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 extent of the repair needed. CHMP work with the provider to ensure that there are clear timescales and that properties move through the system quickly. Yet some properties need an extraordinary amount of work.

Councillor Ross Garrod asked why properties are allowed to go back on to the housing register when they are not adequate for residents to move into. Pauline Ford stated that they do not go on to the register until they are ready. Steve Langley explained the process regarding nomination rights to the Panel and how they work with CHMP to minimise delays.

Councillor John Sargeant asked about tenant scrutiny and if the people involved are the same as the resident advocates. Pauline Ford explained that the regulator expects there to be a process in place for co-regulation with residents and this is where the scrutiny process has come in. Residents received training to undertake this role. Councillor John Sargeant asked if the panel could see the tenant panel’s final reports. Pauline Ford agreed to share these with the Panel.

Councillor Janice Howard asked what steps had been taken to evict disruptive tenants. Pauline Ford explained that there is an Anti Social Behaviour team who work with neighbourhood wardens and a range of tools are in place to monitor any issues. This team also work closely with environmental health and adult social care to establish if there are any issue regarding vulnerability. The burden of proof for eviction is substantial in such cases and human rights need to be taken into consideration. CHMP can evict but need the appropriate evidence base.

Councillor Russell Makin asked if ambience reports could be shared with the Panel which are compiled by wardens in certain wards. Pauline Ford agreed to look into this.

Councillor David Dean asked if CHMP had a need to raise funding and if they were able, as an organisation, to ask for funding from the Mayor’s office. Pauline Ford explained that funding was sought, yet the levels available to councils and housing associations to support housing need had decreased over the years. The majority of the work undertaken to date to improve housing stock had been funded by CHMP.

RESOLVED: Panel noted the presentation and asked for an update on performance at their March 2015 meeting.