A representative of Spitalfields Housing Association will be invited to attend the meeting.

It was noted that the invitations to Spitalfields Housing Association (SHA) to attend both the 9 September and this (19 October) meeting had been declined, and that there were some SHA residents in attendance who wished to raise concerns with their housing provider. At the invitation of the chair, a number of residents addressed the sub committee to highlight concerns with SHA, including:

• No response from SHA to complaints (residents also expressed doubt over the accuracy of SHA’s complaints data as presented in the report).
• Repairs not being completed.
• No non-email option to submit issues in writing. Little or no response to emails. Very difficult to contact SHA via phone.
• Lack of engagement with residents and no local presence of SHA; very difficult to speak to a representative face-to-face; the former local office has closed with no explanation and moved to Canada Square, but residents cannot access it.
• Residents being denied opportunity to participate in governance arrangements. Breaking down of community and democratic participation opportunities and an absence of oversight and accountability arrangements. Meetings (inc. the AGM) being held away from Spitalfields making it very difficult for residents to attend. 
• Residents would like the Council to intervene as they feel they currently have no outlet to raise their grievances within SHA.

Further to the comments of residents, The sub committee expressed concern and alarm at the seriousness, range and volume of issues raised, their longstanding nature and the apparent failure of the provider to respond adequately to them or to make representatives available to attend sub committee meetings (the chair noted that he had received a written statement from SHA which responded to some of the concerns made by residents at the 9 September meeting, however, this could not be made public as it disclosed personal information pertaining to tenants).  The chair suggested that SHA be given a further opportunity to attend a meeting of the sub committee to respond to residents’ concerns, following which the sub committee should develop recommendations for the administration, to include a proposed a course of action for steps the council can take to address the matter.

Shalim Uddin, Affordable Housing Coordinator, introduced the report which provided cumulative performance data for 14 registered providers (RPs) within the borough for quarter 2. Shalim provided a summary of the key achievements and challenges reflected in the report and, further to questions from the sub committee, explained some of the performance trends. He also highlighted an error in the performance table at Appendix 1 to the report: the number of complaints received by Southern Housing Group (question 1) should read 56.

Karen Swift, Director of Housing and Regeneration, provided some further context on the improvements that had been made to the format of the report since it was last submitted and future work that would make the data more accessible and useful to the sub committee. Karen noted there had been some mis-communications recently between the council and RPs and this had led to inaccuracies with some of the performance data. She indicated officers would be pursuing a more ‘curious’ approach to RP performance data, instead of simply taking it on face-value.

Pam Bhamra, Chair of THHF, provided an update on work of the THHF benchmarking group to respond to the sub committee’s previous comments and observations on the way performance data is presented.

Further to the social landlords performance report, the sub committee:

• Indicated concern with the accuracy and reliability of some of the data supplied by RPs. The sub committee noted the council has limited options to challenge or check data supplied, but welcomed officers’ assurances that a more ‘curious’ approach to RP performance data would be used to address this.  
• Noted that the ranking approach taken in the report’s appendices was not always illuminating, as it did not reflect the volume of housing stock each RP holds.
• Reiterated concerns that the report did not provide clarity on the actual targets each provider set themselves to complete repairs. The sub committee would welcome this to enable a more robust comparison of repairs performance between providers.
• Welcomed the recent work to improve the format and presentation of the report and accompanying performance data, which helped to provide a more realistic reflection of RP performance than had been the case in past reports.  

RESOLVED

1.    To review and note progress in the performance outturns achieved by individual Social Landlords and the overall performance trend.

2.    To invite Spitalfields Housing Association to attend the next meeting of the sub committee on 2 December 2021.