley and Uplands, which had to go through further scrutiny at Council before Officers could agree the issue of the CPOs. These had been agreed upon but the ADH would clarify with the ASB service. Councillor Redsell added that mediation was not always the solution. Victims did not want to use this to resolve neighbour situations when the perpetrator should be removed.

RESOLVED:

1)    That the Committee comments on the report.