Agenda item

[Report of the Director for Housing, Regeneration and Planning. To be introduced by the Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal.]

The report seeks Cabinet approval to revise leaseholder policy to ensure that any alterations to external windows and doors do not compromise fire safety.

[Cllr Chandwani remained absent for the duration of this item.]

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Estate Renewal introduced the report which sought to ensure that the Council fulfilled its obligations as a ‘responsible landlord’ in accordance with current legislation and, by removing the permission that allowed leaseholders to procure and install their own windows and doors, sought to take the necessary fire precautions to ensure safety was not compromised. It was noted that some of the information had been covered in the deputation under item 8.

The Cabinet Member outlined that the alterations policy for leaseholders would provide clear guidance on the different categories of work within and outside their homes for which the Council’s consent would be required. The implementation of the policy would ensure that external installations adhered to the current regulatory standards and did not compromise fire safety. This would ensure that leaseholders and other residents would be safe in their homes. It was noted that the policy would also provide clear guidance on fees for leaseholders so that they could make fully informed decisions before deciding to undertake alterations to their homes.

The Leader enquired whether this change in policy would mean that Haringey was taking a different approach to other councils or whether this would bring Haringey in line with other councils. The Cabinet Member explained that, where a policy allowed leaseholders to replace windows and doors, it was difficult to understand and regulate works. The Cabinet Member clarified that there was no suggestion that leaseholders were more likely to undertake non-compliant work but highlighted that it would only take one piece of non-compliant work to cause harm. She added that she had spoken to some other London Boroughs and that their policies were broadly similar to the current proposal.

Sean McLaughlin, Managing Director (Homes for Haringey), noted that there was a range of policies across London Boroughs but that, on issues such as alterations and use of communal areas, many authorities were seeking increased restrictions and enforcement. It was explained that the new policy was not just based on comparing practice between boroughs but on advice from the London Fire Brigade and feedback from fires. In relation to front doors, practice could depend on the status of an individual Council’s replacement and fitting programme and which doors they were permitted to fit. It was explained that, under Building Regulations, existing doors were held to the standard that applied when they were fitted but newly fitted doors were required to comply with new standards. So, although there were some differences between councils, most councils were seeking higher standards and a tougher enforcement approach.

The Cabinet Member noted that there were some variations between boroughs; she had spoken to one borough which had never permitted leaseholders to fit their own windows but did permit leaseholders to test a door and ask the council to fit it. However, she highlighted that some installations, including safety grilles on windows and security doors, could put residents at risk as they made it difficult or impossible for the London Fire Brigade to enter properties in emergencies. It was noted that there was a broad approach across London to prevent these types of installations. The Cabinet Member stated that it was the Council’s responsibility to recognise if residents did not feel safe and to increase assurance and other work to ensure that the doors fitted were safe and that there were other, broader safety measures in place.

Cllr Cawley-Harrison highlighted two cases in his ward where works by Homes for Haringey had been poor quality or had never been undertaken. He enquired how residents could be assured that the standard of works was sufficient and that they were receiving a fair price when there was one provider for works. The Cabinet Member noted that it was important to receive feedback on works and for councillors to raise these issues; she stated that she raised constant challenges on these types of issues and she was sure that other councillors did the same, particularly councillors who sat on the Homes for Haringey Board. It was commented that, when issues arose, there were avenues to provide constant challenge on quality. The Cabinet Member acknowledged the merits of the open market but stated that this did not always ensure the highest quality of materials or works. 

The Managing Director (Homes for Haringey) noted that he would not comment on the individual cases mentioned as he would need to look into the issues but he acknowledged some deficiencies in works and standards over time and that the levels of complaints were higher than he would like. It was explained that a number of actions were underway to make improvements and from the Council side there had been support to do this. The Council was strengthening the team that oversaw the relationship between the Council and Homes for Haringey with increased expertise in buildings and in property services to provide appropriate challenge and support. It was stated that on the Homes for Haringey Board there was an independent board  member who  had  responsibility for  building safety  for large housing associations and was chairing a group on  compliance with  safety standards  in homes.

In addition, Homes for Haringey had their own health and safety board and on  membership there was  representation from the British Safety Council  to ensure a level of independent assurance.

The Council were funding growth in the management of property services and this week there would be recruitment to a new Executive Director for Property Service’s for Homes for Haringey. Also, later in the month, there would a new post of Director of Building Compliance . There had already been recruitment to a building safety manager position  that will enable Homes for ‘Haringey to  meet the incoming regulations  for high rise blocks.

With regards to costs, the Managing Director (Homes for Haringey) stated that he was not convinced that it was possible to get the very high safety and quality standards applied by Homes for Haringey elsewhere. He added that leaseholders could apply to the First Tier Tribunal for redress if costs were not felt reasonable. Homes for Haringey would always need to demonstrate that their costs were reasonable.

In relation to front doors, it was noted that weaknesses had been identified in the self-regulation of the industry and there had been some delays in replacement works as it had been difficult to find doors that were completely satisfactory and met the 30 minutes  burns test  that should be applied. It was explained that the Council were supporting Homes for Haringey to commission their own burn tests on doors and the Director was awaiting the results of this.

The Managing Director for Homes for Haringey outlined that, legally or ethically, they could not proceed with replacement works on the basis of assurance from the industry when there was reason to believe that this should be doubted.

RESOLVED

1.         To approve the revised ‘Alterations Policy for Leaseholders’ regarding the improvement works that leaseholders are permitted to make to their property as set out in appendix 1 of the policy.

2.         To approve the introduction of a requirement that, where a leaseholder’s external windows and doors need to be changed, all such installations are to be carried out by the Council and its approved contractors.

3.         To approve the fee structure detailed in paragraphs 6.13, 6.16 and appendix 1 of the policy which will be subject to an annual review.

4.         To note the process for deciding whether landlord consent can be granted as detailed in paragraphs 6.6 to 6.12 and appendix 1 of the policy.

Reason for decision

The recommendations in section 3 are being proposed to ensure there is a clear and transparent process in place for allowing leaseholders to improve their properties. In providing consent, the Council will give consideration to the effect works may have on the structural integrity of Council owned buildings and the possible impact of these works on other tenants and leaseholders.

The recommendations also seek to ensure that all external installations have been manufactured and fitted correctly, in accordance with current regulatory standards and do not compromise fire safety. This is because the Council, as landlord, is ultimately responsible for the health and safety of all residents within Council owned buildings.

The recommendation also seeks to provide leaseholders with clarity on the fees payable for obtaining landlord’s permission for alterations to their home.

Alternative options considered

The only alternative option was to continue with the existing ’Alterations Policy for Leaseholders’ which was not feasible due to the Housing Health and Safety Rating System Regulations 2005 conferring powers on local authorities to ensure fire safety in occupied buildings. It is ultimately the Council’s responsibility to have robust processes in place to ensure doors and windows are installed to current regulatory standards in the event of a fire.