Agenda item

To receive a briefing from officers in response to concerns raised in connection to the delivery of Major Works on the Canada Estate. 

 

The committee will also hear from local ward councillors and the Canada Estate Tenants and Residents Association.

 

Included within the agenda papers is correspondence requesting scrutiny of the issue and a briefing report from officers responding to the concerns raised.

The committee heard from Councillor Stephanie Cryan in her capacity as ward councillor, Mr Barry Duckett, chair of the Canada Estate Tenants & Residents Association, and estate residents Ms Elaine Lock and Mr Michael Robertson.

 

The committee also heard from Desmond Vincent, Assistant Director of Building Safety and Major Works, and David Quirke-Thornton, Strategic Director.

 

Key points made by Councillor Cryan

 

·  This was a major works project that she felt had not been handled as well as it should have been

·  Works 17 months overdue, the longer the contract went on the more costs went up

·  Additional costs for leaseholders

·  More money required from the housing revenue account to meet the costs

·  Concerns around contract management and financial management of the contract

·  Concerns over response, paragraph 6 of the report – reasons given for delay

·  Catalogue of misinformation around window replacement

·  Felt that all the decisions were made for the benefit of the contractor and not for residents

·  Residents’ concerns were dismissed

·  Concerns around installed windows – experience of windows whistling which increased for windows higher up.  It was noted that building control were doing investigations and some of the concerns were now being picked up

·  Issues around timing of instructions for scaffolding being struck (before painting and pigeon netting installed) and incorrect information sent to residents around this

·  Tenants and Residents Association AGM held in September 2023 has seen a shift change in attitude towards residents - residents were now being listened to and promises made to investigate and come back to residents with answers

·  Residents have not been treated with respect by the contractors and by some officers as well

·  Decisions being made at a lower level were not the right decisions, or were being made without consultation.

 

Mr Barry Duckett addressed the committee about communication around scaffolding and the replacement of the windows. Mr Duckett also addressed the committee around reasons for the delays.

 

Key points made by Mr Barry Duckett

 

·  Installed windows forced upon residents, not fit for purpose

·  Question mark over existence of a Fire Brigade report stating windows were dangerous

·  Absence of officers and consultants on site

·  Breakdown of communication in zoom meetings, with residents being cut-off if they mentioned issues the contractors didn’t like

·  Residents not involved in any decision making

·  Major decisions being made on residents behalf without them being informed

·  Contractors cutting holes in estate landing panels instead of unscrewing them (incurring more cost for replacement of the panels)

·  Replacement of landing doors installed 10 years ago, adding significant cost

·  Fire risk assessment (type fours)

·  Estate ventilation system covered over with Asphalt

·  Lack of consultation with residents

·  Lack of acknowledgement that the clients were the tenants and leaseholders

·  Residents not provided with the fire risk assessments undertaken

·  Building material in cavity walls in low rise blocks rotted away due to water penetration over the years resulting in the flats smelling of mould Proposed solution was to repoint the walls and redo the beams as infilling would be too expensive.  Instead the contractors put in polystyrene and covered it over with cement – the flats were still very wet

·  Scaffolding was left up for two years

·  Residents not being given scope of works upon enquiry

·  Safety rules being broken

·  Reports of residents being happy with the work carried out, however no satisfaction survey had been undertaken

·  Residents not given choice over colour of paint used, even though they did not want the colour chosen.

·  Incomplete paint work where scaffolding footplates had been, resulting in big unpainted square marks across the estate

·  Works being signed off without asking residents whether they were happy with the works

·  Painting was of poor quality, and the residents still had to pay for it

 

Key points made by Ms Elaine Lock in relation to the windows

 

·  Resident of Columbia point for 30 years

·  Prior to windows being changed, she never had to turn on her bedroom heaters or the small radiator in her living room.  Since windows changed, now experience significant drafts due to the damage done to the structural integrity of the cavity walls, resulting in required use of all the radiators in the property

·  Brickwork damaged during the removal of the windows, including the breeze blocks between the kitchen and living room dividing wall – this was never fixed

·  The silicone used was failing both inside and out and allowing water to penetrate the rock wall and cavity walls

·  The force used to remove the large living room windows had damaged the structural integrity of the cavity wall resulting in drafts from above and below the windows

·  The drafts had been acknowledged by the contractor, but their only solution was to use more silicone above the curtain rail and below the windowsill, however this had not resolved the problem.

·  One third of her living room was now freezing cold across that bank of windows in the winter

·  The small kitchen window in many of the estate properties were covered over during major works undertaken in 2015.  The contractor and the council refused as part of the current major works to remove the covering so that the small windows could be sealed internally.  In a lot of the properties the wind whistles through the air vents creating a high pitched noise which was unbearable for a lot of the tenants

·  No retaining arm or way of locking windows on the tilt – when you have a cross breeze during the summer, the windows slam shut

·  The air vents were cheap and difficult to open, and difficult to reach

·  No extra filtration on the air vents, so tenants were being exposed to the air pollution, dust and dirt from the road that runs to the Canada Water Bus Station and British Land major construction sites which the estate was situated next to

·  Unable to clean infill panels on the large strip of windows or the glazing on the balcony or the drains

·  Tenants informed that if they didn’t let contractors install the windows, it would be a breach of their tenancy and would be taken to court.

 

Key points made by Mr Michael Robertson

 

·  Officer response inaccurate and legally disputable

·  Communications have been an issues since the start of the project

·  Concerns of residents not being captured by the council on site – contractor had no relevance comment book, and no mechanism in place by the council throughout the programme to feedback to residents on the weekly meetings being held between the contractor and the council.

·  Residents persistently hindered by the council from obtaining straightforward data on communications, certificates and safety reports

·  Multiple cases of breaches involved with the project – examples given, smoke extraction units on the two tower blocks, and amendments to the living room windows

·  Major scrutiny required in order to establish accountability, and scrutiny of the framework that the council operates within.

 

The committee then heard from officers.

 

David Quirke-Thornton, Strategic Director gave an unreserved apology to the residents, the TRA and ward councillors on their experience.  He indicated that he was very concerned about the reports on the contractor, and working with residents, the TRA and the ward councillors, everything was on the table to resolve and to remedy the matter, and to take to learning and accountability.

 

Desmond Vincent, Assistant Director for Building Safety and Major Works informed the meeting that he was brought in under the former strategic director of housing to start a transformation exercise to look at some of the failings and challenges to try to improve the service.

 

Desmond introduced the officer report.  He explained that the report was responding to the direct questions raised by ward councillors [letter to the chair of overview and scrutiny committee].

 

Councillor Stephanie Cryan indicated that what was clear was that residents were asking for an investigation, and this investigation needed to be independent.  The parameters of that investigation needed to be agreed with residents, and that residents should be on the panel to choose who they want that investigation to be carried out by. 

 

The overview and scrutiny members recommended that the following areas be covered as part of the investigation:

 

·  Management of the whole exercise, including framework, and contract management of the whole major works

·  Oversight of the project in terms of how it progressed

·  Consultation with residents

·  Committee should come back to this issue this year, but guided by local ward councillors and residents

·  Make a recommendation to the cabinet member that the council needs a thorough review of the housing department’s culture, its accountability, its competency, its procurement procedure, its approach to repairs, and this should come back to the committee as soon as possible.

·  That the Minutes of the meeting be sent to the peer review, to ask them to look at the culture that has gone on and the issues that have been raised at this meeting, as there were issues that the council needed to be open and accountable for.

·  Outsourcing, how we procure to those third party services (quality of contractors)

·  Consideration of how much services the council should outsource, and how much it may want to provide in house for better accountability.