Agenda item

To follow.

 6.1  The Chair highlighted the findings of the report:

-  It was possible that excessive charging was still taking place and this should stop

-  Defects liability for works was not assertive enough and non-existent works were being charged for

-  There was a well motivated customer service but there were some problems immediately outside that team

-  There was a disconnect between the provision of services, for instance cleaning and upkeep.  Staff were not keeping in mind that leaseholders are being charged for the services and processes were not being adequately followed

-  There should be a two-tier system of charges which should be introduced to cater for requests to make minor changes to properties

-  Leaseholders have a poor model of a repairs service

-  There needs to be more focus on contract management

6.2  The sub-committee agreed the following recommendations, to be included in the report:

-  Details of service charges should be on-line and clear for leaseholders to log-in and access

-  Leaseholders should be able to follow up on their service charges and be able to monitor their accounts so that challenges can be made if necessary

-  Extension on the current IT changes for works and charges to be detailed in on-line, personalised accounts for residents.

-  Contracted repair service to follow an ‘i-model’ with direct management control in-house

-  Homeowners should not be required to pay for substandard works

-  A designated officer to be the designated officer for signing off works for leaseholders and the details of the work to be made publically available

-  Scrutiny to do follow up review into contract management services within the housing department later in the year

-  Leaseholders to continue to have a face to face contact service available, to give residents information and a co-ordinated response when dealing with repair works.

-  Cross departmental work to be developed to ensure a coordinated, more efficient overall service

-  An expanded role of leaseholder offices, based in other services to enhance joined up working between departments.

-  More attention to be given to ‘future notice’ of works planned.  (Section 20).  The stipulation should be that if there is not adequate future notice for works, the consultation process cannot  take place.  Section 20 should not be allowed to slide

-  Flat rate service charges to be considered

-  A fixed service charge to be connected to a formula year on year.  Fixed service charge to be an additional option available to leaseholders

6.3  Members commented that changing the current system to put leaseholders accounts on-line might be at a considerable cost.  Members wanted to know if this cost was to be passed on to the leaseholder.  However, In view of the BAR project, the chair did not feel that this was going to be a huge expansion and felt it was a realistic expectation.  Further exploration into the details of such an implementation would be pursued.

6.4  Members felt that repairs should be coming back in house.  It was also the view of members that there should be increased training to raise awareness amongst staff dealing with leaseholders, promoting a more integrated system.

6.5  It was noted by the sub-committee that this year the underestimated and actual costs of services to the leaseholder was more in line.  However members felt that over-estimating costs and asking leaseholders for less money rather than more, might offer a more attractive alternative.  Members felt that whilst fixed services charges were a good idea, the details of this needed to be investigated further.

6.6  It was noted that the action plan needed to be incorporated into the report.  The chair agreed to amend the report and get clearance from the sub-committee via email before the report was submitted Overview & Scrutiny Committee.