Agenda item

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

The Panel received a public question from Mr John Poulter, relating to housing disrepair claims. A summary of the key points of his question are set out below:

• What is the Council doing to ensure Council Taxpayer’s money was being spent wisely and that value for money was being achieved when an increasing number of Housing disrepair claims were being taken out against the Council by leaseholders and tenants.
• The Council was failing to carry out repairs and major works and these properties were then deteriorating, to the point of significant legal action being taken by the tenants and leaseholders.
• The situation was being exacerbated by poor communication from the repairs team and a more general failure of different Council departments not talking to each other.
• The issue was disproportionately affecting elderly, frail and otherwise vulnerable tenants.
• There was a failure of contract management in order to get the repairs done.
• The questioner received an FOI response that identified that there were 4753 outstanding legal disrepair claims against Haringey Council.
• The questioner suggested that the Council should set up a dedicated panel to review these cases and get the repairs issues resolved before the situation was escalated to the point of legal action being taken.

In response, the Cabinet Member for Housing and Planning, Cllr Sarah Williams, thanked Mr Poulter for coming along to the meeting and putting his points across. The Cabinet Member set out that the Council would encourage residents not to go through the legal process, as this often made the repairs process lengthier and more difficult to resolve. Instead, the Council would prefer residents to report repair issues to us directly. It was suggested that ultimately, the only winners of legal disrepair claims were solicitors. The Cabinet Member noted that this was not such a significant industry for disrepair lawyers, there would be much more money for repairs and improvement programmes. In addition, it was commonly known that these solicitors work under a success fee arrangement, where they will take a portion of tenant compensation, in addition to serving a large bill on the Council. The Cabinet Member commented that this represented a poor use of public money and ultimately deprives Council tenants of their own resources for almost no additional benefit.

The Cabinet Member advised that the Council was obliged to follow a particular process once a legal claim has been received. This involved disclosing records to the solicitor, arranging for an initial inspection and agreeing upon the scope of works based on that report. It would then be necessary to code and issue that work to a contractor and complete the job. Unfortunately, the legal process, particularly when litigated can significantly slow down the process of completing repairs, causing greater frustration. The Cabinet Member set out that, in response to increased levels of disrepair claims, significant progress has been made to adequately resource disrepair works. The Council has a robust process in place for the completion of works and the Cabinet Member commented that she not have any concerns regarding contractor management following the work done over the last year to transform the service.

The Cabinet Member advised that the Council often faced logistical challenges in arranging access with tenants, the requirement to arrange decanting tenants to alternative accommodation where major works are required, and the storage of personal items. Co-operation between the Council, tenants and their representatives remained essential to successfully conclude works. The Council often found there was a breakdown in communication between tenants and their solicitors regarding access and other logistical issues, which caused works arrangements to fail. The Cabinet Member stated that the organisation ultimately regarded the solicitor’s involvement as an impediment in most cases and this was further compounded by the lack of incentive for works to be completed from the commercial perspective of lawyers, as they could charge more legal costs the longer a case continued without resolution. The Cabinet Member advised that, the Council has a dedicated Disrepair Team, which liaises as necessary with Tenancy Management, tenant’s solicitors, and any other specialist teams within the Council, to ensure that residents were kept informed throughout the process and that any specific needs are met.

Cllr Williams gave assurances that the Council remained committed to completing all works as per legal agreements reached in disrepair cases, taking into account all circumstances in line with our obligations.

The Director of Housing, Jahedur Rahman, advised that he appreciated that from Mr Poulter’s perspective that it may look like the Council was failing to close down disrepair cases, However the cases were being actioned and closed down. It was noted that, since November 2023, the Council closed down 460 live disrepair cases. 350 live cases had been closed down since in the current financial year. The Director of Housing advised that closing cases down quickly could be very difficult as they had to agree the scope of works with tenants solicitors. There were a number of legal steps that had to be followed before a case could be closed down, and this tended to take time.