Agenda and minutes

• Councillor Mahmood
• Alice Lester
• Kim Wright
• Councillor Aden apologies for lateness

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.

There were no declarations of interest.

Councillor Sheth highlighted that his register of interest could be found on the Brent website.

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.

The minutes of the meeting held on 18 September 2024 were approved as an accurate record of the meeting.

There were no matters arising.

To provide the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee with an update on the housing management performance of the Council’s two wholly-owned housing companies, i4B Holdings Ltd (i4B) and First Wave Housing (FWH), delivered by the Council’s Housing Service via Service Level Agreements (SLAS).

The Chair welcomed Andrew Hudson, Chair of i4B and FWH Housing Companies, to the meeting and invited him to introduce the report.

In introducing the report, Andrew Hudson drew the Committee’s attention to the 3 key areas he felt the Companies had made progress and the 3 key areas he felt the Companies needed to improve. The Companies were pleased with the progress of acquisitions within i4B, where the Company had surpassed the target of 25 for the year with 30 acquisitions completed and a further 10 properties in the pipeline. Emergency repairs were also being completed 100% within the target time and there had been progress in relation to compliance, particularly the monitoring of health and safety compliance through True Compliance and the delivery of gas and legionella inspections. He assured the Committee that acknowledging the good performance did not indicate complacency regarding the importance of robust compliance, and it was recognised that there was a need to improve the completion rate of EICRs. In terms of areas for improvement, he highlighted tenant satisfaction where i4B and FWH had low satisfaction rates. The Companies would be looking into the reasons driving that satisfaction level. Voids were highlighted as another area for improvement in terms of the turnaround times to complete a void and let the property. The Companies had done a deep dive into the reasons for the long turnaround times and set out some actions to address that. The final area of focus for improvement was rent collection. One particular pattern emerging was issues with the interaction between Universal Credit and changes in rent levels, and since that was an issue that would happen every year the Companies were looking to build better relationships with the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to address.

Councillor Butt (As Leader and Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration, Planning and Growth) added that the role of the Companies was to support the Council in securing accommodation to provide homes to the residents of Brent, and they had done a good job in procuring those properties but there were many factors which impacted the Companies ability to do that and therefore he thanked the Committee for inviting officers to speak about those challenges.

The Chair thanked presenters for their introduction and invited comments and questions from the Committee, with the following issues raised:

In noting that an area the Companies wished to improve was voids performance, members highlighted that there had been poor performance in void turnaround times for some time, and asked why measures that had been put in place to date had not seen an overall improvement in performance. Andrew Hudson agreed that voids had been a challenge for a while and the deep dive had aimed to take a comprehensive view to put in place an action plan to mitigate those difficulties. During the voids deep dive, officers and Board members had reviewed the voids process from start to finish, from the moment an existing property was declared void, through  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To provide the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee with an update on Brent Housing Management Services’ performance over the last year, including the 2023-24 Tenant Satisfaction Measure (TSM) results.

Spencer Randolph (Head of Housing Services, Brent Council) introduced the report, which reviewed the performance of Brent Housing Management (BHM) over the past year. Particular attention was brought to the Tenant Satisfaction Measures (TSMs) which formed part of a new regulation that came into force in April 2024 which were standards that all Councils and registered providers were now being held to nationally. The TSMs had been introduced with the aim to hold registered providers to account and make them more professional in the way properties were managed. He highlighted that Brent Council was not performing where it wanted to be in relation to TSMs and that services in general needed improvement. He added that the housing service had been putting in steps to ensure readiness for when the call for inspection arrived and that services were improved and residents were engaged going forward.

In relation to TSMs, Ryan Collymore (Head of Service – Housing Management Property, Brent Council) added that the intention was to get some qualitative data behind some of the prescribed questions in the next iteration, so that where residents had informed the Council they were not satisfied then officers could understand the reasons behind that. This was thought to be useful because, with perception-based surveys, the question might be understood differently by the tenant compared to what it truly asked. For example, when asked ‘how satisfied are you with complaints handling’, to a resident they could be answering based on their experience of calling to report a repair rather than relating to a formal complaint they had made. I4B had very good compliance, but the TSM results relating to safety and quality were low, so there was a need to understand why residents had answered in that way. Alongside this would be a big push on communications so that residents knew the good work that had been done.

Councillor Butt (as Leader and Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration, Planning and Growth) highlighted that since he had taken on the portfolio for housing it had been a good learning experience, and he understood the need for scrutiny on the satisfaction and repairs figures. There were also concerns relating to staffing that were being addressed to help performance improve.

The Chair thanked presenters for their introduction and invited comments and questions from the Committee, with the following issues raised:

Noting the mismatch between performance and customer satisfaction, and the fact that officers had attributed the low satisfaction to lack of communication and engagement, the Committee asked what could be put down to services not being delivered compared to services and improvements not being communicated. Spencer Randolph highlighted that on a transactional basis, the level of satisfaction after every repair carried out was relatively high at around 80%, opposed to the perception of how the Council was dealing with repairs, complaints and Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) which was low. There were other parts of London with similar disparities, for example Newham had the highest TSM satisfaction rate in London but  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To inform the members of the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee of the provision and management of Brent Council’s Temporary Accommodation and Homeless Prevention Service since the last report to the Committee in November 2023.

Peter Gadsdon (Corporate Director Partnerships, Housing and Residents Services, Brent Council) introduced the report which informed the Committee of the provision and management of Brent Council’s Temporary Accommodation and Homeless Prevention Service, including an update on the support for families in the borough who were homeless or at risk of homelessness and the performance of services, demand for services and improved outcomes for service users. In introducing the report, he highlighted the housing crisis that London was in with high demand for housing and the large overspend this was driving in the Council budget. He then introduced Housing Needs colleagues who had attended to answer questions from the Committee – Zorba Emelonye (Service Manager – Housing Options, Brent Council) and Komal Samra (Service Manager – Accommodation Services, Brent Council) and thanked them for the hard work they were doing in the current environment.

Councillor Butt (as Leader and Cabinet Member for Housing, Regeneration, Planning and Growth) expanded on the introduction, highlighting that the housing situation being faced in Brent was something Brent had never seen before and the pressure and demand for housing was unprecedented. The Council had started a ‘Find Your Home’ scheme emphasising the need for residents to find a property they could afford, which may not be in Brent where were becoming increasingly unaffordable. As a result of the lack of affordable accommodation in Brent and London, the Temporary Accommodation (TA) spend was increasing due to the Council needing to acquire very expensive accommodation. In addition, the chance of a tenant being allocated a Council home was very slim with a very long waiting list. As such, the Council was encouraging people to find a place they could afford in a place they wanted to go, and whilst it was recognised that people preferred to remain in Brent due to their family and local connections, this was becoming more unlikely to be affordable.

The Chair thanked presenters for their introduction and invited comments and questions from the Committee, with the following issues raised:

The Committee praised the hard work of the service in response to the pressures. As local councillors, the expectations of residents were very high and there was a lack of understanding of the emergency situation the Council was in. They confirmed that members would continue to try to get the message out to the public regarding the housing situation.

In relation to the graph under paragraph 4.10 of the report showing the total number of homeless households each year from 2015 – 2024/5, the Committee highlighted that the Council had successfully halved the number of people living in TA between 2015 and 2021, but it had then gradually increased again. They asked what the narrative behind that was and how it compared to other boroughs. Laurence Coaker (Director of Housing Needs, Brent Council) advised that the increase was due to the impact of the covid-19 pandemic. Pre-pandemic the Council had been doing well at reducing TA numbers as a result of a homelessness prevention  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To present the recommendations tracker to the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee.

The Committee noted the recommendations tracker.

Notice of items to be raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Head of Executive and Member Services or his representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 60.

The Chair informed the Committee that this would be Peter Gadsdon’s final meeting at the Community and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee. He thanked Peter for all the support he had offered the Committee over the years and wished him luck for the future.