Audit Commission report on Homes for Islington

More documents

Recommendations

Info

p 46 London Borough of Islington - Homes for Islington (ALMO) 299 HFI have restructured the HOS to separate all service and major works charge calculation from collection. In effect getting staff to specialise in collection, and they are increasing staff resources with three additional home ownership officers to do this to improve performance. 300 Leaseholders at our focus group and from the leasehold survey feedback are dissatisfied with the consultation on major works. They find the statutory notices sent are confusing and most felt HFI takes little account of their views. Additionally leaseholders were very concerned about the extent and costs of future work. HFI and the council have yet to agree policies on the provision of loans and buy back facilities. Failure to do this could result in hardship for a significant number of leaseholders. This is likely to become more of an issue, particularly as many leaseholders are likely to recive large bills for major works when the ALMO starts its programme of improving properties and a significant number are on low and fixed incomes (22 per cent receive a pension and 6 per cent receive income support). 301 Leaseholders have raised issues on charges for major works in the NDC area and this is impacting on the relationship leaseholders have in this area with HFI who collect the charges. While this is an issue for the council as it has taken the Government’s recommended decision to re-charge leaseholders, it is likely to impact adversely on satisfaction levels. Summary 302 The housing management service, including the repair and maintenance provided by HFI, have improved and weaknesses from our previous inspection have been addressed and positive performance built on. This is evident from the improved performance in PIs, satisfaction levels and an improved perception of HFI from residents we met. Strengths outweigh weaknesses. 303 Some of the positive aspects of the services include: accessible services for all residents including those with disabilities and those with English as a second language; extended access for repair appointments; rent and service charge payments; and transfers through HFI Direct; extended and comprehensive range of CCs most with clear targets and effective arrangements to manage and <strong>report</strong> performance against them; comprehensive and easy to use website, accessible and informative published material including newsletters for tenants and leaseholders with residents involved on the editorial board; formal complaints and surveys being used to improve services; the relationships with contractors and a range of partners for joint working are positive; high tenant satisfaction with major work schemes; continuous improvement in the performance on voids turnaround, urgent repairs carried out in target time and appointments for repairs made and kept; resident involvement in repair improvements and performance review and improving customer satisfaction with repair service; successes in increasing income, reducing losses and efficiencies through the detection of fraud; caretakers carrying out minor repairs and; contractual arrangements;
London Borough of Islington - Homes for Islington (ALMO) p 47 proactive approach to rent and service charge collection and preventative work; wide range of initiatives used to deal with ASB effectively and sustain tenancies; most estates clean and free of graffiti; positive joint working with the council on allocations, and performance to repair and let empty properties and a well publicised accessible transfer system; formal tenant participation arrangements considered to be an effective mechanism to improvement services; greater involvement of harder to reach residents through community groups, specialist forums and out reach work; and visible and inclusive ALMO board. 304 However, there are a number of weaknesses that need addressing: there are still some inconsistencies in service delivery and approach for example cleaning on a few estates, and health and safety compliancy on some major work sites; not all sources of feedback are being used to inform service improvement and performance dealing with stage 2 complaints still requires improvement; poor quality reception centres and facilities and security arrangements are not meeting residents expectations; there is no overarching VFM strategy, clear targets and cost efficiency is secondary to service improvements; gas servicing performance improved but still unsatisfactory at 92 per cent; cleaning standards for empty properties are not consistently being met; lack of qualitative targets for response repair service and arrangements for post inspection work are not effective; no monitoring of repairs carried out right first time; performance on RTB applications has improved but is still poor and performance collecting major work costs; until the review of resident involvement completed the resources for this service area are not aligned to objectives; outcomes of some activities is unclear and the tenant compact is out of date; and still dissatisfaction among leaseholders with consultation for major works.
Page 1 and 2: Inspection report
Page 3 and 4: Summary London Borough of Islington
Page 5 and 6: London Borough of Islington - Homes
Page 7 and 8: Recommendations London Borough of I
Page 9 and 10: © Audit C
Page 11 and 12: The service London Borough of Islin
Page 13 and 14: How good is the service? London Bor
Page 45: Service charges London Borough of I
Page 59 and 60: Summary London Borough of Islington
Page 61 and 62: Documents reviewed London Borough o
Page 63 and 64: Gary Doolan GMB London Borough of I
Page 65 and 66: Positive practice London Borough of

Audit Commission report on Homes for Islington

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?