Agenda and minutes

As the Chair of the Homes Policy Development Group had sent her apologies for the meeting and the Vice Chair had also sent his apologies, there was a need to elect a replacement Chair for the purposes of this meeting only.

RESOLVED that Cllr J Cairney be elected Chair for the purposes of this meeting only.

(Proposed by Cllr B Holdman and seconded by Cllr S Chenore).

RESOLVED that Cllr B Holdman be elected Vice Chair for the purposes of this meeting only.

(Proposed by Cllr J Cairney and seconded by Cllr S Chenore)

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

Apologies were received from:

·         Cllr C Adcock who was substituted by Cllr B Holdman.

·         Cllr A Glover

·         Cllr C Harrower

To receive any questions from members of the public and replies thereto.

There were no questions from members of the public.

To record any interests on agenda matters.

No interests were declared under this item.

To consider whether to approve the minutes as a correct record of the meeting held on 3^rd June 2025. 

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 June 2025 were approved as a correct record of the meeting and SIGNED by the Chair.

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

The Chair had the following announcements to make:

·       There was a great deal of important business to discuss on the agenda, he encouraged all participants to be succinct when asking their questions and making comments.

·       He advised the Co-Opted Tenants not to make comment in relation to the Rents Error item as there would be a clash of interests.

·       He drew the Group’s attention to the fact that a previous Chair of the Homes Policy Development Group and former Member of Mid Devon District Council, Cllr Ron Dolley, had recently passed away. The condolences of the Group wished to be passed to his family. The Chair stated that he had been a ‘delightful man’ who always had time for you and he would be sadly missed.

To receive performance information from the Corporate Performance & Improvement Manager for Quarter 1 (2025/2026) in relation to the General Fund and the Housing Revenue Account.

The Group were presented with, and NOTED, two slides showing performance information in the Mid Devon Housing area both under the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) and the General Fund (GF).

The dashboards aimed to give an ‘at a glance’ understanding of how services were performing in terms of performance measures, finance and risk. Any measures that were also part of the Corporate Plan were listed in yellow text.

The indicators were presented with current performance, the annual target and a RAG (red/amber/green) rating to indicate whether or not the Council was on track to meet its target. Overall performance was presented in a pie chart which combined the RAG ratings for both the performance and the finance measures.

A summary of the performance position was presented as follows:

General Fund

• Home Improvement Loans sanctioned was showing as amber. Performance was just below the target position at the end of quarter 1.
• Private Sector Housing Service requests response rate was showing as amber. This was due to an administrative error which had now been rectified. Performance was 100% for Q1, not 90% as stated on the Dashboard.
• Homes PDG Projected Outturn was showing as amber. This was due to higher spend on Community Alarms installations.

Housing Revenue Account

• Mid Devon Housing (MDH) -  Delivery of new Social Housing and New MDH net-zero MMC properties were both showing as red. It was stated that there were homes under construction and most were expected to be delivered in Q3 and Q4.
• MDH routine repairs completed on time was showing as amber. This was just behind target, with 1,129 routine repairs completed on time out of 1,213.  Q2 performance had improved and was currently ahead of target. This would be seen in the Q2 Dashboard.
• HRA Projected Tenant Income was showing as amber. This was due to a very minor variation, made up on £116k loss of income from voids, which was largely offset by £110k increase in affordable rent income.
• HRA Projected Capital Outturn was showing as red across 18 projects with a budgeted spend in 2025/26 of £23.5m, 9 were underspending to a value of £10.5m due to slippage for a variety of reasons, such as delays in planning, legal or tendering. For current stock maintenance and renovations – there was a net £107k overspend largely due to increased works against modernisation and renewables. This was partially offset by underspends in glazing replacements and reduced responsive maintenance works.
• HRA Capital Slippage percenatge of development projects was showing as red. 9 out of 34 projects were slipping. These were largely development projects.

Discussion took place regarding:

·         Whether the number of unoccupied and unfurnished empty homes figure was ‘reasonable’? This needed more context in future.

·         The target of ‘50’ new MDH net zero properties was a challenge but current and ongoing development was moving towards this.

Note: * Slides previously circulated.

To receive a report from the Deputy Chief Executive (S151) presenting to Member’s the updated Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) which covers the period 2026/27 to 2028/29 and to discuss initial options for cost pressures/savings or income related to the services covered by this Policy Development Group (PDG).

The Group had before it a report * from the Deputy Chief Executive (S151) presenting the updated Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) which covered the period 2026/27 to 2028/29 and which discussed initial options for cost pressures/savings or income related to the services covered by the Policy Development Group.

The Head of Finance, Property and Climate Resilience stated that the report needed to be considered in two distinct halves, firstly the General Fund and secondly the Housing Revenue Account.

The report was a little different to that provided in previous years. This was due to theraft of changes expected from 2026/27 and the longer term restrictions placed upon the Council byLocal Government Reorganisation (LGR). The report didn’t give a forecast shortfall to beaddressed. Instead it highlighted the unprecedented level of uncertainty faced by all councils inrespect of funding from 2026/27 onwards and estimated a range that the shortfall could fallwithin.

The Chancellor’s Autumn Budget would not be available until the end of November 2025. This would have a knock on effect of delaying the detail at individual local authority level. The uncertainty regarding future funding could not be overstated.

General Fund Budget Options

Over the summer officers had identified a range of budget options to address the budgetshortfall, using the Red, Amber and Green (RAG) assessment, which were being presented tothe relevant Policy Development Groups for discussion, with the recommendation to support the Green and Amber options.

Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Budget Options

This was largely based on assumptions, including the level of Pay Award, the price of utilities, contractor / materials pricing and income projections. These would be keptunder review and would be updated and brought back to the November PDG as moreinformation became available.As shown in Appendix 5, the forecast indicated a funding shortfall of £541k in 2026/27 risingto £1,796k over the 3-year forecast. Therefore savings ideas and proposals were required.

Discussion took place regarding:

·         The need to estimate the Homelessness Prevention Grant (HPG) due to such uncertainty.

·         It was sensible to be prudent and ‘over cautious’ when assessing the future budget due to the unprecedented circumstances.

·         The proposal to increase the budget in relation to Climate Change needed to be considered given the forecast financial position and the implication it might have in reals of finding further savings in order to be able to afford it.

·         The expected increase in income due to the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and that this would offset the loss of the Devon County Council Share Savings.

·         The question marks shown in the report against the Collection Fund which were due to so many unknowns at this stage of the budget setting process.

·         The Homes for Ukraine Scheme would neither be reduced or expanded, the Council would continue to seek to do what was required of it by Government.

·         The robust approach being taken as regards vacancy approvals by senior management.

·         Temporary accommodation costs.

·         Whether the figures took account of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

To receive a report from the Head of Housing and Health setting out the conditions under which tenants and their visitors may use, store and charge mobility scooters and powered wheelchairs within Mid Devon Housing flats and communal areas.

The Group had before it a report * from the Head of Housing & Health setting out a proposed new policy in relation to mobility scooters in flats.

The following was highlighted within the report:

·       Clear fire safety guidance had been received by both the Government and Devon & Somerset Fire & Rescue and as a housing provider the Council needed to adhere to this.

·       The issue had come to light as a result of a visit from the Fire Service to the St George’s Court development in Tiverton which had two lifts and the potential for mobility scooters to travel up and down the lifts visiting various flats was therefore increased. Whilst these were ‘game changing’ leisure devices for many people with impaired mobility it needed to be recognised that these were bulky items that had the potential to block access and exit points in an emergency. With further risks due to potential fires.

·       The range and quality of mobility scooters varied greatly.

·        Following the approval of the policy, tenants would be able to make informed choices about which properties they would prefer to live in.

Consideration was given to the following:

·       The Council would not be installing charging points at the moment since mobility scooters were classed as leisure vehicles and were not covered as part of the Council’s Aids and Adaptations Policy.

·       All tenants had been made aware of the proposed policy and the legal requirements upon the Council.

·       Support e.g. with PAT (Portable Appliance) Testing could be provided for tenants affected through the handyman service.

·       The Housing Service was currently looking at the overall mobility needs for its tenants across the whole district.

·       There were currently 270 MDH flats above ground floor, officers were not aware of any scooters currently being carried upstairs in those properties. It was estimated that approximately 10 properties might be affected.

RECOMMENDED to the Cabinet that it recommends to full Council:

The adoption of the new Mobility Scooter in Flats Policy and the Equality Impact Assessment contained in Annexes A and B respectively.

(Proposed by Cllr N Letch and seconded by Cllr G Czapiewski)

Reason for the decision

As a registered provider of social housing, the Council must comply with the regulatory standards set by the Regulator of Social Housing. In particular, that it complied with all relevant safety legislation including the mitigation and management of fire risks and meet the wider requirements of the statutory Safety and Quality Standard (consumer standard).

This policy had been developed in close consideration with the latest the National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC) safety guidance for mobility scooters, noting both their benefits and associated fire risks.

Note: * Report previously circulated.

To receive a report from the Head of Housing & Health. Following on from Cabinet approval on 1^st April 2025 to commence statutory consultations with tenants under the Housing Act 1985 section 103 to vary the terms of our tenancy agreement this report presents the results of the consultation and the final draft Tenancy Agreement for approval.

The Group had before it a report * from the Head of Housing & Health setting out the steps needed to meet the legal requirements for varying the terms and conditions of tenancy for existing tenants.

The contents of the report were outlined with particular reference to the following:

·       This document set out the rights and responsibilities of tenants.

·       3000 consultation packs had been sent out regarding the Variation to the Tenancy Agreement (TA).

·       All references to Flexible Tenancies had been removed and a new clause added for CCTV.

·       More detail had been added regarding Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) and keeping people safe.

·       Multiple ways for tenants to respond to the consultation had been offered. The consultation had ended on 30 June 2025.

·       214 responses had been received which equated to approximately 7%.

·       The majority of the responses had said that the new TA was clear and sensible. There were some concerns regarding the use of communal spaces.

·       The aim was to issue the new Tenancy Agreement by the end of October 2025 following approval.

·       This was a vital step towards modernising the housing service.

Discussion took place regarding:

·       Whether or not powers around ASB would be strengthened as a result of this new document. It was confirmed that they would be re-emphasised.

·       A response rate of 7% was typical following a consultation.

·       It was felt that for many ‘not responding’ was probably a sign that they were ‘happy’.

RECOMMENDED to that Cabinet that:

a)    The Tenancy Agreement is approved subject to any responses from new tenants signed up after the preliminary consultation ended.

b)    Delegated authority be given to Head of Housing and Health (in  consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing, Assets and Property Services)  to review the consultation responses from the new tenants and authorise such changes to the new tenancy agreement as he considers necessary in the light of any late consultation responses.

c)     Delegated authority be given to Head of Housing and Health (in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing, Assets and Property Services) to draft and serve the notice of variation to existing secure/introductory tenants under section 103 of the Housing Act 1985 to vary the terms and condition of their tenancies so that they are on the terms and conditions of the new tenancy agreement.

(Proposed by the Chair)

Reason for the decision

As a registered provider (RP) of social housing, the Council was obliged to comply with the requirements of the Housing Act 1985. The specific requirements within the Act with regard to the legal requirements for introducing a new Tenancy Agreement were set out within the report.

The Council’s legal team had been closely engaged through this process with regard the updated Tenancy Agreement itself and the notice/adoption process to ensure legal compliance.

Note: * Report previously circulated.

To receive a report from the Deputy Chief Executive (S151) and the Head of Housing and Health providing an update on the corrective measures completed and next steps in order to rectify an identified historic rent setting error.

The Group had before it, and NOTED, a report * from the Deputy Chief Executive (S151) and the Head of Housing & Health providing an update on the corrective measures completed and next steps in order to rectify an identified historic rent setting error.

The contents of the report were outlined with particular reference to the following:

·       A brief summary of the historic background to the report.

·       There had been progress since the issue was last reported to the Group. A significant amount of chasing had been undertaken with affected tenants but not everybody wanted to engage with the Council where refunds have been offered.

·       All and non-benefit Housing Benefit claims for live tenancies had now been processed.

·       The Council was reliant on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to assist with various tenant calculations and this was proving extremely complicated. At the moment there was a large cohort where the claims could of Universal Credit claimants where the refunds could not be processed due to individual complications and these tenants were being encouraged to engage directly with the DWP.

·       The Council was not the only housing provider in this situation.

·       The work of the Rent Recovery Team had ensured that the Council was ahead of the game where it could be.

Consideration was given to:

·       Concern that Universal Credit claimants were being kept in the loop. It was confirmed that all affected tenants had been written to.

·       The Council had no legal right to know what benefits a tenant received.

·       The Council had not received any complaints so far from tenants, they understood that the Council was waiting for the DWP.

·       It was confirmed that the resources to support this work would continue until the process was complete.

·       Advice was being provided to other local authorities who were experiencing the same issues.

·       The team were confident nobody had been unjustly evicted as a result of this issue.

Note: * Report previously considered.

To receive a report from the Head of Housing & Health presented in support of an ongoing commitment to provide a quarterly update to Members on activity undertaken by Mid Devon Housing (MDH), including some relating to enforcement.

It also contains performance information as measured in line with the guidance relating to the Tenant Satisfaction Measures (TSMs).  The Regulator of Social Housing (RSH) requires registered providers of social housing (RPs) to provide a report on a set of TSMs which includes perception and performance data.

The Group had before it, and NOTED, a report * from the Head of Housing & Health containing performance information as measured in line with the guidance relating to the Tenant Satisfaction Measure (TSM’s).

The Chair stated that due to the time and the length of the meeting, unless the Group had anything urgent they wanted to ask, he requested that any questions in relation to this item be held over to the next meeting.

The Group did not have any urgent issues they wished to raise under this item at the current time.

The Head of Housing & Health briefly explained that the service was performing well, quarter 1 data was strong and was expected to improve in the coming quarters. Annual repairs had taken a dip but all safety measures were where they should be.  

Note: * Report previously circulated.

To receive an update from the Head of Housing & Health on a number of national housing initiatives.

The Group received a presentation providing a summary of national changes in the social housing sector within the context of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) ‘five-step plan for renewal’ (July 2025). This plan was focussed on increasing the supply of social housing and continuing change in the safety and quality of homes.

The presentation included the following information:

§  Nationally there was not enough social and affordable housing (MHCLG July 2025).

§  Locally, the Devon Housing Commission report (2024) had identified the same issues across the county.

§  Mid Devon’s Housing Strategy aimed to build / acquire more MDH social housing properties, grow development pipeline, invest in the current stock, acquire temporary accommodation properties and support 100% of Homelessness presentation.

§  The Government would provide a boost to affordable homes funding through the new Social and Affordable Homes Programme (SAHP)

§  Sector financial capacity:

§  There were a number of regulatory changes including:

o   Updated Decent Homes Standard (DHS) consultation.

o   Implementation of Awaab’s Law from October 2025. There were stringent timelines for investigating and resolving damp & mould and emergency hazards. MDH were putting processes and resources in place to meet this.

o   Mandatory full (inspection) electrical safety checks every five years from November 2025. MDH had already begun significant advance work towards this.

o   Proposals to implement minimum EPC Band C energy standard within social rental sector by 2030. Again, MDH had undertaken significant advance work towards this.

o   Mandatory Competence and Conduct Standard. This would come into force in October 2026 setting out minimum qualification standards for specific housing staff/roles.

§  There was a raft of additional Right to Buy changes.

§  There would be a greater tenant focus in terms of the ‘Resident Experience Innovation Fund’, allocation policies and tenants access to information. This increased focus would mandate specific requirements on housing providers.

Discussion took place regarding:

·       The Housing Service faced a lot of challenges and the team as whole were praised for working hard and being so proactive.

·       The Government had said that damp & mould was an issue that needed to be solely dealt with by individual local authorities. There would be no additional funding to support this work. However, this Council had a robust system in place to tackle this difficult issue.

·       The ‘Rent Convergence’ issue and the difference to a tenant of being charged either £1 or £2 extra per week. These  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

Members are asked to note that the following items are already identified in the work programme for the next meeting:

·       Performance Dashboard Q2

·       Draft General Fund and Housing Revenue Account Budget for 2026/2027 (round 2)

·       Housing Strategy (tbc)

·       Tenancy Strategy

·       Downsizing Recommendations Update

·       Mid Devon Housing Service Delivery Report

Note: This item is limited to 10 minutes. There should be no discussion on the items raised.

The items already listed in the work programme for the next scheduled meeting were NOTED.

It was requested that the following be added to the agenda for the next meeting:

·       Grass cutting for sheltered housing units.

It was also NOTED that the Housing Strategy would need to slip until early 2026 as the Government were currently undertaking a number of initiatives which would have an impact on the MDH Strategy therefore it would be sensible to delay bringing it before Members until then.