Agenda and minutes

Councillor Ketan Sheth (as Chair) welcomed members of the Scrutiny Committee to the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mahmood, Aden and T. Smith.

Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, the nature and existence of any relevant disclosable pecuniary or personal interests in the items on this agenda and to specify the item(s) to which they relate.

Personal interests were declared as follows:

·       Councillor Ketan Sheth – Lead Governor of Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust.

·       Councillor Ethapemi – Spouse employed by NHS.

To hear any deputations received from members of the public in accordance with Standing Order 67.

There were no deputations received.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record.

It was RESOLVED that the minutes of the previous meetings held on Monday 19 January 2026 be approved as a correct record.

There were no matters arising.

To receive a briefing from London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust in relation to the operating hours at the Urgent Treatment Centre at Central Middlesex Hospital.

Prior to the consideration of the item, the Chair agreed to consider a request which had been received to speak under item 6, in relation to the Urgent Treatment Centre at Central Middlesex Hospital, from a member of the public, Amandine Alexandre, who highlighted the following points:

·       Amandine Alexandre began by stating that, from the 1 February 2026, the Urgent Treatment Centre at Central Middlesex Hospital had ceased operating between 9pm and midnight. It was emphasised that this had constituted a significant alteration to the service, yet patients had not been informed of the change before the reduction in opening hours had taken effect. The speaker reported that they had become aware of the new hours only through a photograph that had been posted on Facebook on the 2 February 2026.

·       The speaker believed that this absence of communication, prior to the introduction of new operating hours, represented very poor practice on the part of London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust. It was further stated that this lack of communication had nevertheless been entirely in keeping with the consultation process undertaken by the Trust in October of the previous year.

·       Amandine Alexandre recalled that the consultation had been extremely brief, lasting only a couple of weeks at most. It was stated that this had predictably resulted in a very limited number of responses from patients, with only 42 participants. The speaker contrasted this with the 570 signatures that had been collected for a petition hosted on the Council’s website earlier in the year.

·       The speaker advised that there was considerably more to be said about both the decision itself and its consequences for patients. The speaker stated that the Trust had encouraged patients to make use of community pharmacies and their GP practices as a mitigation for the loss of the late evening service at the Urgent Treatment Centre. The speaker reported that they had identified only one pharmacy within 2.5 miles of their home that remained open until 10pm.

·       Amandine Alexandre also referred to the difficulties encountered when attempting to access their general practitioner services and cited the example of being required to complete a form described as Patches. It was stated that each use of the form had caused them to feel as though they were being cross examined by a barrister in relation to an offence they had not committed.

·       In concluding their presentation to the Committee, Amandine Alexandre encouraged the Committee to remind London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust of the standards that patients were entitled to expect. It was further emphasised that the NHS existed to serve patients and should not implement significant changes to services without appropriate consultation and without ensuring that patients were properly informed. Amandine Alexandre described the request as simple but important and expressed the hope that the Committee would take action.

The Chair thanked Amandine Alexandre for addressing the Committee and then invited Pippa Nightingale (Chief Executive Officer, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust) to deliver a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To receive an overview and update on the performance of Brent Housing Management (BHM) against Tenant Satisfaction Measures and improvements planned and delivered in relation to BHM performance, particularly voids, compliance, repairs and disrepair, rent collection and arrears, complaints, major planned works, and the current financial position.

Councillor Donnelly-Jackson (Cabinet Member for Housing) was invited to introduce the Housing Management: Tenant Satisfaction Measures and Brent Housing Management (BHM) Performance Report. In presenting, it was stated that housing remained one of the defining issues for Brent, and that the quality of housing management was central to how residents experienced their council. It was noted that the Council continued to face a significant level of challenge arising from rising homelessness and structural financial constraints. It was emphasised that the Council remained fully committed to delivering safe, secure and decent homes for all residents who relied upon its services. Reference was made to the broader national context following the tragedy at Grenfell Tower, the death of Awaab Ishak which had led to the introduction of Awaab’s Law, and the strengthening of building and fire safety requirements. It was stated that it was essential that tenants were placed at the centre of everything the Council did in this area. It was observed that safe, secure and decent homes were a foundation for a fair and thriving borough and were not optional for any responsible housing authority. Members were informed that the report before the Committee set out an overview of the Tenant Satisfaction Measures and the performance of Brent Housing Management. It was explained that the Tenant Satisfaction Measures provided one of the core mechanisms through which the Council assessed tenant views and their experience of the housing service.

In continuing the presentation, Tom Cattermole (Corporate Director Residents and Housing Services) added that current performance was not always at the level that residents expected and that such a position was not tenable. It was stated that the report represented a transparent and accurate account of the issues, the improvements achieved to date, and the changes being delivered. The measures put in place to address the issues identified were outlined. It was confirmed that a Housing Tenant Satisfaction and Improvement Programme had been established, chaired by the Chief Executive, providing clear governance, delivery oversight, grip and accountability in respect of the required improvements. Members were further advised that resident scrutiny had been strengthened through the Housing Management Advisory Board, chaired by Dawn Martin. Several key areas of focus within housing management were highlighted. The first related to voids, where the backlog was reducing. The second concerned compliance, where improvements were being made although data systems continued to be stabilised, with supporting information technology systems forming part of the ongoing improvement work. The third area was repairs, where significant improvement had been recorded since autumn 2025, although capacity remained tight. The final area related to complaints, where volumes continued to rise. It was stated that this reflected both service issues and increased resident awareness, with learning being embedded as part of the system. It was noted that void losses and arrears had a direct impact on the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) and that improved performance in these areas was essential, as had been reported to the Resources Scrutiny Committee in the previous week.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To receive the current context of the Area Tenancy Management team responsible for providing tenancy services to general needs Council tenants.

Tom Cattermole (Corporate Director Residents and Housing Services) was invited to introduce the Area Tenancy Management Model Report. In presenting, it was highlighted that Shanice Low (Area Tenancy Manager) and Georgia Gallagher (Area Tenancy Manager) were two of the Council’s area tenancy managers, covering the areas from Willesden to Kensal Green and Kilburn. It was outlined that the area tenancy management model had been introduced in June 2024 in response to fragmentation between teams, weak handover processes, data quality issues and limited continuity in resident relationships. It was explained that the new model consolidated responsibilities into a single accountable role. Each Area Tenancy Manager, referred to as an ATM, was responsible for lettings, income collection, tenancy management, estate presence, early intervention and safeguarding from end to end. Members noted that the model remained relatively new and that recruitment and induction had taken time to complete. However, early evidence of positive impact was being observed, including increased tenancy audits, improved estate visibility and strengthened income performance during late 2025.

In presenting to the Committee on her role and the nature of cases she managed, Shanice Low (Area Tenancy Manager) informed the Committee that she had extensive experience within the Council. Prior to the restructure, she had worked solely as an income officer, focusing primarily on rent collection. Following the restructure, her role now encompassed income, tenancy management, lettings and acting as the first point of contact for prospective tenants. She reported that, upon taking up her new role, she had sent an introductory letter to every household within her management to inform residents of her role and provide her contact details. She then provided an example of a case relating to a resident referred to as Miss B, who was a management transfer moving from one area to another. She described how she had attempted to contact Miss B by email and telephone to arrange a viewing but had initially been unable to reach her. She subsequently received a response from Miss B’s support worker advising that Miss B had significant vulnerabilities. She explained that, after two cancelled viewings due to Miss B being hospitalised, Miss B eventually attended a viewing and expressed interest in the property but requested the installation of a wet room. Shanice Low (Area Tenancy Manager) contacted the occupational therapy team, who carried out an assessment and agreed to make the necessary adaptations. The sign up was coordinated and Miss B attended with her mother and support worker. Shanice Low advised that, because Miss B was hospitalised again following the sign up, she was unable to return the keys for her former property for approximately 6 weeks. As a result, Miss B incurred rent and council tax liabilities at both properties. Shanice Low explained that because she had established a relationship with Miss B’s support worker, she had been able to coordinate communication and support arrangements to minimise the impact. She described how she had suggested a dual Discretionary Housing Payment application to assist Miss B in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To receive an update on temporary accommodation, supported exempt accommodation and homelessness prevention, including the financial position and partnership working.

Councillor Donnelly-Jackson (Cabinet Member for Housing) was invited to introduce the Temporary Accommodation, Supported Exempt Accommodation and Homelessness Prevention Report. In presenting, it was stated that the report had been presented against the backdrop of a severe housing crisis. Members were advised that the Council had experienced a 21% increase in homelessness presentations, with cases expected to reach just under 9,000 by the end of the 2025 to 2026 financial year. It was further reported that the number of households placed in temporary accommodation had risen. It was emphasised that a significant amount of work was being undertaken in this area.

In continuing the presentation to the Committee, Tom Cattermole (Corporate Director Residents and Housing Services) added that the direction of travel within this important area of work was focused on reducing reliance on nightly paid placements, which were the most expensive form of temporary accommodation, and securing more stable accommodation for residents. It was stated that efforts were also directed towards strengthening quality assurance processes. It was highlighted that the Council was required to balance its statutory duties, the wellbeing of residents and the financial sustainability of the local authority.

The Chair thanked Councillor Donnelly-Jackson and Tom Cattermole for their presentation to the Committee and then moved on to invite members to ask questions in relation to the information presented, with the following being noted:

·       Representatives of the Brent Youth Parliament began by questioning whether more specific data was available on the age profile of those placed in temporary accommodation. The representatives noted that the age range of 0 to 17 years was broad, encompassing a wide range of different needs and issues, and asked whether a more granular breakdown existed. In response, Laurence Coaker (Director Housing Needs and Support) indicated that a full breakdown of age groups was available and that officers were able to break down the age range in any form required.

·       As a further issue highlighted, the Brent Youth Parliament representatives further stated that young people were particularly vulnerable, as referenced in paragraph 9.3 of the committee report and expressed concern that the report lacked clear actions regarding how young people could be safeguarded while living in temporary accommodation. It was noted that family wellbeing centres and Brent Hubs had been referenced as sources of support for families with young children. However, the representatives highlighted that a significant proportion of households were being placed outside the borough or beyond the M25, raising concerns about whether comparable support was available for those placed at a distance from Brent. In response, Komal Samra (Head of Accommodation Services) highlighted that officers were working closely with colleagues across multiple service areas. An example was provided relating to public health, noting that regular visits were being arranged to temporary accommodation sites such as Anansi House and Knowles House. These visits were intended to ensure that young applicants received wraparound support and were signposted to relevant health services. The importance of face-to-face contact to avoid residents having to rely solely on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

To receive the Committee’s work programme for 2025-26.

Having reviewed the work programme report, it was RESOLVED to note the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee Work Programme for the 2025/26 Municipal Year.

To receive the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee Recommendations Tracker.

Having reviewed the Scrutiny Committee Recommendations Tracker, it was RESOLVED to note the progress of the previous recommendations, suggestions for improvement, and information requests of the Committee.

The following item(s) are not for publication as they relate to the category of exempt information set out below, as specified under Part 1, Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972:

Agenda Item 9:        Temporary Accommodation, Supported Exempt Accommodation and Homelessness Prevention (Appendix 1)

                               This appendix has been classified as exempt under Paragraph 3 of Part 1 Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, namely: “Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)”.

There were no items that required the exclusion of the press or public from the meeting.

Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Deputy Director – Democratic and Corporate Governance or their representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 60.

None.