Agenda, decisions and minutes

1.1. RESOLVED: that Cllr Stephen Penfold be elected as Chair of the Committee and Cllr Billy Harding be elected as Vice-Chair.

1.1. RESOLVED: that Cllr Stephen Penfold be elected as Chair of the Committee and Cllr Billy Harding be elected as Vice-Chair.

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

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

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

3.2. Councillor Dawn Atkinson declared an interest as a service manager for Community Advice Works- which provides advice and advocacy for people regarding housing matters in Lewisham.

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

3.2. Councillor Dawn Atkinson declared an interest as a service manager for Community Advice Works- which provides advice and advocacy for people regarding housing matters in Lewisham.

RESOLVED:

·         That the Council request housing providers to notify it at an early stage about cases in which they intend to use Ground 8.

In March 2024, the Housing Select Committee referred its views to the Mayor and Cabinet regarding the use of Schedule 2, Ground 8 of the Housing Act 1988 by Housing Providers in Lewisham. The Mayor and Cabinet considered a response to this referral on the 10^th of July 2024. Gillian Douglas (Executive Director for Housing) introduced the referral response report. This was followed by a discussion by the Committee members. The following key points were noted:

4.1. The text under the table in point 5.1 of the response stated that Peabody had used Ground 8 in combination with other Grounds (such as 10 and 11) for possession cases over the last three years. Therefore, clarification was needed from Peabody on how many cases in the last 3 years involved Ground 8, even if combined with other Grounds.

4.2. The Committee enquired if the housing providers could be asked to seek Council agreement before using Ground 8 for a Lewisham nominee. Officers informed the Committee that we did not have the powers to require this agreement. However, it was discussed that the housing providers could be asked to notify the Council at an early stage if they were planning on using Ground 8 on Lewisham nominees.

4.3. Officers mentioned that there was a mechanism that allowed housing providers to give the Council early notice of tenants that were at risk of losing their tenancies, this was referenced in point 5.7 of the report. Officers in the Housing Needs service worked closely with the housing providers to support tenants who were at risk of losing their tenancies and tried to prevent this eviction. Where possession could not be avoided, the expectation was that the housing providers would notify the Council’s Housing Needs service of any forthcoming evictions. The Committee stressed the need for the Council to be notified at an early stage, at the time the notice was issued, rather than being notified when an eviction was imminent.

4.4. It was discussed that even though the duty to refer only applied to ‘public bodies’ and RPs (Registered Providers) were classified as private companies, many RPs still voluntarily shared information with the Council to mutual benefit.

ACTIONS:

The Committee-

·         Requested information from Peabody on how many cases in the last 3 years used Ground 8 (even if it was used in combination with other Grounds of possession).

·         Requested clarification from L&Q about their use of the term 'secure' tenancies.

·         Requested a breakdown of figures from L&Q regarding their usage of Ground 8 for their private rented sector, intermediate rent & London Living Rent stock.

·         Asked officers to report on whether other housing providers also used Ground 8 for their private rented sector, intermediate rent & London Living Rent stock, similar to L&Q.

RESOLVED:

·         That the Council request housing providers to notify it at an early stage about cases in which they intend to use Ground 8.

RESOLVED:

·         That the report be noted.

Gillian Douglas (Executive Director of Housing) introduced the report. The following key points were noted:

5.1. Following Lewisham’s self-referral to the Regulator of Social Housing, additional information was requested by the Regulator. After this follow-up information was provided, the Regulator issued a regulatory notice in March 2024. This was based on a breach of consumer standards as they stood at 31^st of March 2024. New consumer standards came into force in April 2024.

5.2. To date, officers had participated in 3 meetings with the Regulator’s engagement team. These meetings were being held monthly and would continue until the Regulator was satisfied that the Council had made improvements and that these improvements were sustainable.

5.3. The Regulator had advised that while the Council was under the regulatory notice, it would not undergo any inspections by the Regulator. The estimated duration of the notice was 12 to 24 months. Inspections by the Regulator of Social Housing were part of a new regime for large landlords. The Council was likely to have an inspection once the regulatory notice had been lifted.

5.4. A stock condition survey that started in February 2024 had surveyed around 6000 properties so far. These surveys revealed that 29% of the properties were non-decent, a significant increase from the 17% identified in the 2019 stock condition survey.

5.5. Officers had made significant progress in completing overdue fire safety actions, reducing the total number of overdue actions to just below 3000. Many high-priority fire safety actions had been completed, and the progress of other overdue high-priority actions was being monitored weekly. A large proportion of the P2 priority actions involved leaseholder fire doors, requiring co-operation from leaseholders to install certified doors.

5.6. Good progress was being made on the repairs transformation project but the Council had not yet demonstrated a substantial reduction in ‘work-in-progress’ repairs to the Regulator. At the last meeting with the Regulator, ‘work-in-progress’ repairs were down to 14,000. It was noted that faster progress was now being made, largely due to data management improvements and the elimination of job duplication through data cleansing.

5.7. The Regulator was also reviewing the Council’s complaint handling process, both for its own Stage 1 and Stage 2 processes and for cases with the Housing Ombudsman. A memorandum of understanding between the Regulator and the Housing Ombudsman service facilitated the sharing of relevant information between them. Currently, 127 cases were with the Housing Ombudsman. Since the publication of this report to the Committee, the Council had been notified that the Housing Ombudsman would be conducting a special investigation into its complaints handling due to the rate of maladministration.

The Committee members were invited to ask questions. The following key points were noted:

5.8. While officers reported a £10million overspend in repairs, they noted that ongoing transformation efforts would enhance efficiency and deliver better value for money from contractors. This included improving the first-time fix rate to avoid repeated visits and unresolved issues. Additionally, efforts were being made to increase internal workforce  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

RESOLVED:

·         That the report be noted.

Fenella Beckman (Director of Housing Strategy) and Rhona Brown (Head of Private Sector Licensing and Home Improvements) introduced the report. The following key points were noted:

6.1. Lewisham’s additional HMO licensing scheme was launched in April 2022, set to run for 5-years until 2027, after which the Council would decide whether to renew it. Implementing this scheme had been very challenging due to the high demand for both staffing and technological resources, which were costly. Officers noted that a major challenge over the past 2 years had been the substantial expansion of the Council’s licensing team.

6.2. Despite these challenges, the team had achieved notable successes. Over 2,300 HMOs had been identified and brought into the scheme, representing between 25 to 38 per cent of the estimated licensable HMOs in the borough. Since Lewisham was now 2.5 years into the scheme, these figures meant that there was a significant number of properties that still needed to be incorporated into the additional HMO licensing scheme.

6.3. Lewisham had issued 73 Civil Penalty Notice fines for a mixture of failure to licence and licence breaches. These fines not only penalised non-compliant landlords but also generated additional resources to support the resource-intensive enforcement activities.

6.4. There was a backlog of 900 unprocessed HMO licence applications. However, this was a significant reduction from few months ago. The implementation of a new licensing software had accelerated processing times.

6.5. The 900 unprocessed HMO licence applications were on the old licensing software system and could not be migrated to the new system until they were processed. However, all new HMO licence applications, along with the new selective licence applications, were being processed through the new, more efficient licensing software. To address the backlog, a dedicated team of officers was working on an area-based approach since May 2024. They had completed processing applications for Evelyn ward and had now moved on to applications from Catford South ward. 

6.6. The licence processing part of the team was successfully expanding with 18 staff members already in place and 6 more currently being recruited. The field officer part of the licensing team was also undergoing a significant expansion with 18 new staff members being recruited to undertake property inspections, increasing the team size to 27 officers.

6.7. At the time of this meeting, the Council had received around 5800 selective licensing applications. This represented 30% of the total applications expected over the scheme’s 5- year duration.

6.8. Under the HMO licensing schemes, all properties were inspected prior to receiving a licence. However, under the selective licensing scheme, properties would be risk rated at the time of application and prioritised for inspection accordingly. The commitment was to inspect 60% of all licensable properties over the scheme’s five-year period. 

The Committee members were invited to ask questions. The following key points were noted:

6.9. A comprehensive risk-matrix had been developed to allocate properties for inspection under the selective licensing scheme. This matrix included various risk factors, for example, landlords with previous complaints  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

RESOLVED:

·         That the Committee’s work programme for 2024-25 be agreed.

7.1. It was discussed that the Committee would be requesting standardised information and data from all housing providers in Lewisham, using a uniform pro-forma. Once this information was received, the Committee would determine which housing providers should be invited to its March 2025 meeting to address any areas of concern and answer the Committee’s questions. The Committee’s formal meeting in January would note which housing providers were to be invited in March 2025.

RESOLVED:

·         That the Committee’s work programme for 2024-25 be agreed.