Agenda item

To consider how the Housing Landlord Service is performing in its response to damp, condensation and mould for 2024-2025 (report of the Director of Communities enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Communities which consider how the Housing Landlord Service performed in its response to damp, condensation, and mould for 2024/25.

The Housing Property and Repairs Manager introduced the report highlighting the following areas:

• The report provided an updated position for year end 2024/25
• Damp, condensation and mould continued to be a challenging area but reporting of cases had been streamlined into proactive and reactive reports to maximise efficiency in reporting.
• There had been additional investment made into staffing resource for the co-ordination of reports for damp, condensation, and mould to increase capacity for the service to provide follow-up telephone calls six months after remedial works had taken place.

Members considered the report, and made the following comments:

• Members noted the number of DCM cases was very large and asked why there had been a sudden increase in the number of reported cases.
  • The Housing Property and Repairs Manager confirmed that the vast majority of cases had arisen from the results of stock survey work undertaken.
  • Where a tenant was happy to manage the DCM themselves, the cases were not closed but are provided with a follow-up phone call six months after to the report.
  • An emphasis was put on the proactive approach taken by officers to ensure that tenants were encouraged to report any DCM at their property.
  • Information on how to report a repair was provided as part of the annual rent review letter sent in March 2025 and the upcoming annual tenants report would include a section on DCM and how to report it.
• Members asked whether the Council was measured on its response to DCM reports.
  • The Housing Property and Repairs Manager confirmed that this was measured as part of the Tenant Satisfaction Measures.
• Members queried how repeat reports of DCM from one property were received.
  • The Housing Property and Repairs Manager advised that in most cases where remedial work had been carried it, the DCM did not return. A follow-up phone call was also conducted six months post repair.
  • It was also noted that where remedial works take place, education was provided to the tenant to manage moisture within their property. In select circumstances, cases are sent through to the Cost of Living team where a tenant could be provided with continued support to manage DCM.
  • Repeat cases were also monitored and reported to the Housing Compliance Clinic.
• Members requested that comparisons be provided quarterly against the proposed performance indicators.
  • The Housing Property and Repairs Manager confirmed that this information would form part of the quarterly performance report. These indicators would provide trends rather than work to set targets due to variations in the number of cases reported each quarter.
• Members expressed concern at the number of properties that officers were unable to access where DCM issues had been discovered and the long-term impact on those properties.
  • The Housing Property and Repairs Manager clarified that within the total number of properties within the no access procedure, properties would be at different stages of that procedure.
• Members queried why officers weren’t able to access some properties.
  • The Housing Property and Repairs Manager responded to say it was difficult to ascertain the reasons for no access in some cases, but most were due to the tenant not being available for a visit.
• Members asked what the last resort was to access a property if urgent remedial work was required.
  • The Housing Property and Repairs Manager confirmed that the last resort was to issue an injunction to access a property, however this was usually only used in cases where electricity or gas safety were a danger to the tenants.
• Members felt sensitivity was required in cases where tenants may not be able to afford DCM maintenance or may be unable to manage moisture in their property.
• Members raised concern that tenants had let officers in to conduct a stock condition survey but would not allow officers back in to conduct remedial works on identified issues within the survey.
• Members noted that there was a handful of cases in Table 3.1 of the report where a DCM issue had been reported but no access had later been gained to the property to conduct remedial works.
  • The Housing Property and Repairs Manager clarified that in some cases, a Housing Officer had reported the issue rather than the tenant themselves.

The Panel requested that the following feedback be provided to Cabinet:

• It was imperative that departmental resourcing was sufficient to carry out critical DCM work.
• There was concern around the volume of ‘no access’ cases and the number of attempted contacts that officers had already undertaken.
• The Panel were supportive of enforcement action being taken to ensure DCM didn’t have a long-term impact on the condition of a property.
• It was important that all tenants were aware of how to report DCM and the support available to them.

AGREED:

1. That the Panel notes the report and provides the above feedback to Cabinet.
2. That the Key Performance Indicators reported to Performance Monitoring Panel on damp, condensation and mould cases be revised for 2025/26 to the following:

·      Number of damp, condensation and mould cases reported in the last quarter

·      Number of live damp and mould cases as a percentage of stock.

·     Average number of days to fix damp and mould issues

Percentage of inspections carried out within 14 working days