Agenda item

To receive a report from the Head of Housing and Health.  This report is 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. 

The Group had before it, and NOTED, a report * from the Head of Housing & Health providing a quarterly update to Members on the activity undertaken by Mid Devon Housing, including some relating to enforcement.

The following was highlighted:

·         There was currently a gap in the data around Tenant Satisfaction Measures perception survey results. This was purely related to a timing issue, this data would be provided next time following the first round of the tenant survey.

·         Last year MDH undertook a single survey, this would be increased to three this year and four going forwards.

·         Void turnaround times continued to be under pressure.

·         Recruiting trained staff continued to be a problem with the lowest number of retained staff in ten years.

·         Repairs would always be prioritised and the health and safety of tenants would always come before anything else.

·         The Council was currently holding 22 development voids. Existing tenants needed to be decanted and this took some time.

·         The Council was still managing to achieve a 97% occupancy rate, this included properties used for temporary accommodation by general fund where there was a greater turnover of occupants hence more void periods.

·         MDH recently received a number of queries from the Regulator of Social Housing on its safety approach to electrical testing following the submission of the last years Tenant Satisfaction Measures (TSM) management data. They had a long list of questions but had gone away being satisfied that the Council was doing what it should to protect tenants and was compliant with requirements.

Discussion took place with regard to:

·         Councillors needed to know where voids were being ‘turned over’. It was explained that sometimes this happened quite quickly and that to inform Members each time might be a challenge, however, it might be possible to produce a short monthly update report to Members. This would be explored. However, it was stressed that the location of each void could not be publically advertised for obvious reasons.

·         The definition of void categories was set out in the Voids Management Policy available online including the Decent Homes voids.

·         MDH tried to get every major repair completed whilst a property was void so that there was minimal upheaval for incoming tenants.

·         Loss of rent and repair costs needed to be weighed up. ‘No win, no fee’ disrepair claims had a part to play and could potentially cost the Council millions of pounds if issues such as damp and mould were not addressed as a priority, therefore treating conditions such as this whilst a property was void was vital to ensuring its future safe occupancy.

·         It was noted that for the first time a performance report had been brought to the PDG showing a 100% gas safety check compliance.

·         Officers would use a number of methods to survey tenants, not just by telephone.

·         The Group requested a breakdown of the survey results once they were available.

·         The question in relation to the TSM specifically on complaints handling. It was recognised as the most challenging as often what happened was that responses to this survey question ends up being obviously influenced by the fact a tenant has made a complaint and their reaction to the outcome of their complaint which may not always be objective in terms of how effective the handling process was understandably. It was potentially a bit of a false measure. It would be interesting to analyse the national position with regard to this question in the future and benchmark data.

Note: * Report previously circulated.