Report to update Members on voids
Councillor Jan Osborne – Cabinet Member for Housing
Minutes:
19.1 The Chair began by informing Members that Item 5,6 and 7 on the Agenda were all related and would therefore be discussed together. However, Members were to vote on the Items for their respective Council separately.
19.2 Councillor Jan Osborne then introduced report JOS/18/14 which detailed the improved re-let times over the past eight months and that the Voids team had undergone changes to procedures and processes, re-allocation of resources, co- working and culture changes to deliver improve performance. She thanked the team for the work they had undertaken to achieve the improved working practices and voids times. She was confident that Babergh District Council was in a good position to ensure that the housing stock would be ready to re-let to tenants with-in a reasonable time
19.3 Councillor Jill Wilshaw agreed with Councillor Osborne.
19.4 The Tenant Service Corporate Manager provided an update on the average re-let in days on Standard Voids for June 2018, they were as follows:
Babergh Standard Voids 23 days
Mid Suffolk Standard Voids 19 days
This was an average of 21 days across both Councils and that this had been the year-end target for the service.
19.5 Councillor Gasper said it was a comprehensive report, and that especially the risk assessment was good. The improved management changes would benefit the residents and help to reduce the back log of work and still main the housing stock.
19.6 Councillor Hurren asked how many employees were working within the team. He continued to enquire further about the process for purchasing new properties and if considerations were made to the state of the property for the purpose of planning repairs before a property was being purchased.
19.7 In response to the first question, the Corporate Manager – Babergh and Mid Suffolk Building Services (BMBS), informed Members that there were 40 tradesmen, 3 apprentices and 4 team leaders employed in the team, 25 tradesmen were working on the maintenance and 15 were working on Voids project,
19.8 He continued that the acquisition process was currently being reviewed to ensure that the right properties was being purchased and that a mini project in co-operation with the Asset Management team was being undertaken to implement regimented procedures for this process
19.9 Councillor Barrett asked for a clarification of the cost element in the report, in particular how sub-contractors were employed and how these were retained.
19.10 Officers responded that originally there had been 117 Voids properties but that this had now been reduce to 24 properties. All standard Voids had been retained at 100%, whilst at the same time major Voids had been repaired by sub-contractors. Currently there were nine major projects of these, five were being retained in-house and four were being repaired by out-side contractors. Sub-contractors were only considered if there was a significant amount of work, and this would depend on the type of project and what kind of repairs were required when a property was returned the Housing team. It was important to understand the work required on to help plan the repair project.
19.11 Councillor Field asked the following questions:
· How many staff could have responded to the staff survey (page 5, bullet point 4.15);
· In relation to the reduction in Voids from 55 days to 20 void days; how did this compare with other similar organisations;
· Did all the calculation of Investment Appraisal for Void Improvement include council tax or only the 10-day improvement.
·
Could officers clarify the
definition of standard and major
Voids for Item 7, page 17.
19.12 It was clarified that there had been a return rate of 50% on the staff survey.
19.13 The officers did not have a comparison to similar organisations, but that several local housing associations had a turn-around time of approximately 20 days.
19.14 The Tenant Service Corporate Manager had only considered the rent gain and rent loss in the financial aspect of the report.
19.15 The calculation for the Investment Appraisal had included Council Tax for the 10-day calculation.
19.16 The Voids definition on page 17 did not include major Voids project. Voids were now defined as standard and major Voids, and that the high figure had included the major Voids.
19.17 Members continued to question the officers and it was established that the Voids team was catching up on the modernisation of properties, which was funded by the capital investment.
19.18 There was minimal adaptation to sheltered housing properties and therefore these properties were often included in the standard Voids. Properties requiring major work were still turned around within 48 days.
19.19 It was established that regular inspections of properties were a challenge and that currently this was not achievable due to resources. A housing register was being developed, so that when a resident applied to the Housing Register, officers would conduct a visit, which would enable them to plan the work require before re-letting the property.
19.20 It was the intention to have a 100% stock condition archive in a few years.
19.21 Councillor Alastair McCraw said that the report was the best report on the issue to date and he drew Members attention to the Draft Void Improvement – Long Term Action Plan (Appendix F) and said that it was now possible to achieve the key targets as detailed in bullet point 7.1 to 7.4 in the plan.
19.22 Members noted the improved performance and they thanked the officers for their work. It was agreed that this was to be added to the recommendations.
19.23 The Babergh Members discussed the amendment, which was proposed and seconded
By a unanimous vote
It was RESOLVED: -
1.2 That the Committee endorses the actions contained within the long-term plan. (Paragraph 4.13 and Appendix F)
19.24 The Mid Suffolk Members debated the amendment which was proposed and seconded
By 4 votes to 1
It was RESOLVED
1.1 That the Committee notes the improved performance for re-let times and commend Officers for their work in achieving this improvement.
1.2 That the Committee endorses the actions contained within the long-term plan. (Paragraph 4.13 and Appendix F)
Supporting documents: