The Housing, Planning and Development Scrutiny Panel met to discuss the council's progress on its voluntary undertaking with the Regulator of Social Housing, its preparedness for new consumer standards, the Community Infrastructure Levy, and under-occupation in council housing. The panel noted updates on these key areas, with discussions focusing on compliance, resident engagement, and the effective use of council resources.

Voluntary Undertaking to the Regulator of Social Housing

The panel received an update on the council's progress following its self-referral to the social housing regulator due to breaches of the Home Standard, specifically concerning the Decent Homes Standard and the identification of over one hundred Category 1 hazards. Jahedur Rahman, Operational Director of Housing Services and Building Safety, presented the report, highlighting that nine out of ten short-term actions agreed with the regulator have been completed. Discussions included clarification on terms like 'handed back' properties, the 'big six' compliance indicators, and the move towards a new dedicated compliance system. The panel commended the work done to address outstanding actions and requested further data on Category 1 hazards, excluding overcrowding. Assurance was sought regarding external validation processes and wider engagement work, with the Director stating that sufficient lessons learned work had been conducted.

Preparedness for New Social Housing Consumer Standards

The panel reviewed the council's readiness for the Regulator of Social Housing's new Consumer Standards, with presentations from Jahedur Rahman and Nimisha Patel, Assistant Director for Housing Management. The discussion focused on the weighting and repercussions of non-compliance with these new standards, which are outcome-based and will replace existing ones. Officers expressed confidence in the council's current safety and quality compliance due to recent work. The panel raised concerns about enforcing poor quality housing cases and the need for stronger liaison with police to tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB). The effectiveness of CCTV and door entry systems was debated, with a focus on intelligence-led deployment. The panel also discussed the communication of housing manager roles and the trend of placing vulnerable people in general needs housing. A future update was requested on the revised recharging model and SLA between housing and housing enforcement.

Community Infrastructure Levy

Bryce Tudball, Interim Head of Planning Policy, Transport and Infrastructure, briefed the panel on the Haringey Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). The discussion addressed the differing CIL rates across the borough, which are based on viability evidence, and the process for allocating Neighbourhood CIL (NCIL). Officers explained that areas with adopted neighbourhood plans receive 25% of CIL receipts, while others receive 15%. It was noted that the majority of CIL revenue is generated in the east and centre of the borough, and spending is generally aligned with these areas. The panel queried the allocation of funds for School Streets and other walking and cycling projects, with officers confirming that Strategic CIL can be spent borough-wide. The process for allocating NCIL in areas without a neighbourhood forum was clarified, with Cabinet ultimately making decisions after engagement. The panel also commented on Haringey's CIL rates in comparison to neighbouring boroughs, noting that Section 106 agreements are another significant source of developer contributions.

Under-occupation in Council Housing

The panel considered a report on under-occupation in council housing, presented by Robbie Erbmann, Assistant Director of Housing, and Denise Gandy, Assistant Director of Housing Demand. The report highlighted that 46% of four-bedroom and 61% of five-bedroom council properties are under-occupied, suggesting that better use of the housing stock could alleviate demand pressures. The effectiveness of current incentives for tenants to move to smaller homes was questioned, with the Cabinet Member acknowledging the need for a robust offer and suggesting that lower running costs could be a key incentive. The panel explored examples of good practice from other local authorities, including transferable discount schemes and the Seaside and Country Homes scheme. The potential for different tiers of incentives and the importance of resident engagement were discussed. Officers confirmed that only properties with empty rooms are classified as under-occupied, not those with adult children living at home. The potential for split tenancies and the success of the Neighbourhood Moves scheme were also highlighted, with a commitment to offer a bespoke product for older residents at the Ashley Road site. A further update on the Neighbourhood Moves scheme was requested.

Work Programme Update

The panel requested a further update on under-occupation and the increase of staff resources dedicated to this issue. They also commented on the need for informal meetings to learn lessons from a recent scrutiny review on the Private Rented Sector (PRS) housing.