Agenda item

To receive a progress report on the work related to the Social Housing Regulation Act.

The Assistant Director of Housing presented the report highlighting that it followed on from the over-arching report considered at the last meeting.  This detailed that a self assessment had been conducted of the housing services against the Regulatory Consumer Standards, identifying gaps.  As a result, a number of new or updated policies and procedures were proposed to ensure that there was a clear evidence base for the future review by the social housing regulator.  

The Panel were asked to consider the work centred around the transparency, influence and accountability standard, one of the consumer standards.  There would be reports on the other three standards at future meetings.  It was noted that the transparency, influence and accountability standard required the most work in order to fully comply with the standards, and therefore it was presented to the Panel at an earlier opportunity for scrutiny.

Actions plans were being developed and accessed with a RAG rating to identify which priority to give to the action – high, medium or low.  The recommendations were detailed in the report and the Panel noted that one referred to the principal of a tenant attending future scrutiny meetings, in order to express their views or challenge officer reports.

A housing tenant, Melvyn Utley, was in attendance at the meeting and he was introduced to the Panel and invited to speak by the Chairman.  He felt that there was good level of engagement from the council with housing tenants and that the District Council was a good landlord. He felt that tenants had an important role to play in policy formulation and spoke about possible future tenant involvement at future scrutiny meetings.  He reported that he saw himself not as a tenant representative, but was representative of the tenants.

A Panel Member sought to understand what Mr Utley, as a housing tenant considered to be a safe home.  In response, it was noted homes should be well maintained with, for example no damp or mould, that good services be provided, and that the wider community was a safe place to live.

A question was about tenant representation across the district, in terms of from different groups of people living within the properties, geographical spread as well as tenants from different types of properties.  The Assistant Director referred to the Tenant Accountability structure and the different types of engagement.  It was proposed that a Tenant Involvement Group (TIG) member or tenant representative attend the Panel to give a greater voice to housing tenants.  The membership of the TIG was broadly representative of the demographic make-up of the District.  It was also noted that work was being carried out to get to know housing tenants better, to make the council more visible within local communities and ensure that services responded to residents’ needs.  All tenants had a voice, and tenants were asked to respond to the tenant engagement survey.  All feedback was accessed and used to shape services for the future.

RESOLVED:

1.     That the Housing Department’s compliance against meeting The Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard as part of preparedness for Inspection was noted;

2.     That the principle that a TIG member or representative be approved to attend the Panel in future to express views or challenge officer reports in person alongside the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Homelessness; and

3.     That the tenant accountability structure, as per Figure 1 in the report be supported for adoption by the Housing Department.