None.

Apologies were received from Chris Lee (Director of Environment and Regeneration).

The presentation given by Pauline Ford (CHMP) is available on the council’s website. The presentation covered:

·         Delivering on the promises within the stock transfer agreement;

·         Response to Welfare Reform;

·         Projects such as increasing employment and skills, tackling hoarding and community schemes delivered through the community fund

Councillor David Dean asked about overcrowding and the numbers that need re-housing as a result of this. Steve Langley confirmed approximately 1200 CHMP residents requested a transfer to alternative accommodation which could be as a result of medical factors, downsizing or overcrowding.

Councillor David Dean asked why there were so many people on the housing list. Pauline Ford explained this was due to a range of issues however, homes displayed as much under occupation as overcrowding. The issue therefore becomes how to solve a range of housing issues which are very complex. 

Councillor David Dean asked if there should be an increase in sheltered accommodation for people who are in need and what short and long term estimates are for residents requiring this type of accommodation. Pauline Ford stated that sheltered accommodation was not the answer to rehousing older people and that instead this should be based around choice, and offering a range of solutions for local communities, enabling some to remain in their homes and offering access to high quality accommodation that would aid their mobility. Pauline Ford did not have this information at the meeting and agreed to forward these figures to the Panel after the meeting.

Councillor Stan Anderson asked if lack of housing was due to a lack of land available for new properties to be built, or due to a lack of building. Pauline Ford stated that land availability was a factor and that, at the time of transfer, analysis was undertaken to look at opportunities regarding land availability and how to provide value for money and deliver a sustainable scheme. However, land supply in the borough was limited.

The following questions submitted by Councillor Suzanne Grocott were asked by Councillor Janice Howard and responses received during the meeting:

·         Do CMPH follow prioritisation criteria in determining whether, and if so when, repairs should be undertaken.

·         What is the expected turnaround time for tenants' repairs to be undertaken

·         What steps are needed to evict disruptive tenants?  Dundonald Councillors have been corresponding with MPH for almost a year now about a noisy, disruptive tenant living in a quiet residential street in our ward. MPH has agreed that the tenant is unsuitable for the property, but seem unable to do anything it. 

Councillor Ross Garrod asked about void housing where the tenant has moved out and the property is put back onto the housing register, and what the turn around time was for repairing these properties to make them available to residents. Pauline Ford explained that the amount of time required to repair these homes in Merton is quite extensive and that the average cost of repairing a void property ranges from £5000 to £7000, but costs can increase dependent on the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

The presentation given by Paul Quinn (CHMP) is available on the council’s website. The presentation covered:

·         Rationale for the programme;

·         Scale of the project;

·         Consultation and engagement undertaken; and

·         Next steps

Councillor Stan Anderson asked where residents were placed while regeneration works were underway and if residents had a right to return to their properties once complete. Paul Quinn explained that there are a number of options available to CHMP in how they handle this process. One option could be to build homes first on empty land which would allow people to move in and then free up other buildings to regenerate the remaining stock. CHMP are also looking to acquire sites near estates to build homes ahead of the regeneration scheme and have held discussions with council officers on this. This means some homes would be available for people to live in during this time on the estates, or as close as possible to these estates. He added that the right to return is reflected in the regeneration master plan, which is in its first drafting stage, and takes account of peoples housing needs. CHMP would encourage resident’s right to return.

Councillor David Dean asked what the discrepancy was between cabinet, CHMP and residents about the types of homes they wanted as part of the scheme resulting from the consultation undertaken, in particular with regard to density. Councillor David Dean asked if we would see something other than tower blocks and a design that would look relevant in the future in the plan. Paul Quinn explained that planning would take place based on what they think is the right mix of properties and also in response to consultation outcomes. Density will be considered as part of the master planning.

Councillor Russell Makin asked CHMP to ensure that they consulted the group leaders on the master plan when available.

Councillor Janice Howard asked about the staged offer of market value plus 10% being offered to any residents that wish to leave sooner. How confident are you that you have the funds for all that may wish to take this option. In addition, if residents move out and they are offered right to return, will the cost be the same value CHMP paid to them when they moved out ahead of the regeneration scheme. Paul Quinn explained that the additional 10% is to reflect that their lives are going to be disturbed with the work being undertaken but if they leave early then this will not be the case. With regard to buy back, when properties come to the market, the values of peoples existing homes will have increased and therefore will be valued at that time. If people wanted to buy back and the price of the property was higher then CHMP would provide shared equity options. Options will be explored with homeowners as part of the consultation programme to support residents to buy and remain in their homes. Workshops will be run on this during the winter.

Councillor Janice  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

The presentation given by Mark Anderson (CHMP) is available on the council’s website. The presentation covered:

·         Repairs and maintenance undertaken since the housing stock transfer;

·         Objectives of the service;

·         Achievements;

·         Challenges going forward; and

·         Investment in the service

Councillor Tobin Byers asked if interest in the regeneration programme at High Path Estate was linked to resident’s experience of the repairs programme, especially if this was negative. Furthermore, if surveyors are visiting properties but work is not completed then what percentage of work is undertaken based on these visits. Mark Anderson confirmed that he had heard that resident’s have had many visits from different surveyors. CHMP needs to plan so that one survey covering a number of aspects is covered in one visit. In terms of day to day response to repairs, one of the downsides has been around staff retention given where the team is located and other places offering a higher rate of pay. A fixed stable team is currently in place and hopes are that they will become permanent.

Councillor Ross Garrod asked if the staffing structure for repairs was working as the team were accountable to the regional manager and the rest of the operation was accountable to the managing director in Morden. How many Housing Associations have this set up and how well is it working.

Mark Anderson explained that as the regional director for property service repairs he spent 3 days a week in Morden and was closely involved and that there was a customer service centre in operation under Wayne Hainsworth.  There is daily dialogue between the two posts. However, going forward they will consider the effectiveness of the structure.

Councillor Ross Garrod added that communication seemed to be a problem between teams and with stakeholders and that perhaps there was a disjointed approach to resolving issues. Mark Anderson agreed that historically it has been disjointed but that changes have been made to address this.

Councillor John Sargeant asked about staff retention and performance and average length of service. Furthermore, what processes had been adopted to ensure that issues are not missed?

Councillor John Sargeant also asked for an update on allegations about Keep Moat in the local press. Mark Anderson stated that they had reviewed processes and staff performance and that previous communication issues have been acknowledged and dealt with. However, the focus of the team has always been on supporting the customer and less on the team responsible.

Mark Anderson added that there was an investigation underway regarding Keep Moat and informed the Panel that there is an independent audit every 6 months on the contract. This issue is being dealt with by the Executive Director of Governance. The results from the audit should be available to the CHMP Board shortly.

Councillor Stan Anderson asked if homeowners could go to other providers for repairs and maintenance. Mark Anderson explained that repairs relate to a common part of the building and that they encourage repairs to be requested through them as the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Panel discussed undertaking a task group review of housing supply. The Panel agreed to conduct the review and that the scope for this review is produced and presented for approval to the next available Panel meeting.

RESOLVED: Membership of the task group agreed: Councillor Ross Garrod (Chair), Imran Uddin, Dennis Pearce, Abdul Latif, Janice Howard.