foster carer prog - Council meetings - Lewisham Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Findings 34. Do Lewisham Homes, Regenter B3 and the RSLs use a single contractor to carry out repairs or a variety of contractors? On what basis are the contractors selected? Lewisham Homes Lewisham Homes have their own in-house repair service for day to day repairs. The contract for this was originally won through competitive tender and has since been assessed through value for money studies and through benchmarking with other organisations. Individual major works schemes are let through competitive tender, with a minimum of 3 contractors submitting bids. All contractors are chosen from Lewisham Council’s Approved List (Exor). Bids are assessed on price for small contracts and a mixture of price and quality for larger contracts. Regenter B3 Day to Day Repairs: A variety of domestic and specialist contractors are used to implement the repairs. There is a pre-qualification process used to vet contractors. This includes financial, experience, health and safety policies and being CRB checked. RSL L&Q: A number of multi trade contractors who provide a repair service to a dedicated geographical area based on post code are used. Specialist contractors are also used to back this service up where necessary. e.g. damp works, graffiti removal. Hyde have 3 contractors carrying out day to day repairs across London selected via a tender process based on a schedule of rates. The planned maintenance contractor was selected through a tender process where a minimum of 4 contractors tender. Residents can suggest a contractor for the tender list but they must meet certain criteria. 24 The Council’s obligations to leaseholders 35. At our second evidence session, Mark Agnew from Lewisham Homes reported that there had been a quality issue with subcontractors when Lewisham Homes took over the management of Building Services, but Lewisham Homes had rationalised the number of sub-contractors used through a tendering exercise. There were now four main sub-contractors with far more stringent performance requirements built into the contracts and Lewisham Homes were using this ‘tougher’ approach to sub-contractors to drive up the standard of work. In addition, a clerk of works would be appointed to all major works projects, to oversee sub-contractors and help ensure quality; and more inspections would be carried out. 36. Following our two evidence sessions, we asked if any fire safety work would be carried out as a result of concerns raised by a recent fire in a block of flats in Southwark and if leaseholders would be charged for this. We were told that Regenter B3 had recently carried out an extensive survey to all blocks/properties regarding fire safety protection and were working to implement some of the recommendations that arose from the surveys. Leaseholders would be charged for the work and if it totalled more than £250 per item, then a
Findings section 20 notice covering the works would be issued. As all major works to Brockley Leaseholders properties are capped at £10k within a five year period, we were told that if any additional works were required to a property and the leaseholders had already been billed for the maximum cap then the leaseholder would not be charged. Lewisham Homes reported that Fire Risk Assessors were reviewing the fire risk assessments on blocks of a similar design to the one involved in the fire in Southwark. The Fire Authority were also inspecting these buildings in conjunction with Lewisham Homes. The initial inspection of these buildings had been completed although some more intrusive examinations were now being carried out. At present there did not appear to be any major concerns but leaseholders would be re-charged for any necessary works. Survey and focus groups 37. The survey and focus groups both assessed leaseholder satisfaction with the standard of repairs, maintenance and major works. Evidence from the survey suggested that: • The majority of respondents (regardless of housing provider) were dissatisfied with the standard of repairs and maintenance carried out • The majority of Regenter B3 respondents were dissatisfied with the standard of major works carried out • Just under half of Lewisham Homes respondents were dissatisfied with the standard of major works carried out (and just under a third had no view or had not yet experienced major works). 38. Examples of comments left in the ‘free text’ section of the questionnaire, relating to the standard of repairs, maintenance and major works included: Lewisham Homes • “With ‘best value’ it is always the lowest cost (cheapest) bid that is appointed for contracts. This results in the quality of work not being of lasting value, and some work has had to be done again by a better contractor. A specification of good quality should be set out for contractors to adhere to and to meet. This investment in quality would save money in the medium and long term” • “The cleaning is not up to standard” • “My roof was damaged in the past. They are supposed to have done the repair but the job was not done properly. It still leaks when it rains.” The Council’s obligations to leaseholders 25
Page 1 and 2: The Council’s obligations to leas
Page 3 and 4: Chair’s introduction Cllr Alex Fe
Page 5 and 6: Executive summary for each leasehol
Page 7 and 8: Key lines of enquiry • When will
Page 9 and 10: Methodology The results of the surv
Page 11 and 12: Questionnaire and focus groups 6. T
Page 13 and 14: Questionnaire and focus groups •
Page 21 and 22: Findings A: Background 19. There ar
Page 23 and 24: Findings B: The Standard of Repairs
Page 25: Findings 32. We asked if compensati
Page 29 and 30: Findings Key lines of enquiry 42. W
Page 31 and 32: Findings 46. Regenter accepted that
Page 33 and 34: Findings 50. How many Lewisham leas
Page 35 and 36: Findings 54. What is the process fo
Page 37 and 38: Findings 57. What payment options a
Page 39 and 40: Findings 62. What is the value of o
Page 41 and 42: Findings • during a falling marke
Page 43 and 44: Findings 78. Examples of comments l
Page 45 and 46: Findings 83. How do Lewisham Homes
Page 47 and 48: Findings 85. Are leaseholders provi
Page 49 and 50: e answered within 10 working days a
Page 51 and 52: Findings noted that the external fa
Page 53 and 54: Recommendations Our recommendations
Page 55 and 56: Recommendations allow a clear and c
Page 57 and 58: Recommendations Recommendation Prio
Page 59 and 60: Recommendations Recommendation Prio
Page 61 and 62: Glossary ALMO EXOR KLOE L&Q LVT Reg
Page 63 and 64: key legislation relating to the man
Page 65 and 66: Appendices Appendix B: Results of t
Page 67 and 68: Appendices answered question 93 ski
Page 77 and 78:
Appendices answered question 33 ski
Page 79 and 80:
Appendices Appendix C: The Committe
Page 81 and 82:
Appendices Ruddock requested this.
Page 83 and 84:
Appendices block my window. The ini
Page 85 and 86:
Appendices in the bill being carrie
Page 87 and 88:
Appendices previous officers are ov
Page 89 and 90:
Appendices unreliably overcharged.
Page 91 and 92:
Appendices area much better managed
Page 93 and 94:
Appendices Appendix D: Results of t
Page 95 and 96:
Some of the leaseholders had been t
Page 97 and 98:
Appendices become damp and start cr
Page 99 and 100:
Appendices “We were told to get a
Page 101 and 102:
Appendices “Our communal area is
Page 103 and 104:
Appendices that there was a mistake
Page 105 and 106:
Appendices Appendix E: Regenter B3
Page 107 and 108:
Appendices Appendix F: Lewisham Hom
Page 109 and 110:
Appendices Leaseholders were asked
Page 111 and 112:
Appendices The leaseholders who had
show all

foster carer prog - Council meetings - Lewisham Council

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?