Agenda item

To consider an update on the initial work of the Preferred Registered Providers Task and Finish Group.

The Committee considered a report, set out in agenda pages 23 to 28, which gave an update on the initial work of the Preferred Registered Providers Task and Finish Group.

Shirley Boyt (Chair of the Task and Finish Group) gave a further verbal update. The core aim of the Task and Finish Group was to strive for a parity of quality regardless of whether residents were housed with Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) or a housing association. The contract for our preferred registered providers was up for renewal next year, which would give the group an opportunity to strengthen the requirements therein. Housemark had been invited to a meeting of the group, and it had been alluded to that some of WBC’s preferred partners were not providing a fantastic level of service. A further meeting was due to be held with Steve Bowers, Chair of the Tenant Landlord Improvement Panel, whilst further outreach to residents and housing associations was also to be undertaken by the group. It was important that the task and finish group could have real input and impact into this issue.

During the ensuing discussion, members raised the following points and queries:

·         It was noted that the group was hoping to report in 5 months’ time.

·         It was noted that the membership of the group was Shirley Boyt (Chair), Chris Johnson (Vice Chair), Laura Blumenthal, Rebecca Margetts and Andy Croy.

·         It was requested that the Committee be sent copies of the notes of the task and finish group meetings;

·         It was noted that WBC currently had 8 preferred partners, with some being very large companies. In addition, there were a multitude of other registered providers who were not on the preferred list. It was requested that members inform the group of housing association properties and any associated complaints within their wards;

·         Would housing associations be invited to talk to the group? Response – Yes, however anecdotal evidence was first being gathered to be able to challenge the housing associations.

·         It was requested that the current contract be circulated to the Committee. In addition, it was noted that the existing contract was not particularly robust.

·         What outputs did the group hope to achieve? Response – A series of recommendations would be presented alongside a report to the Executive. The core aim was to improve the service received by residents regardless of who operated their social housing.

·         It was requested that officers ascertain whether it was possible for Loddon Homes (WBC’s housing company) to deliver the majority of new social housing with loans from the public works loan board, to be paid off by rental income.

·         It was noted that the Chair of the Task and Finish Group would be writing to all members to seek feedback from social housing issues within their wards.

·         The issue of property guardians was raised. This issue may be required to be looked at separately, as it was outside of the scope of this group.

RESOLVED That:

1)      The members of the task and finish group be thanked for their ongoing work on this matter;

2)      Notes of meetings of the group be circulated to the Committee alongside the existing contract;

3)      Officers ascertain whether it was possible for Loddon Homes (WBC’s housing company) to deliver the majority of new social housing with loans from the public works loan board, to be paid off by rental income;

4)      Members contact the group with any known social housing issues within their wards.