Agenda item

Action Plan included at the back of the agenda, on A3 spreadsheet.

4.1  David Longbottom from Grant Thornton, updated the sub-committee on the Audit Review.

4.2  Members commented that the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) should be split with the general fund.

4.3  Members also mentioned that the rents from commercial properties went into the HRA and that funds should be considered on a case by case basis because of the loss of income if funds were moved about.  Members also said that taking rents from properties out of the HRA might give leaseholders the perception that there were injustices in the system.  Members commented that the recharging arrangements between the general fund and the HRA were difficult to understand and that any effort to make this work clearer would be welcome.

4.4  A member wanted to know why leaseholders should contribute to the charge for providing the democratic role of the council and the management structure around the administration.  It was also highlighted that the cost for the provision of bins were not always part of the core costs.  Collection services were, on some estates, an additional cost for doorstep collections for those in flats who do not have access to rubbish shoots and communal bins.

4.5  Members pointed out that open spaces were used by all and yet the leaseholders paid for the upkeep of the area.  There was a difference between the council as landlord and the council in a borough governance role.  Other members commented that there had been no comparative or benchmarking studies made around this issue because of the wide sample needed to adequately inform a view.  The council had to take an objective stance and it was on that basis that it made its decisions.

4.6  It was noted by a tenants and leaseholders representative that the review of the re-charging arrangements was lengthy and difficult to understand.

4.7  It was agreed that the action plan report returns for scrutiny at a future date.