ModGov Infozone - Click to go to Tamworth Borough Council website

Agenda item

Update on Strategic Review of Leasehold Service Charges

(Committee to consider the Report of the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness and Planning/Executive Director Communities, which is due to be presented at Cabinet on the 10th October 2024)

Minutes:

Councillor Hadley left the meeting for the discussion on this item.

 

The Chair welcome the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness and Planning and the  Executive Director Communities to discuss the report to provide an update on the work done by Campbell Tickell in relation to Leasehold Service Charges and sets out a series of recommendations in relation to that report. The Interim Section 151 Officer and the Recoveries Manager were also in attendance for this item.

 

The Portfolio Holder introduced the report highlighting that further to the discussion at the last Scrutiny meeting that recommendation 4 had been amended.

 

The Committee made the following comments/observations and asked the following questions:

 

Ø  Clarification around what repairs were required for the affected Leaseholders.

The Officer confirmed that following assessment by Campbell Tickall (CT), the majority of roofs had been assessed as needing repairs which could extend their lifespan before replacement being needed by approximately 10 years subject to reinspection after 5 years.

 

The Committee then addressed each recommendation that was being made to Cabinet for comment

 

Ø  Recommendation 1:

Were Cabinet being asked to endorse the all the recommendations made by CT?

Ø  Officers confirmed that they were looking for Cabinet to endorse all of the of CT recommendations except for the ones relating to the extending of payments terms and loans, which they were not looking to carry forward.

Ø  Recommendation 2:

Clarification was sought from Officers who confirmed that the Corporate Credit Policy laid out terms for debts and where a debtor had means to pay they would expect them to, however the recovery team could look at individual circumstances to offer a payment plan of up to 12 months as standard, but that a longer term could be offered where appropriate subject to an assessment of individual circumstances, supported by proof of income and expenditure. It was also confirmed that the option to place a charge on the property can be used when required.

The Committee expressed concern at assessing on an individual basis as this may lead to inconsistent decisions.

Discussions were had around whether it was made clear that a payment plan was available, and Officers confirmed that they needed to ensure they were collecting income on a timely basis and not incurring administration costs, and that spreading the cost was not an option for everyone and therefore they needed to make sure this wasn’t taken advantage of, however invoices did state that that if you were struggling to pay to get in touch with the recovery team.
Following discussion around whether the letters to residents should state that a payment plan should be offered the Committee agreed that as not everyone would be eligible for a payment plan that it should state that if they are having financial difficult that they should talk to the Council as soon as possible to look at what arrangements.

It was confirmed that there was some general advice on the invoice but that something could be added to the covering letter to encourage that early engagement.

A recommendation was moved for Cabinet around the payment plans.

Ø  Recommendation 3:

The Committee welcomed sight of the Service Improvement Plan (SIP) which they had highlighted at the meeting in August, it was noted that the SIP appeared to be written in conjunction with Trueman Change rather than CT and asked for clarification on why this was?

Officers confirmed that CT were consulted on as the experts but Trueman Change who the Council are working with across a number of projects were supporting with the administration. It was confirmed that using the two companies did not incur any additional costs as there were enough allocated hours available.

The Committee made suggestions of improving the plan including have a resource requirement column so that this could be addressed for every section and that an application such as Microsoft project could be used to define data and actionable tasks. Officers welcomed their suggestions.

How would they ensure that letters did not go out with the wrong information on as they and done previously?

Officers confirmed that they would take this point away and provide a response.

What timescales would be given to leaseholders to enable them to budget for upcoming works?

Officers confirmed that they would be given a forward plan of works which following the stock condition survey should give a five year program of replacements and major works alongside the statutory consultation period.

Ø  Recommendation 4:

Clarification around varying estimated cost of works and clarification as to whether roofing felt would be replaced or repaired.
Officers confirmed that works recommended by CT hd been costed by the contractors but that they still needed to go through the consultation process subject to cabinet approval to proceed. Only works recommended by CT were being completed so if that included replacement of the felt then this was being looked at.

The Committee requested sight of the costings of the works and an amendment to this recommendation was moved by the Committee.

Ø  Recommendation 5:

The Committee acknowledged that they supported the Continued use of CT to develop a policy.

Ø  Recommendation 6:

It was noted that in the minutes from the meeting on the 13th August that the Committee highlighted that the suite of letters were still not customer friendly enough.

Officers confirmed that this is the suite of letters that they would be using but that any letters would be accompanied by an explanatory covering letter from the Portfolio Holder.

Ø  Recommendation 7:

There were no questions or comments on this on this.

Ø  Recommendations 8:

The Committee acknowledged that they were happy with the revised wording to includes those who are ‘willing to participate’.

 

Following revision of the eight recommendations being made to Cabinet the committee recommended an amendment to recommendation four :

 

 

Cabinet approves the process for remedial works based on the completed surveys and utilising the QLTA approach. A detailed cost breakdown must be submitted to the next available Corporate Scrutiny committee as a briefing note. Both these costs and the final invoices require approval from the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness, and Planning.

 

(Moved by Councillor S Smith and seconded Councillor M Couchman)

 

 

The Committee made an addition recommendation to Cabinet that they

 

 

 

Review and revise the payment plan criteria including the statement of means to ensure fairness and consistency.

 

 

 

(Moved by Councillor S Smith and seconded by Councillor M Summers)

 

 

 

Councillor G Coates left the meeting at 6:55pm.

Supporting documents: