Agenda, decisions and minutes

1.1. RESOLVED: that the minutes of the last meeting be agreed as a true record.

1.1. At the meeting on 16 July 2024, the Committee recommended that all housing providers notify the Council at an early stage if they were planning on using Ground 8 on Lewisham nominees. The Chair enquired whether housing providers had been informed of this recommendation and if any responses had been received. Peabody, Clarion and Hyde indicated they would be willing to comply in principle but would need to establish an agreed process. L&Q stated they would provide further guidance on how they could notify the Council, while Southern Housing indicated they would need to obtain residents’ permission before disclosing information.

1.2. RESOLVED: that the minutes of the last meeting be agreed as a true record.

2.1. Councillor Stephen Penfold declared an interest as a Director at J49- which is a registered social housing provider that operates within Lewisham.

2.1. Councillor Stephen Penfold declared an interest as a Director at J49- which is a registered social housing provider that operates within Lewisham.

RESOLVED: That

·         the report be noted.

·         the Committee be provided with an informal update following the expiry health check of the Council’s PFI contract with Regenter B3 by the Infrastructure and Project Authority.

·         all future review reports from Regenter B3 include details on anti-social behaviour and possession actions for rent arrears.

Paul Williams (Head of Housing, Pinnacle), Paul Mitchell (Area Manager, Pinnacle) and Hugo Marais (Head of Operations, Rydon) introduced the report. This was followed by a discussion with the Committee members. The following key points were noted:

3.1. Officers reported that all contractual KPIs had been met or exceeded over the past 12 months.

3.2. A key focus of the service improvement plan for the next 12 months was enhancing responses to Stage 1 and Stage 2 complaints and mitigating the risk of those complaints being escalated to the Housing Ombudsman.

3.3. Income management performance had shown year-on-year improvement. However, the ongoing cost-of-living crisis was impacting income collection. In response, Pinnacle had made significant investments in their welfare advice service to support residents affected by these challenges.

3.4. A Committee member shared that the departure of a Pinnacle officer had not been well-communicated to residents, leading to confusion as residents continued trying to reach the officer, unaware they had left the organisation as no out-of-office message was being sent. Officers apologised for this miscommunication and confirmed that an out-of-office message had been activated, and IT had corrected the issue.

3.5. Point 9.19 of the report indicated that service charge collection was at 104.52%. The collection rate exceeded 100% as past due charges (arrears) were recovered in addition to current charges. Each year, a fixed service charge amount was allocated to each account, yet some accounts still had unpaid charges from previous years. If both current service charges and some historical arrears were collected during the year, the total collection rate would surpass 100%, reflecting the recovery of more than the current year’s allocation.

3.6. Point 7.6 in the report noted that tenant satisfaction with the overall service was 70.7%, a year-on-year decrease of about 10% compared to last year. This decline in satisfaction was partly attributed to a change in the tenant survey methodology, which was now more detailed and involved than previous versions. The new approach set a new baseline for measuring satisfaction across providers and also encouraged greater tenant participation, including responses from previously disengaged or dissatisfied tenants, resulting in a broader range of feedback and contributing to the lower satisfaction levels.

3.7. Tenant satisfaction with landlord’s handling of complaints was at 34.6%, reflecting a sector-wide issue where tenant satisfaction with complaint handling was consistently low. For Brockley PFI, officers noted that another challenge was a lack of clarity around what constituted a formal complaint. Many residents who reported low satisfaction with complaint handling, had not formally submitted a complaint. There was need for clearer communication to guide residents on how to log complaints so they would be recognised and resolved accordingly.

3.8. Tenant Satisfaction Measures (TSMs) were introduced in 2023/24, making this the first year of their implementation,. They brought greater uniformity across the housing sector and allowed for improved benchmarking.

3.9. Several ‘quick wins’ had been identified to improve tenant satisfaction with complaint handling, such as a weekly review of complaints between all partners across the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

RESOLVED:

·         That the report be noted.

Patrick Dubeck (Director of Inclusive Regeneration) introduced the report. This was followed by a discussion with the Committee members. The following key points were noted:

4.1. The July 2024 report to Mayor and Cabinet on the Building for Lewisham (BfL) programme recommended a revised delivery approach, that included a strategy to put the Drake, Greystead, Valentine Court and Fairlawn schemes on hold to ease pressure on the Housing Revenue Account (HRA).

4.2. The Bampton Road scheme, a fully affordable scheme in Perry Vale ward, received additional funding due to a contractor needing to address costly utility work. Additional Section 106 funding was allocated to support a commercial settlement with the developer at Bampton Road, putting the scheme back on track for completion in late 2024.

4.3. Several market-wide factors were impacting the housing delivery programme, including rising construction labour costs, and building safety changes that required modifications to some development schemes. Although inflation rates had lowered, cost pressures remained, as there was no deflation, and borrowing costs continued to be high.

4.4. The report noted that the BfL programme had delivered 385 homes between 2018 and 2022, with an additional 684 homes either under construction (‘on-site’) or recently completed. These totals included homes delivered through partnerships such as those with Peabody and L&Q, where council funding or land had facilitated the development of affordable housing.

4.5. The 2022-2026 Labour manifesto committed to delivering 800 new social homes, defined as ‘genuinely affordable rent’- a mix of social rent and London affordable rent. While the programme included some shared ownership options, these were tracked separately and did not count toward the target of 800 social homes.

4.6. A Committee member enquired about the allocation of Right to Buy receipts and how they were being used to fund low-cost homeownership rather than social rental homes. Officers explained that Right to Buy receipt rules were restrictive, frequently changing, and could not be combined with other grant funding (such as GLA funding) to support social rent units. Instead, the Council typically applied for GLA grants alongside HRA borrowing to deliver genuinely affordable housing, while Right to Buy receipts and HRA borrowing were allocated to support intermediate housing, such as shared ownership. This cross-subsidy model- using distinct funding sources for different tenures within a scheme- enhanced financial viability, meeting diverse housing needs and delivering a balanced range of affordable options.

4.7. One risk highlighted in the report noted that, while build costs were stabilising, an increase in contractor insolvencies pointed to the market’s ongoing fragility. This reflected a broader market trend and did not indicate rising insolvencies within the BfL programme, which had seen three contractor insolvencies over the past 24 months, though none in the past year. Over the last 3-4 years, contractor insolvencies had disproportionately affected small and medium-sized companies, while larger corporations were generally more resilient against market pressures. Although the Council initially prioritised engaging with small businesses in the BfL programme, it now aimed to balance this by working with larger  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

RESOLVED: That

·         the report be noted.

·         the Committee supports the Cabinet Member, Councillor Will Cooper, performing the role of the ‘Member responsible for Complaints’ for the purposes of the Housing Ombudsman Complaint Handling Code.

·         the annual submissions required under the statutory Housing Ombudsman Service Complaint Handling Code 2024 that include the annual self-assessment against the Code, the annual complaints report and service improvement report, be presented to the Committee each year before the 30^th of June publication deadline.

Carol Hinvest (Director of Housing Resident Engagement and Services) introduced the report. This was followed by a discussion with the Committee members The following key points were noted:

5.1. Section 11 of the report highlighted the key themes and trends that emerged from the analysis of Lewisham’s 2023/24 complaints casework, resident feedback and Housing Ombudsman cases.

5.2. On 30 July 2024, the Housing Ombudsman launched a special investigation into Lewisham Council under paragraph 49 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme. This investigation stemmed from a high maladministration rate, including a significant number of severe maladministration findings, and non-compliance issues relating to complaints handling. Details of the investigation were further elaborated in Section 8 of the report.

5.3. Page 119 of the agenda pack stated that- ‘Lewisham Council had over 40 residents out of every 1,000 residents who brought a formal investigation to the Housing Ombudsman, a comparatively high rate.’ A Committee member asked for clarification on whether this meant 1000 Lewisham residents in general or 1000 Lewisham Council housing tenants.

5.4. Housing Ombudsman determinations had risen, with Lewisham receiving 23 findings of service failure and maladministration in 2023-24, of which 17 involved failures in complaint handling. Officers explained that it took years for many cases to be fully processed and therefore many determinations received in 2023-24, often related to complaints made in 2021-22 or earlier, when properties were managed by Lewisham Homes, and service had been declining. This backlog, compounded by an increase in sector-wide complaints, had led to escalations to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman’s outreach efforts, including advertisements on radio and newspapers, had also raised awareness about the complaint process.

5.5. The report proposed creating a formalised process to learn from complaints. Although such a process had not yet been established, officers suggested various approaches, including team meetings, service-wide discussions, tracking insights on the complaint portal, or potentially developing new policies or procedures based on these learnings.

5.6. The service improvement plan included in the agenda pack outlined actions for the 2024-25 financial year, with the Housing Ombudsman Service expecting Lewisham to complete these actions by March 2025. Lewisham would need to provide evidence of improvement in processes, policies, and practices.

5.7. The service improvement action plan set July 2024 as the target completion date for updates to the Compensation, Reimbursements, and Remedies policy. A Committee member asked if this had been achieved and officers reported that a draft policy was prepared and was now being finalised with input from legal teams.

5.8. In July 2024, Lewisham received a letter from the Housing Ombudsman service noting that, under paragraph 54(f) of the Scheme, they had issued a wider compliance order in November 2023 but had not yet received adequate evidence from Lewisham. Officers confirmed that compliance evidence had been submitted but was initially insufficient due to miscommunication about requirements. This issue had now been resolved.

RESOLVED: That

·         the report be noted.

·         the Committee supports the Cabinet Member, Councillor Will Cooper, performing the role of the ‘Member responsible for Complaints’ for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

RESOLVED:

·         That the agenda for the Committee meeting in November 2024 be agreed with the addition of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman Report.

6.1. The date for the November meeting of the Committee had been changed to 21^st of November 2024.

RESOLVED:

·         That the agenda for the Committee meeting in November 2024 be agreed with the addition of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman Report.