Agenda item

To receive a written report from the Executive Member for Housing Services, and to question the Executive Member thereon, provided any such questions are registered in accordance with the timescales and procedures set out in Standing Order 8(2)(a).

A written report was received from Cllr Sunderland, the Executive Member for Housing Services.

Notice had been received of 9 questions on the report, submitted by Members in accordance with Standing Orders.  In the time allowed, the following five questions were put, in the order indicated on the list circulated around the Council Chamber and as set out below, with the Executive Member’s replies:

(i)         From Cllr Horton:

            "Given that you regard the increase from 84% to 88.23% as ‘substantial, would you not regard the shortfall from your own target of 98% as much greater than ‘substantial’ and if not, why not?”

            Reply:

            “I would agree that there is still some way to go to meet our target.  However, it has to be acknowledged that substantial progress in improving urgent repairs has been made over recent years with performance improving from 79% in 2004/05 to a projected 90% this financial year.”

(ii)        From Cllr Horton:

“Given that Labour’s insistence on inclusion of choice-based lettings which did not receive your wholehearted approach at its introduction following a Scrutiny topic, will you now accept that it was Labour’s perception of the procedure that has given rise to the successful numbers of ‘hard to let’ properties being achieved and if not, why not?”

Reply:

The outcome of the all party scrutiny review on Housing Allocations did not recommend full implementation of choice based lettings (CBL).  There is no doubt that the introduction of CBL, for some of our more difficult to let properties, has had a part to play in reducing the length of time it has taken to re-let these properties.  However, a systems review of the void process has been undertaken which has also changed a number of processes within the voids procedure.  Additionally, the changes in staffing structures within Housing Services now give Tenancy Estate Managers a clearer focus.  All contributed to reducing the turnaround time of hard to let properties.”

[In response to a supplementary question from Cllr Horton]

“I do not accept that the introduction of CBL was a result of a minority report from the Scrutiny Committee.”

(iii)       From Cllr Horton:

“Who do you regard as ‘vulnerable perpetrators’ and would you please define?”

Reply:

“The approach that Housing Services take to dealing with anti-social behaviour is three-fold – prevention, enforcement and support.  There are some instances where the most appropriate form of action is no enforcement but supporting the perpetrators to ensure that they modify their behaviour.  In some of these cases the perpetrators will be vulnerable individuals.”

[In response to a supplementary question from Cllr Horton[

“One example of a vulnerable perpetrator would be someone with mental health problems, but there are many others.”

(iv)      From Cllr Hyman:

            "Does the Executive Member have any information regarding the results of the Annual Housing Service Monitor?”

Reply:

“Every year we take a satisfaction survey of our tenants covering the housing landlord service.  I am very pleased to announce that I have the headline figures which I can share with Council.

Questionnaires were sent to 2,000 tenants during October / November 2007.  995 questionnaires were returned – a 49.75% response rate.

The key results were:

·        Tenant satisfaction with the overall services provided by Housing up 8% to 88%

·        Agreement with statement that ‘CYC is a good landlord’ up 12% to 88%

·        Agreement that the rent for the property represents value for money up 12% to 86%

·        Percentage of tenants who would describe the condition of their property as very or fairly good up 7% to 87%

·        Satisfaction with repairs and maintenance up 4% to 83%

·        Satisfaction with opportunities for participation in decision making up 7% to 64%.

I am sure that you will agree that this can be hailed as a huge success.  I would like to thank all the officers who have worked so hard to achieve these fantastic results.”

[In response to a supplementary question from Cllr Horton]

“ received these figures today, in a press release produced by Housing Services.”

(v)       From Cllr Hyman:

            "Does the Executive Member have any information regarding the results of the Annual Housing Service Monitor?”

Reply:

“I understand that York Housing Association could indeed choose to charge differential rents for identical properties on the same site.  However, this would create a precedent.

Any rents charged by a Housing Association need to be agreed by the regulator and funder, which is the Housing Corporation.  The Housing Corporation have agreed the rent levels for the new bungalows as part of the capital grant approval and the financial viability of the project assumed the same rent level.  If the rent levels on any of the properties were to change then the financial viability would have to be re-appraised and would affect the capital receipt.  If this were the case then it is likely that the Council would have to start the whole tender evaluation process again.  This is therefore unlikely to be a viable option.

The Council cannot use monies form the Housing Revenue Account to benefit residents who are not council tenants.  However the Council, under the Local Government Act 2000, does have powers for discretionary expenditure ‘to promote well being in the local area’.

It may be possible, under these powers, to make a contribution towards the rent for those residents who are responsible for full payment of their rents.  However, this would set a precedent for any future redevelopment projects as well as be open to challenge from residents who have been affected by redevelopment of their homes in the past.  

There are currently 15 Discus tenants who do not get any financial help with their rent.  We do not know the financial circumstances of these 15 and the Council and York Housing Association will be visiting these people during February as part of a benefit take up campaign.

Some people may be eligible for help through Housing Benefit now, and others may be eligible when their rents increase.

There may be some people who do not wish to discuss or disclose any financial information.

By the end of February we will have a clear idea of individual circumstances and how many people, if any, will be directly affected by an increase in their rent.”

[In response to a supplementary question from Cllr Potter]

“It’s true that information on the level of rent increases was included in a leaflet left on tables at a meeting of the Steering Group and I was surprised by this.”