Modern.gov Breadcrumb
- Agenda and minutes
Modern.gov Content
Agenda and minutes
Venue: Zoom meeting
Link: Watch Live Webcast
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Election of Chair Minutes: Election of Chair - 2020/21
Following one nomination being received for the position of Chair of the Housing Management Board it was unanimously -
RESOLVED – That Alex Marsh be elected Chair of the Housing Management Board.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Welcome, Introductions and Apologies for Absence Minutes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minutes of the Previous Meeting To confirm as a correct record. Minutes: RESOLVED - That the Minutes of the Housing Management Board of 7 January 2020 be confirmed as a correct record.
Matters arising
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Public Forum Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this Any member of the public or Councillor may participate in Public Forum. The detailed arrangements for so doing are set out in the Public Information Sheet at the back of this agenda. Public Forum items should be emailed to democratic.services@bristol.gov.uk and please note that the following deadlines will apply in relation to this meeting:-
Questions - Written questions must be received 3 clear working days prior to the meeting. For this meeting, this means that your question(s) must be received in this office at the latest by 5 pm on 23 July 2020.
Petitions and Statements - Petitions and statements must be received on the working day prior to the meeting. For this meeting this means that your submission must be received in this office at the latest by 12.00 noon on 28 July 2020.
Please note, your time allocated to speak may have to be strictly limited if there are a lot of submissions. This may be as short as one minute
Minutes: The Board received questions in respect of how noise nuisance/antisocial behaviour and other associated aspects were investigated and dealt with by the Council. The questions and the Council’s reply are as set out in the Appendix to the Minutes.
A tenant representative emphasised that a number of properties had serious noise transfer problems. The Director (Housing and Landlord Services) was asked to give specific attention to this ongoing problem.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Report back from Bristol Homes Board - verbal update Minutes: Pete Daw reported that the Bristol Homes & Community Board had met on 25 June and all the papers relating to the meeting were on the Council’s website. The main topic was themed around sustainability and the Fuel Poverty action plan, also discussed was the One City climate strategy and issues relating to the ecological emergency. The next meeting would be held on 8 October 2020.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Housing and Landlord Services Covid-19 update Minutes: The Director gave a presentation updating the Board on how Housing and Landlord Services had been affected by the Covid-19 lockdown period of April to May 2020. It was emphasised that due to the flexibility and goodwill of staff in all teams an outstanding performance had been achieved enabling much needed emergency and safety related housing services to be provided and specifically to the most vulnerable tenants.
Tenant representatives emphasised their thanks to the housing teams for their hard work during the period.
In response to the presentation the following points were made:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Moving Forward Together Minutes: The Director of Housing gave a presentation on the Moving Forward Together draft model which sought to become a world class housing service. Key to the model was that its findings were derived residents and staff and not from senior managers within the housing management team. Co-design was seen as a fundamental and integral part of developing the Model.
The draft model comprised of six key priorities –
2. Provide services that are visible and local;
Comments made were:
a) Long term sickness absence had been a problem in the past so having named officers might be challenging; b) It was very important that support to housing officers was available for this to work. The Director of Housing clarified that more housing officers would be needed for the model to work effectively. This would be done by reviewing the number of specialist teams and services provided. This would not cost the service more; c) Regarding staff absences, staff would be put in local teams with agile management for most effective deployment of the staff resource, to mitigate shortages workforce planning would become central to the management of housing officer availability; d) Access to housing officers was crucial with examples of tenants and other service users unable to communicate with housing officers. The Director of Housing confirmed that this was not acceptable and all efforts were being made to improve this; e) It was important to also meet the needs of those outside of the service e.g. applicants applying for housing services; f) Need better contact systems to connect with housing officers; g) Housing officer skills needed to be more generic to cover wide range of issues e.g., evictions, rent arrears, noise complaints, a smaller patch based role was the best way to achieve this; h) Part time housing officers not always practical due to limited availability, local residents need a local dedicated housing area officer; i) The costs relating to the new model would not be known for some time however it was anticipated that this was not likely to be a major concern, as savings could be made from addressing demand failure; j) Specific buildings for locating housing staff was not necessary as experience has shown that an agile and effective service can work without this as it’s more about customer care and having robust systems in place to ensure services are maintained e.g., daily check-ins, close team working, utilising a combination of council/community buildings and high a quality management structure;
The Board welcomed the draft MFT Model and were advised that further feedback outside of the meeting would be very welcome. It was also suggested that input to it be sought from the BAME community, the Councils youth parliament members and youth mayors. ... view the full minutes text for item 50. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Date of Next Meeting Minutes: The next meeting of the Housing Management Board would be held in November 2020, date to be confirmed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Any Other Business Minutes:
Appendix
HOUSING MANAGEMENT BOARD PUBLIC FORUM 29 JULY 2020 Questions from Ryan Miles I have points that I would like put to the board, regarding noise nuisance/antisocial behaviour & how certain aspects are investigated & dealt with by the Council. The Council's own tenancy agreement lists door slamming as an example of antisocial behaviour & yet the noise nuisance team do not deem it serious enough to warrant taking action against the perpetrators. Door slamming can cause major disturbance to tenants at all hours & can have a major detrimental effect on their quality of life & their mental health. How can victims be protected from such disturbance & antisocial behaviour, when the very people responsible for taking action against the perpetrators of it, don't regard it as serious enough? How also can victims prove their case, when the app recommended by the Council for recording noise, is not fit for the purposes for which it was designed? Door slamming according to the noise nuisance team, does not constitute statutory noise nuisance, as per the environmental protection act & therefore rarely if ever results in them taking tenancy action. Yet it is listed as antisocial behaviour in the tenancy agreement & can therefore be actioned under the antisocial behaviour, crime & policing act, so why doesn't this happen? & why are tenants not properly supported in making it happen? Noise nuisance such as this, is a major issue on our estates & can have devastating effects on the lives of those on the receiving end. The entire noise nuisance policy & procedure in general, can be a very lengthy & frustrating experience for tenants & I'm sure for Housing Officers too & is in dire need of review.
Council Officers Reply Poor sound insulation between adjoining properties is a cause of many complaints throughout the country. It may make every day sounds of ordinary living; for example children playing, footsteps across a floor and doors banging, intolerable. It is a particular problem in premises originally constructed as single household dwellings, which have been converted into self- contained flats and in buildings constructed during the 1960s when standards for noise attenuation were not as good as modern day standards. Following the common law cases of Southwark v Mills, Baxter v Camden LBC and Vella vs LB Lambeth it was found that a lack of sound insulation between premises leading to noise nuisance cannot be remedied under the Environmental Protection Act ... view the full minutes text for item 52. |