Agenda and minutes

Please note that this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method. Although we ask members of the public recording, filming or reporting on the meeting not to include the public seating areas, members of the public attending the meeting should be aware that we cannot guarantee that they will not be filmed or recorded by others attending the meeting. Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on. 

By entering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

The Chair referred Members present to agenda Item 1 as shown on the agenda in respect of filming at this meeting, and Members noted the information contained therein’.

To receive apologies for any absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Buxton.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business (late items will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items will be dealt with as noted below).

There were no items of Urgent Business.

A member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

A member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Register of Members’ Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct.

None.

To consider any requests received in accordance with Part 4, Section B, Paragraph 29 of the Council’s Constitution.

None.

To approve the minutes of the previous meeting. 

In relation to matters arising from the previous meeting, the following points were raised:

·       The Panel disputed the extent to which someone illegally subletting  a room would be picked up as part of a tenancy audit. The Panel requested further information about whether we would be relying on self-declarations at the tenancy audits in order to get an accurate figure, or whether some consideration was being given to a more proactive process of  requiring written permission to sub-let. (Action Sara Sutton).

·       The Panel sought clarification about whether the limit of £100k for a persona of pensionable age to have in savings was appropriate. The Panel requested a written response on why it was set at this level (Action Sara Sutton). The Cabinet Member advised that the allocations policy was being updated and this provided an opportunity to bring it in line with other benefits.

·       The Panel reiterated their request to receive regular updates on the numbers of legal disrepair claims as part of the standing KPI item update. (Action Sara Sutton).

·       In relation to undertaking financial checks on whether people have properties abroad, officers clarified that there was a limit to the checks that could be carried out for foreign property and that these checks would usually be carried out in instances where there was intelligence to that effect or in cases involving fraud. The Chair requested a written response on what checks were undertaken as part of fraud checks on tenancy, including holding foreign assets. (Action Sara Sutton/Minesh Jani).

·       In response to a request for clarification, officers confirmed that legal disrepair claims were limited to Council owned properties.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting on 23^rd September 2025 were agreed as a correct record.

To receive an update on a range of performance indicators relating to the Housing service.

The Panel received a set of slides which provided an update on  arrange of Key Performance Indicators relating to the Housing Service, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 17-48. The following arose as part of the discussion of this item:

a.    The Panel commented on the 38% score for handling of ASB as part of the tenant satisfaction measures. In response the Cabinet Member commented that ASB was a difficult issue, particularly given the vulnerabilities of some of the people who perpetrated it. The Cabinet Member pointed to some successes in getting closure orders to prevent some of the more serious cases and commented that it was hoped that better cross working between the Council’s ASB team and the Housing ASB team, as well as the roll out of the good neighbour policy would help. The Corporate Director of Adults, Housing and Health commented that bringing these services together in one directorate helped focus support for vulnerable people. It was also commented that there was some work being undertaken with health partners, including the allocation of £2.6m to fund assertive outreach work, which included supporting mental health.

b.    The Panel commented that the level of homes that met the Decent Homes standard seemed to have remained fairly static. In response, officers advised that the Council had a target to bring all homes up to the decent homes standard by 2028 and that there had been an 8% improvement over the last three years. Officers also cautioned that the figure was not static and that homes became non-decent during the course of the programme.

c.     The Panel commented that there seemed to be a knock-on impact to resident satisfaction with things like repairs, arising from the problems they experienced in contacting the Council about that repair. The Panel set out the importance of improving call waiting times and being able to update tenants regularly on the particulars of their case. In response, officers acknowledged these concerns and the fact that there had been a drop in telephony performance within Customer Services in the past couple of months. It was commented that additional resources were being put into that team and that there was a service recovery plan in place. Officers also highlighted the importance of digital innovation and the integration of the Customer Services interface with the Housing repairs system. Officers commented that the Council had removed the capping of calls and that there was a system in place for people to get a call back.

d.    The Panel commented that the data suggested that performance around levels of satisfaction with repairs had decreased in the current year compared to last and that the Council had consistently failed to meet it’s target on this KPI. In response, officers set out that there were a number of factors that impacted performance in this area including; contact centre waiting times, volume of repairs, type of repairs. Officers provided assurances that they were working to resolve these issues and they had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 267.

To receive an update on the recommendations arising from a previous Scrutiny Review on Landlord Licensing.

The Panel received an update on a previous Scrutiny Review that the Panel undertook on Landlord Licensing in the Private Rented Sector (PRS). The recommendations from which were considered by Cabinet in March 2024. The report consisted of a cover report, the original Scrutiny Review report and a table which provided an update on the implementation of the recommendations from the Review. The report was introduced by Cllr Williams, Cabinet Member for Housing & Planning and Gavin Douglas, Head of Regulatory Services as set out in the agenda pack at pages 49-86. Lyn Seller, Private Sector Housing Team Manager was also present for this item. The following arose as part of this discussion of this item:

1. Cllr Williams commented that the introduction of the Renters Reform Bill would have a big impact on the housing in PRS and the organisation’s responsibility as the local housing authority. The Bill proposed a number of reforms including a ban on no fault evictions, a ban on rental bidding and a ban on paying rent in advance of more than one month.
2. Officers advised that there had been around 22k licensing applications, with around 21k licenses issued. 7k compliance inspections had been undertaken and 108 Civil Penalty Notices (CPNs) had been issued. More staff had been recruited to the team since the last update, with 39 staff in the team and paid for through the licensing fees.
3. In response to a query, officers clarified that CPN’s were not there to pay for the licensing scheme, instead the licensing fees paid for this. Income from CPNs could be used more broadly across the area of private sector housing.
4. In response to a query around why the number of fines received from CPNs had decreased slightly since the last update, Officers advised that this was a live figure and that a reduction may reflect that some of the cases may been lost on appeal. It was also noted that there was currently a significant backlog in tribunal hearings, which meant that the appeal process could take some time. Cllr Williams advised the Panel that two-thirds of local authorities had not issued any CPNs and that 108 was comparatively high.
5. The Panel questioned the likelihood of further expansion of the selective licensing scheme. In response, officers advised that the scheme was due to expire in 2027 and that work had begun to build the dataset in order to support an application for an extension. The dataset would determine whether there was scope for an expansion of the scheme. It was also noted that the Renters Reform Bill would require landlords to provide an updated dataset to the Council.
6. In relation to advocacy and Rent Repayment Orders, officers advised that there was an existing arrangement with Justice for Tenants and it was hoped that the Renters Reform Bill would strengthen the authority’s ability to adopt more formal arrangements. Current legislation limited what the licence fee income could be spent on.
7. The Panel sought clarification about the current inspection cycle.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 268.

To receive and make recommendations on the 2026/27 Draft Budget and Medium Term Financial Strategy 2026/2031.

The Panel received a report for their consideration and comment, on the Council’s draft 2026-27 Budget and 2026-31 Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) proposals that related to the Panel’s remit. The report include the Budget/MTFS report that went to Cabinet on 11^th November, along with appendices that set out the General Fund revenue and capital budget proposals relevant to Housing and Placemaking. The report was introduced by Kaycee Ikegwu, Head of Finance and Cllr Carlin, Cabinet Member for Finance and Corporate Resources, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 87-160. Also present for this item were the Corporate Director of Adults, Health and Housing, along with the Director of Placemaking. Cllr Williams, Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning was present for this item and so was Cllr Gordon, Cabinet Member for Placemaking and Local Economy.

The report identified that the estimated additional budget requirement for Housing Demand in 2026/27 was £13.2m, consisting of £4.3m of previously agreed proposals and £9.9m of new proposals. The report identified £9.9m of proposed new budget pressures across 2026/27, £9m of which were attributed to an 18-19% increase in the cost of Nightly Paid Accommodation for Temporary Accommodation. The report also identified a £257k reduction in the Floating Support Contract as a proposed new budget saving. Furthermore, the report identified £1m of investment required to provide proposed reductions of £2.1m across the five-year period of the MTFS. This proposal related to incentive payments to private sector landlords to retain and grow private sector leasing housing stock, and thereby reduce the Council’s reliance on costly nightly paid and B&B accommodation. The following arose during the discussion of this agenda item:

1. The Panel sought clarification about how much of the circa £9m budget pressure related to Temporary Accommodation related to the decrease in availability of Private Sector Leased accommodation (PSL). In response, officers advised that the net impact of PSL was around £350k. It was highlighted that there was an invest to save proposal around incentive payments to PSLs and that this would be a net cost to the Council in the first year of the MTFS. Officers provided assurances that the proposals were a combination of some robust modelling, which the service had received external assurance on, including benchmarking against other London boroughs. Officers commented that Haringey

benchmarked favourably against other London boroughs.

b.    The Panel queried what assumptions were used in relation to the reduction in PSLs and what impact would the increase in the cost of NPA have from 2027 onwards. In response officers set out that they couldn’t really forecast beyond 12/18 months when it came to the cost of NPA due to the volatility in the market making it very difficult to accurately predict beyond this timeframe. It was also commented that the Renters Reform Bill would likely have an impact in this area. The Corporate Director advised that they had based the modelling for the invest to save proposal on a number of assumptions on income and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 269.

To receive an update, and provide comments on,  the Haringey Draft Local Plan, which is currently out to public consultation.

The Panel received a report on the Draft Local Plan. The Local Plan was approved by public consultation by Cabinet on 16 September 2025 and public consultation was underway, closing on 19 December 2025. The paper set out the background to the Haringey New Local Plan and signposted the Panel to key documentation relating to the Draft Local Plan. The report was introduced by Cllr Sarah Williams, Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning and Bryce Tudball, Head of Spatial Planning. Rob Krzyszowski, Director, Planning & Bulding Standards was also present for this item. The following arose during the discussion of the report:

1. The Chair commended officers for the breadth and scope of the Draft Local Plan, acknowledging the large amount of work that must have gone in to producing the document. Officers set out that the Local Plan was the spatial expression of the Council’s vision and would set out how the organisation would seek to tackle the housing challenges it faced, along with tackling climate change and other challenges.
2. The Panel noted that it was a 15 year plan and sought assurances that it would be updated regularly, given the need for flexibility in light of changing priorities. In response, officers advised that Local Plans should be updated every five years. It was commented that the Plan was very detailed so it was hoped it would be more a case of refining it, rather than wholesale changes in future. Officers confirmed that it would be updated on a five-year rolling programme.
3. The Panel commented that the Plan was due to be adopted in 2027, by which time some of the schemes would already be in place. In response, officers acknowledged that this was the case but provided assurances that even though it was in draft format, the Plan still gave a clear signal to developers about what the Council expected in terms of future developments. Even though the full weight of the Plan couldn’t be given through the Planning process until it was adopted. Officers added that in terms of a longer term view, the Council was holding a call for sites that might become available for future development.
4. The Panel commented that the Plan talked a lot about equity and fairness, but queried why the fairness element was hyper-localised around neighbourhoods, given that people often lived and worked in different parts of the borough or even in different parts of London. In response, officers advised that the Plan could do both, it could deal with the hyper-local as well as the need to think beyond the borough and across the wider city. Officers elaborated that in the consultation received to date, there had been a lot of feedback around the importance that people attached to their neighbourhood, and so the service had tried to develop a Plan with neighbourhoods that people could relate to and recognise on the ground. Officers acknowledged that people often lived and worked in different parts of London.
5. The Panel welcomed references to 15 minute  ...  view the full minutes text for item 270.

RESOLVED

That the work programme was noted and any amendments were agreed.

To consider any items admitted at item 3 above.

N/A

15 December 2025

9 March 2026

Noted as:

15 December 2025

9 March 2026