Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and notice of appointment of substitutes.

Apologies were received from Councillor P J Heal.

Councillors are reminded of the requirement to declare any interest,

including the type of interest, and reason for that interest, either at this

stage of the meeting or as soon as they become aware of that interest.

No interests were declared under this item.

To receive any questions relating to items on the Agenda from members of the public and replies thereto.

There were no members of the public present.

Members to consider whether to approve the minutes as a correct record of the meeting held on 11 September 2018.

The minutes of the meeting held on 11 September 2018 were confirmed as a true and accurate record and SIGNED by the Chairman.

A brief discussion took place regarding the policy in relation to the parking of mobility scooters in communal areas being forbidden as per the current Mid Devon District Council approved policy. It was suggested that consideration be given in the future to providing a covered shelter (with electric) for these vehicles although it was recognised that currently there was not money available within the budget to do this. It was explained that where somebody had been assessed by an Occupational Therapist as having a need for a mobility scooter the Council did make the necessary adjustments to that persons home to allow for a scooter, for example, by installing ramps, widening doors or providing mobility aids.

It was further suggested that planners and developers should give more consideration to incorporating a sheltered area or storage space for scooters in the design of facilities aimed at the older population.

To receive any announcements that the Chairman may wish to make.

The Chairman had no announcements to make.

To consider the Government’s Green Paper entitled ‘A new deal for social housing’ and to reflect on the questions asked within the document in order to provide a response to the consulation.

The Group had before it a copy of the Government’s Green Paper * entitled ‘A new deal for social housing’. Within the document there were a number of questions that interested parties were encouraged to think about and provide a response to as part of a national consultation.

In an effort to aid discussion, the Group Manager for Housing had provided some suggested responses to each of the questions (see Appendix A). The Group discussed each of these in depth and provided the following comments and where necessary, amendment, to the suggested response:

1.    How can residents best be supported in this important role of working with landlords to ensure homes are safe?

Suggested response was agreed. The Group noted that it is the view of this Council that when a housing authority has stock that is maintained to a good standard and offers a high standard of service delivery, it is less likely that tenants will come forward to get involved although the Council worked hard to encourage them to do so.

2.    Should new safety measures in the private rented sector also apply to social housing?

The word ‘Yes’ to be added to the start of the suggested response as the Group felt it should be equitable on both sides.

3.    Are there any changes to what constitutes a Decent Home that we should consider?

In addition the Group suggested that the definition of a “decent Home” should implicitly include consideration of any adaptations needed as a result of an aging population; this may include, for example, the provision of storage facilities for mobility scooters.

4.    Do we need additional measures to make sure social homes are safe and decent?

Agreed suggested response. The Group considered that the Council was doing all it could to provide a comprehensive adaptations service.

5.    Are there ways of strengthening the mediation opportunities available for landlords and residents to resolve disputes locally?

Agreed suggested response. The Council was currently doing all it could to resolve disputes locally and the Group were satisfied that a robust system was in place.

6.    Should we reduce the eight week waiting period to four weeks, or should we resolve the requirement for the “democratic filter” stage altogether?

Agreed suggested response to reduce to four weeks.

7.    What can we do to ensure that the “designated persons” are better able to promote local resolutions?

Suggested response agreed as written.

8.    How can we ensure that residents understand how best to escalate a complaint and seek redress?

Suggested response agreed as written.

9.    How can we ensure that residents can access the right advice and support when making a complaint?

Suggested response agreed as written.

10.How can we best ensure that landlords’ processes for dealing with complaints are fast and effective?

Suggested response agreed as written.

11.How can we best ensure safety concerns are handled swiftly and effecting within the existing redress framework?

Suggested response agreed as written.

12.Do the proposed key performance indicators cover  ...  view the full minutes text for item 39.