Agenda item

A report of the Head of Landlord Services.

The Head of Landlord Services submitted a report to consider the results of the STAR survey, and the actions in progress and proposed to support greater satisfaction with services. (Item 5 on the agenda).

 

The Head of Landlord Services gave an update as follows:

 

i.              The delivery of kitchens and bathrooms had been impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic and this in turn had an impact ton tenant satisfaction.  It was thought that as work resumed, satisfaction would increase.

ii.            As a new Customer Engagement Officer was recruited, capacity would increase.

iii.           The survey had identified that tenants reporting issues online were the least satisfied.  As such it was concluded that those on a digital platform were feeling as though they were not being heard.  In order to address this, the Customer Engagement Strategy had included a digital agenda.

iv.           The survey had found that those who had made an Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB)-related complaint in the past 12-months were less likely to be satisfied.  It was concluded that this had a significant bearing on activity and it was recommended that a report on Anti-Social Behaviour should be brought before the Board.

v.            Satisfaction had been lowest amongst those in Loughborough

vi.           Southfields, Loughborough Hastings and Loughborough Lymington. These areas covered the town centre. Estate walks with residents and Councillors were currently being re-introduced having stopped due to the pandemic. Customer engagement estate-based activities would be prioritised in these areas.

vii.          Tenants in Thurmaston were significantly less likely to feel the Council provides a home that is safe and secure compared to the other areas.  This would be investigated.

viii.         With regard to Rent Value for Money, it was noted that rents for Charnwood Borough Council properties were lower than those in comparable authorities and as such feedback had likely been based more on quality of service.

ix.           Regarding repairs and maintenance, the attitude of workers was perceived highly by tenants (93%), however, perceptions amongst customers was lowest regarding the time taken for work to start.  Recruitment was taking place to address resourcing issues.  Repairs being carried out correctly first time had a bearing on the satisfaction of the service.

x.            The opportunity had been taken to ask specific questions about the service:

a.    Questions were asked on the rent payment pattern, specifically whether tenants would rather pay a lower weekly rent rather than having some rent-free weeks.  A majority of those surveyed favoured the current system and as such it would not change

b.    When asked about priorities for investment, the following priorities were identified by those surveyed: acquiring more housing, replacing kitchens, bathrooms and heating and investment in sheltered housing.

xi.           83% of those surveyed had thought it important to be able to go into Southfield’s offices to consult with officers.

xii.          Overall benchmarking data showed there had been a drop in levels of satisfaction across landlords, with the lowest levels of satisfaction recorded in September where monthly perception surveys were completed, but there were clear messages from tenants arising from the Council’s survey..

 

Councillor Seaton commented that the amount of Council housing was low in Thurmaston and as such the survey may be based on a small sample.

 

In response to a suggestion from the Board that tenants may not fully understand what constituted ASB, the Head of Landlord Services informed the Board that the Council website was part of the ASB review.  It was planned for the website to contain ‘tiles’ that could be clicked on regarding issues such as noise nuisance and how to report it, drug abuse/dealing and how to report it to the Police, and neighbour disputes such as parking and how the Council could mediate.  This would show what the council could and could not do in each circumstance.  The Tenants Editorial Panel had been involved in setting this up.

 

The Board suggested that information on ASB would be needed in print for non-internet users.

 

The Head of Landlord Services added that the Customer Service staff from the Council could advise on the issue.

 

Action: Head of Landlord Services to produce printed information on ASB.

 

Councillor Draycott Raised the following points:

 

·         With regard to the review on ASB she asked as to whether this applied solely to Housing or if it encompasses all ASB issues.

·         Loughborough Hastings Ward had been declared a ‘People Zone’ by the Police due to high levels of crime, ASB, depravation and poverty.  Agencies had worked together with the Police on the issue and the situation had begun to improve.  This work had stopped due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the area was no longer designates a ‘People Zone’.  As such she suggested that more estate walks were needed and coordination with the police was needed so that adequate notice could be given for them.

·         An article in the tenants magazine on rent payments would be helpful to tenants due to inflation and increases in the cost of living.  This article would need to be considerate as tenants often had limited means.

·         The cleaning of communal areas had worked well.

 

The Head of Landlord Services responded:

 

·         The ASB review would be across all services.

·         The rota for estate walks would be issued.

 

The Cabinet Lead Member for Public Housing added part of the reason as to why the approach to reporting and actioning ASB was being reformed was due to the need for communication so that those with ASB complaints could understand how it was being dealt with.

 

The Head of Strategic and Private Sector Housing drew attention to the Corporate  wide working group set up to consider the impacts and what advice and support the Council can provide to residents on the cost of living.

 

The Board raised the issue of fly-tipping and suggested that it had increased due to tenants now having to pay to have bulky waste removed.  It was further suggested that vehicles needed to regularly tour estates to remove bulky waste and fly-tips.  An additional suggestion was made that when Council workers came to estates to remove fly-tips, they talk to tenants so that they could be directed to the tipped waste.

 

It was further suggested that communal bins were regularly full and bulky waste was often left by them.  It was also suggested that Housing Association properties had waste dumped outside of them and as such the Housing Associations should be made to pay for its removal.

 

The Head of Landlord Services informed those present that a truck visited estates each Monday to remove waste.

 

The Landlord Services Manager added that the Bell Foundry estate had been specifically targeted to remove fly-tips.

 

Councillor Draycott raised the issue that the process to get bulky waste removed was not user friendly

 

Action: Head of Landlord Services to investigate targeting fly-tips and the opportunity for dedicated trips to remove them.

 

Action: Workers removing fly-tips to consult with tenants so they can be directed to where the tips are.

 

Action: Bulky waste left outside bin-store to be investigated.

 

Action: Article to be published in newsletter on the issue of fly-tipping, including the hardship-scheme for free collection.

 

Action: Head of Landlord Services to consult with Head of Cleansing to make process for removal of bulky waste more user-friendly.

 

In response to a query from Councillor Seaton, the Head of Landlord Services clarified that there had been a number of respondents who had not expressed a view on Communal Cleaning Improvements.  As such those who had not responded that they were satisfied with the service were not necessarily unsatisfied.

 

Councillor Seaton further suggested that the survey specifically target buildings and areas where communal cleaning had taken place.

 

The Landlord Services Manager added that the Tenancy Team conducted a regular sample of inspections throughout the Council housing stock using a rigorous scoring system on the standards of cleaning to score against the specification.  The areas inspected were largely found to be compliant and any complaints were addressed as formal complaints and as such the contractor would re-inspect.

 

Action: Head of Landlord Services to look specifically at the data on Communal Cleaning for areas where it had taken place.

 

In response to the issue raised of waste dumped in tenants’ front gardens, the Head of Landlord Services clarified that this could be addressed as a breach of tenancy.

 

Councillor Capleton enquired as to the level of take-up on the bulky-waste collection service since charges had increased.

 

Councillor Draycott raised the issue that the general fund was benefiting from the bulky-waste collection charges, however, the Housing Revenue account (HRA) was picking up the cost of removing fly-tips.

 

Action: Head of Landlord to share cost information with Board Members.

 

The Cabinet Lead Member for Public Housing drew attention to the financial pressures faced by the Council as the reason for charges for bulky waste collection and suggested that the HRA paying for bulky waste collection on Council land was fairer as private tenants needed to pay for collections on their land and funding collection on HRA land from general taxation would be unfair on those not living on HRA land.

 

In response to a query by the Chair on the issue of voids, the Head of Landlord Services explained that properties could not be let without an Energy Performance Certificate.  A new contract was being put in place to undertake this work which had previously been done by a different section of the Council.  There had been a backlog in repairs on voids, but this was now being resolved with recruitment.  In addition to this, age-designated voids were being re-assessed to optimise their potential occupancy.

 

In response to a further question from Councillor Seaton on the reasons behind void properties, the Head of Strategic and Private Sector Housing informed the Board that properties were advertised as soon as they were available, however, some properties were required major works and as such could not be advertised.  When the review of the Allocation Policy was completed, the Council reduced the number of bands from 4 bands to 3.  Therefore, all applicants on the register have a housing need, the Council are now seeing an increase in applications.  All allocations must be made in accordance with the Allocation Policy and therefore direct matches to properties could be made outside of the Policy.

 

Action: Article in magazine to be produced on voids.

 

Action: Item on Housing need and Government Legislation to come to the Housing Management Advisory Board.

 

In response to a query on the prioritisation of voids, the Head of Landlord Services explained that repairs were prioritised based on need.  The Head of Strategic and Private Sector Housing further added that in terms of allocation housing was prioritised in terms of the need on the register.

 

The Cabinet Lead Member for Public Housing noted that some people were encouraged to look for housing via charities and the private sector as the Council did not have the housing to match the need.  The Head of Strategic and Private Sector Housing added that CBC Lettings had been set up to help residents find accommodation in the private rented sector.

 

 

RESOLVED

 

1.    That the Board note the STAR survey and the actions in

progress and proposed to support greater satisfaction with services.

2.    That a report on the  Anti-Social behaviour review be brought to the next meeting of the Board.

 

Reason

 

1.    To acknowledge the Board’s consideration of the matter.

2.    To allow the Board to understand the improvements being made through the ASB review.