Agenda item

F Williamson updated Committee on the Housing Quarter 4 Performance and was happy to take questions.

The Chairman asked for an explanation of the difference on letting an adapted property and why they impact the figures.  FW confirmed that when a property has an adaptation, these can cost a significant amount of money, such as through floor lifts or wet rooms or extensions, so we try to match the property to an individuals need rather than take an adaptation out.  Each person’s needs are assessed on the individual circumstances and this can take some time and the process can be extended.  We try to get the best use of our stock and to get the people with a high level of need for an adapted property a suitable property.

Cllr Mahmood asked three questions.

1.    The targets have been the same for years and years, how are the targets reviewed?

2.    What is the average time to let and you alluded to the fact there are three different types of properties, sheltered, adapted and general.  Why don’t we split the three up and then we can have a real picture of where the problem is.

3.    Some of the work is being moved to Property and Place and enquired what the thinking was behind that.

F Williamson confirmed the following:

1.    With regard to target setting, the targets are reviewed on an annual basis.  Some of them form contractual measures and therefore they have to be in consultation with our service providers.  We are in the process of undertaking the fifth year review of the Osborne contract, so there is the potential for some re-setting of some of the performance indicator targets at the end of this financial year for the remainder of the Osborne contract.  The others are set in consultation with the Tenants and Leaseholder Committee and the Portfolio Holder and the Group Managers in each service area, to make sure that the targets remain sufficiently challenging but are realistic.

2.    We are looking at splitting out the property types in consultation with the Portfolio Holder.  We have agreed that this year we should do this in order to see those exceptions and also do some benchmarking against other organisations on the standard voids.  That will be shown separately in the reports going forward.

3.    We are currently trialling moving the lettings team into Property and Place because once the properties are handed to the contractor to undertake the work the lettings team need to work very closely with them to understand when that property will be ready to let, so that the advertising cycle can co-ordinated, so that these two things run concurrently.  At that stage hopefully the advert will have closed and we shall be ready to identify a suitable applicant.

Cllr Mahmood enquired about when we are notified that the home is becoming empty, do we go in during the notice period so that we can undertake a survey.  F Williamson confirmed that we did when we have a notice to quit served, we have 28 days to try and get into the property.  We have to work with the outgoing tenant in those circumstances, we do get a pre-termination visit undertaken so that we are aware of the extent of any work and also to re-inforce to the outgoing tenants what their obligations are in respect of the condition they are expected to leave the home in.  In 18/19 some analysis was undertaken to look at the reasons that properties were terminated, there were a high number of terminations through death, which means there is no notice period.  We had 13 through evictions and four through abandonment.  In situations like that we don’t have any prior notification.

The Chair asked how far the numbers are skewed by adapted properties as she understood that we have to wait for an occupational therapist to assess the property and she believed that was 116 days, so straight off we are 116 days behind normal target.  N Beresford confirmed the figures for May and we had 38 properties that were let, of those properties two were adapted, taking a total of 150 days, which is quite a significant period of time.  We require lengthy negotiations with an occupational therapist to determine the suitability of a property for a household.  The two properties that we’ve been negotiating with, both the client and the occupational therapist has some unfortunately circumstances in one case where we had identified a household for the property and some minor works were undertaken to ensure it was suitable. Unfortunately during that process there was a bereavement during the process which meant that the household no longer required the adaptations.  We then had to undertake the process of identifying another household. N Beresford confirmed it is an extensive process, circumstances change a lot whilst we are undertaking assessments and we are required to liaise with colleagues at County and often multiple agencies.  For this month we had 15 sheltered properties that were let during May, which had a total void period of 595 days, so we quite quickly start to see that adapted properties and those undergoing major works do account for a large number of the days taken to let properties.

The Chairman enquired about the costs of adaptations and why it’s worth undergoing the lengthy process.  F Williamson replied that a through floor lift is around £14k.  If there is a ground floor extension with lifting hoists, a level access shower and other specialist equipment, that has to have additional strengthening works to the structure, will mean that the costs will be more than a standard build and can often run between £50k and £70k depending on the nature of the equipment used.

The Chairman requested clarification on the costs to maintain a property, without adaptions.  F Williamson advised that within the Business Plan we look at investment of around £51k over a 30 year period.

Cllr Mahmood said that there seems to be two issues with adaptations, one is money and the other the type of adaptions that are needed.  Are we being proactive in what needs to be done or do we just wait for people to come in.  N Beresford highlighted that with applications on the Housing Register we have an in-depth medical assessment undertaken.  Quite a lot of our stock does not lend itself to undertaking adaptations due to the nature of the property, so there is extensive work undertaken with the teams in preparation for our new build programme and five of the units at Kylna Court development are lifetimes homes built to adaptable requirements, so we are looking to futureproof tenants needs to look at the long term requirements.  We do have an extensive list of households who require more intensive adaptations than just ramping and handrails, they require significant adaptions to a property.  We currently have households that have been waiting in excess of two years for extensive requirements because we are unable to accommodate their needs with the adapted properties that are coming available.

Cllr England asked what proportion of the stock is significantly adapted.  F Williamson replied that there was not huge numbers, we are talking in the 10s rather than 100s properties with significant adaptations.  With properties that have a stairlift or level access shower is in the 100s.  In the bathroom renewal programme, especially with shelter accommodation, we are looking at replacing baths with level access showers.

Cllr England suggested that the letting time is being affected by the adapted properties and this begins to explain the 25% increase in voids.  Cllr England asked if this was a significant contributor to what’s happening with this KPI.  Cllr Griffiths said that’s why she has agreed to split the figures out so that we can see rather than guess.  Hopefully as we go through the year and definitely by this time next year we will have more definitive information.

Cllr England mentioned the direct offer list and asked if this was a massive funnel for the numbers going through.  N Beresford confirmed that households pending an offer on the direct offer list, on the wider housing register we have 5,600 applicants, that increases by approximately 180 applications every month, a good proportion of those, at least 25%, are identifying with some form of medical need, either physical or mental health requirements.  The direct offer list has around 50 households pending an offer of adapted accommodation.

Cllr Mahmood enquired if we have looked at prefabrication to speed things up.  F Williamson confirmed that we have used prefabricated pod on a trial basis for one property that we adapted.  It was successful but they do have some site constraints if you’re using a volumetrics system because you have to be able to crane it into place, so you do need to have room at the side of the property rather than the rear.

Cllr Freedman mentioned the number of complaints we had received and asked if there is any more resources available or if we are at risk in dealing with complaints.  F Williamson advised that generally the performance has been positive and in the main 100% are responded to within target. We did have a number that came in that were complex, either due to a number of services being involved or waiting for external contractors.  One of the reasons there were six out of target was because four of those were complex cases, one was due to a member of staff being on long term sick and the other one were as a result of the system which gave an incorrect response date.

Cllr Freedman mentioned that the collection of arrears is positive, which is very good, but wondered what the bad debt policy was as he had noticed that in the past year this has been significantly above budget.  Cllr Freedman asked if we have favourable arrear collection but still a significant adverse variance on bad debt.  L Warden explained that a substantial amount of these were from Debt Relief Orders whereby a tenant has the debt written off, so we have to write the debt off. This was substantially more than we were expecting and additionally we went through a process to identify some long standing debts, like former tenant arrears, whereby we have been trying to recover for many years.

Cllr Freedman queried if people who get a Debt Relief Order can stay in the tenancy.  L Warden confirmed they would be able to stay and continue the tenancy with us.

The Chairman confirmed the recommendation that the report is noted and Committee agreed.