Agenda item

Report of the Interim Director of Services

The Committee gave consideration to the report and appendices (at pages 11 - 54) as delivered and summarised by the Interim Director of Services which should be read together with these minutes as a composite document.

Current and Former Tenant Arrears

It was raised by the Committee and advised upon by Officers that plans were in place to consolidate the Council’s four debt recovery officers, currently assigned to different service-areas, and including the officer responsible for the collection of tenant arrears, into a single team. This restructure was said to hopefully provide additional income, result in less debt being written-off and build resilience. It was also noted by Members that a cost benefit analysis ought to be carried out in order to balance the sum of any given debt owed against the costs incurred in its recovery.

Housing Allocations Policy

It was raised by the Committee and advised upon by Officers that the proposed clarification of part-time work of less than 16 hours a week as not being sufficiently meaningful to create a “local connection” for the purposes of appearing on the Housing Register was a benchmark of reasonable in-work activity emphasising that residency within the Borough remained crucial to “qualifying persons” status.

It was requested by Members that evidence be gathered on the 16-hour limit by monitoring the numbers of persons who presented themselves under this criterion.

Council’s Tenancy Agreement

In respect of the Council’s draft Tenancy Agreement (TA) at Appendix 1, Members made a number of comments regarding: the lack of narrative detailing the approach to be taken against breaches of garden maintenance (at para. 10.1 at page 26); the prescriptive nature as to the number of animals to be kept (at para. 14.1 at page 27); and the use of legalese to describe the serving of notices (at para. 19.1 at page 30).

Accordingly, the Committee was advised that: any obligation contained in the TA that was broken or not performed by the tenant(s) were grounds on which the court may order possession; consent would not be unreasonably withheld if permission to keep more animals that that prescribed was sought; and it was necessary to exhaustively set out the legal requirements for what amounted to the effective service of notices. As a whole, assurances were given that the TA was to be applied pragmatically.

Capital Programme Update 2017/18

For clarification, it was raised by the Committee and accepted by Officers that, contrary to what was stated in Appendix 2, planning permission had not yet been obtained for the HRA Capital Project at 14 Junction Road, Wigston (at page 33).

Disabled Facility Grants and the Lightbulb Project

Whilst it was acknowledged by the Committee that this Council remained statutorily-responsible for the delivery of adaptions to homes through Disabled Facility Grants (DFG’s), Members raised serious concerns regarding the implications arising from and between the Council’s statutory duty, the integration of the Better Care Fund (BCF) and the Leicestershire-wide provision of DFG’s by the Lightbulb Project (LbP).

In summary, it was mentioned that the Council’s exposure to risk was significant should there be inconsistencies in performance across the Districts and Boroughs or widespread service-failure on the part of the LbP. There was also little explanation regarding the ring-fencing of allocations and, in particular, if there were any under or overspends across the County, whether the redistribution of allocations was legally-permissible. In view of these concerns, Members were of the opinion that robust overview, scrutiny and monitoring arrangements were essential to mitigate the risks.

The Committee was advised that whilst the objective behind participation in the LbP was to secure better value for money from the perspective of the Council’s client-role, a commensurate need for the LbP to demonstrate good and sufficient governance was justified. It was emphasised that every effort would be made to ensure that the Borough’s full DFG allocation was to be spent, and spent within the Borough, so as not to jeopardise future funding cuts and that, as the LbP was a separate entity, if cuts to grants were made, the LbP would need to revise its business plan accordingly.

It was requested that a further report be brought back to the next meeting of the Committee addressing Members’ aforementioned concerns. As such, the report was to include, but not be limited to, information regarding the LbP’s responsibilities, liabilities, decision-making capacity and ability to be held accountable, in addition to a comparative, year-on-year analysis of this Council’s DFG allocation and spend.

The Committee also requested that a representative of the LbP be in attendance at the next meeting so to answer any further questions Members may have.

Borough Wide Cleaning Contract

The Committee was advised that the Cleaning Contract did not feature on this meeting’s agenda due to an ongoing audit review into its letting and monitoring currently being undertaken by the Council’s Internal Auditors. It was reported that audit’s findings would be reported to a subsequent meeting of the Policy, Finance and Development Committee as per the usual Internal Audit reporting process.

It was noted that complaints were still being received regarding the substandard quality of cleanliness being delivered under the Cleaning Contract.

It was moved by the Chair, seconded by Councillor J W Boyce and

UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED THAT:

(i)       The contents of the report be noted, however subject to serious concerns being raised by Members regarding the governance of the Lightbulb Project  and the implications thereof upon the Council;

(ii)     The clarification to the Housing Allocations Policy (at paragraph 3.11 of the report) providing Officers with a clearer working definition when dealing with housing applicants not relying on residence criteria be approved; and

(iii)   The process for updating and the amendment of the Council’s Tenancy Agreement (as set out at paragraph 3.4. of the report) be approved.