The Housing and Communities Select Committee met to discuss the Regulator for Social Housing's inspection of the council, the Housing Revenue Account budget, the Housing Asset Management Strategy, the Lancaster West Refurbishment, and the Select Committee Work Programme. The committee agreed to the next steps for the Consultation Working Group.

Social Housing Regulation Act 2023

The committee reviewed the inspection of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Council's housing management function undertaken by the Regulator for Social Housing (RSH) in April and May 2025, as detailed in the Social Housing Regulator Inspection Scrutiny Report. Angela Holden, Director of Regulatory Engagements, and Jessica Quanzolini, Assistant Director of Regulatory Engagements, from the Regulator of Social Housing, were present to explain the inspection process and answer questions.

The RSH gave the council a grade of C3, citing serious failings in relation to stock condition knowledge and Decent Homes Standard compliance, but found the council compliant against all other standards.

Councillor Marie-Therese Rossi, Vice-Chair of the Licensing Committee, asked if the outcome was expected. Councillor Suffolk-Gain said that the council was aware that work was still required to meet safety standards and to know enough about their housing stock. Jessica Quanzolini explained that the council had lots of information about their homes, but lacked a full assessment in terms of a stock condition survey.

Dan Hawthorn, Executive Director for Housing and Social Investment, noted that the inspection is just part of a widened regulatory landscape, and the point of the consumer standards is to achieve the right outcomes for residents.

Councillor Linda Wade asked what was being done differently as a result of the inspection. Dan Hawthorn responded that they were not fundamentally changing tack, but would always be challenging themselves on quicker routes to achieving the best possible outcomes for residents. He also noted that when the management of housing was brought back in house, a decision was made to prioritise investment in safety measures, at the expense of some other measures critical to the Decent Homes Standard¹.

Councillor Wade asked how this was being communicated to residents. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that the council had written to every resident on the day the judgement was published, making clear that they accepted its findings.

Councillor Hamish Adourian asked if the judgement was causing demotivation amongst staff. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that he had held a staff session with the chief executive, and that behind the disappointment, there was determination amongst staff about how they can deliver on the plan.

Councillor Adourian asked if the report could be reviewed sooner than every four years. Angela Holden responded that it could move on a responsive basis, but the timing would depend on the council's progress.

Councillor Adourian also raised a question from the Tenants Consultative Committee (TCC) about how the people who engage with residents are chosen. Jessica Quanzolini explained that one element of the standards is transparency, influence and accountability, and a strong focus is how tenants are engaged with. She said that the RSH asked the council to facilitate meetings with engaged tenants, and that they tried to ensure fair geographical representation across the borough.

Councillor Joanna Gardner, Vice-Chair of the Housing and Communities Select Committee, asked if the council felt it had the skill sets to survey, quantity survey, and project manage some of these things. Dan Hawthorn responded that it will always be the case that some of those skills and services will be bought on a contract basis.

Councillor Gardner said she would like to see more rigour, because she had been having to look after somebody's flat that is in a Kensington and Chelsea property, and the fire doors didn't comply, even though they were under instruction.

Councillor Wade asked the regulators if they ever go and visit estates or assemble of the properties rather than rely on the paperwork that's provided. Jessica Quanzolini responded that it's not a routine part of their inspection process, and that they thought carefully about whether they would do that when designing the framework. She said that the risk is that they would only get shown the best bits of it, and that they want landlords to understand their stock and be able to evidence that to them.

Councillor North asked what engagement looks like and how often the RSH will be working with the council. Jessica Quanzolini responded that they will be meeting with the council quite frequently, and holding the council to account against their improvement plan.

Councillor North asked if 100% decency levels was realistically achievable. Angela Holden responded that they are looking at aiming for 100%, but recognise that there will be challenges in terms of access. She said that it's not the case that the council has to be at 100% before they move up another grade, and that they would always try and be pragmatic about that.

Councillor Rossi said that the judgment was not a reflection on the officers and staff, but on the extremely dire state that the homes were in as of 2017 and under the Kensington and Chelsea TMO, and the lack of investment and maintenance that they had.

Housing Revenue Account Budget

The committee reviewed the Housing Revenue Account 26/27 Budget Setting and Business Plan. Councillor Suffolk-Gain said that the team were aware that this is a work in progress, and would really appreciate comments on where they are right now.

Councillor Rossi asked about the discretion to set rent levels instead of in line with this standard, which has any increased exceeding CPI. Dan Hawthorn responded that the discretion is that the council has the discretion to set the rent at any level up to that cap. He said that the government have confirmed that that cap will be in place for the next 10 years.

Councillor Rossi asked how many properties are in our outside rent conversions, how many in the right place, and what's the gap in monetary terms. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that there is a consultation about rent conversions, which all councils have been linked to, and that it does give all those figures, so they can definitely attach that as an appendix next time. Neil Isaac said that if the council took advantage of the full capacity offered by rent conversions, that would be worth about an extra £5 million.

Councillor Rossi asked about conversions rates in regards to market rent versus social rent. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that conversions doesn't mean everything's going to be converged to market rent, and that social rent will still stay probably about 3rd or 2nd market rent.

Councillor Rossi said that on page 56, all that's happened is the date exchange from last year. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that the change has been they have added in the parking charges into this bag, but point taken.

Councillor Gardner asked at what point of World's End and Warwick Road the state is going to come in on any scheduling given some of the problems highlighted on Warwick Road. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that what she has asked to be part of the budget you will see either in December or January is a breakdown of all the major works and which will list by state what the works are doing.

Councillor Gardner asked about the option to dispose of the estate properties, and how the council was going to be able to acquire the replacement housing. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that the council only sell the property when it's in Tennessee, so there isn't the need to rehouse anyone because they're only selling them when they're bought. Dan Hawthorn added that the basic principle is that the acquisitions will overwhelmingly be ex right to buys on our estates, which are generally being lower value.

Councillor Gardner asked if there was any possibility of actually retaining some of the street properties properties to be able to transfer those people to these properties. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that they will look at every option available.

Councillor Gardner asked about page 61, and when it said basically that there was about £70 million of backlog of identified, when they did have a meeting, it was indicated to bring all of our stock up to standard, it was going to probably be considerably higher than £350 million, which must have been at 2018 value, and has there been any change. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that it says in the next paragraph £620 over six years, but it's actually more £700, but over a slightly longer year period.

Councillor Gardner asked if the council had a backup plan if the funding bill goes worst-case scenarios. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that they still will be maintaining their tenancy support fund, and have a very good income team that really help residents who need it.

Councillor North asked how much of the £351 million that has been allocated for five years was reliant on some of the unknowns, like grant funding, and selling non-estate companies and getting revenue. Neil Isaac responded that the numbers in here are based on the very best estimates they have at the moment, and that the stock survey data so far has been broadly consistent with the numbers they were expecting.

Councillor North asked if potential changes to inflation and interest charges had been modelled in a reasonable way. Neil Isaac responded that on page 81 they need to make that clearer on the chart.

Councillor Rossi asked if the new homes programme sits within the capital. Dan Hawthorn responded that the new homes programme is a general fund capital programme, comes in the general fund capital budget, and then once the homes are finished, they appropriate the social rent component of those schemes into the HRA as kind of as billed homes.

Councillor Rossi asked if when you try to have convergence, do you get resistance from people coming? Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that it hasn't happened yet, and that this is why there's this consultation that's going out across all London virus.

Housing Asset Management Strategy 2025 - 2030

The committee reviewed the Scrutiny Report Housing Asset Management Strategy and the Draft Housing Asset Management Strategy 2025-2030. Councillor Suffolk-Gain said that she would struggle with housing management, so that's what she's changed it to, maintaining and investing in residence homes. Fiona Leonard added that they don't use the words unit dwelling property, it's now residence homes.

Councillor Rossi asked about how residents are involved in evaluating and selecting contractors during mini competitions. Fiona Leonard responded that Project Union is a framework that they've got contracts, so they've already gone through a lot of competitions to establish a range of contractors who've already met most of criteria they want. She said that they ask residents to be part of the panel to do some of that assessment, and that they would like more residents to get involved in it.

Councillor Rossi suggested that the council actually put social value in the agreement, and define what is social value. Fiona Leonard responded that they are reviewing all of that at the moment, and that they've got a new head of delivery is in post and her background is in resident engagement.

Councillor Gardner asked if there was more detail going to be forthcoming about how some of these new developments will bridge affordable housing forward. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that at the moment they don't know that any of the homes on Earl's Court will come into council ownership, and that it has to be available to them at a price that makes sense and doesn't have a net negative impact on the HRA business plan.

Councillor Hope asked if there was anything else that can be shared on force saving energy performance. Fiona Leonard responded that any form of new technology they want to look at, any form of retro fittings that can be done efficiently, they're definitely open to looking at anything.

Councillor Hope suggested that if the council has any suggestions or any companies doing this they'd like to sit down with, keys they're always open to ideas.

Councillor Wade asked where's the money, and if when you're talking about contractors do they have to go through a process and if they fail to do a job what is the mechanism to be able to recover the costs. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that the first thing in terms of where's the money that's in the business plan. Dan Hawthorn added that the figures in the business plan are based on a costed assessment of what it will take to deliver this asset management strategy.

Councillor Wade said that she recognised this for residents but that also includes leaseholders, and that there is no mention of leaseholders on page 10. She also said that when you do actually prop up leaseholders which is on page 13 it's much more a sort of obligatory consultation paragraph.

Councillor Wade asked what is mandatory occurrence reporting which is on page 23. Fiona Leonard responded that they probably should explain that as well, and building safety case reports.

Councillor Gardner asked to what extent social value might be able to be used to assist the HRA in the services. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that it would be better to take that away and come back, but she's pretty sure it has to be over and above additional it's additional to delivery of contracts.

Councillor Gardner asked if ongoing repairs contracts attract social value components. Fiona Leonard responded that they're just going through using the Project Union framework to go out again and set up a framework of repairs contractors and within that they'll be doing social value as well as it is they do work with our principal suppliers to make sure they offer some social value back.

Councillor Gardner asked about the consultation and the next steps. Fiona Leonard responded that it's being to TCC as an initial draft, and that they have members of TCC coming to co-design sessions with them.

Councillor Simmons said that she thought this is laser focused enough as a management plan, and that for example in the priority to warm dry and well maintained we have kitchen and bathroom replacement well actually that's not essential for keeping the place warm dry and well maintained.

Councillor Hope asked how the improvement has improved, and do you have the data of if it's on the increase or are we static. Fiona Leonard responded that sometimes they have more officers in attendance than sometimes residents, but that the residents they have been very engaged.

Lancaster West Refurbishment Report

The committee reviewed the LWE Refurb Scrutiny Report - Response to Recommendations. Councillor Suffolk-Gain said that all the recommendations have been very helpful as you can see we have accepted or partially accepted them all.

Councillor Gardner said that she hasn't seen anything particularly change since their May meeting, and that there was a view that sort of work was not to the right standard and wasn't being assessed or checked. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that they did get actually cancer catheter has passed for review of the heat network programme by an independent organisation, so she can find out what's happened to that and they are now we have now blocked in those quites.

Dan Hawthorn said that the reason why this one was only partially accepted is the sense that this has got to be a proportionate effort, and that they've got finite resources and they want predominantly standard resources on doing the work rather than going to the end of the green so you're always making a judgment about what the proportionally appropriate approach is.

Councillor Hope said that in terms of assurance of the quality of the works there's a limit there's a limit to how far the programme board can deliver that. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that this is why they ask those experts to come and report to programme board so we can add another action to the programme board to actually have a report from those parties.

Councillor Rossi asked if the amount between £100 per year or applying blocks etc has that been accepted. Councillor Suffolk-Gain responded that it has, and it's done by block by block places places when the work is happening and it's not retrospective.

Councillor Rossi said that that is not separate so as we talked about as Councillor Hope was asking about not competing the contract that is separate and that's contract negotiation this has nothing to do with the contractor this is completely nothing to do with the council acknowledging the disruption caused to residents by this huge amount of varied and multiple works going on rather than a contract not certainly what it should have done.

Councillor Simmons said that she probably could leave this whole paper without necessarily knowing or realising that this was the state we're going to happen and one of the things that she thinks we are one of the reasons why this came to the committee and one of the reasons why we've made the recommendations that we've made in pleading around compensation and well-being is because this is not just a question of the council and the disruption and the delays but it's all of that in the context of the order and she thinks it's really important that we do acknowledge that as explicitly as possible.

Councillor Simmons said that on recommendation one which is partially accepted which is to urgently reassess the project in light of recent feedback that we have some statistics there and some numbers she feels that paragraph four three and four maybe either missing the point or have the wrong focus because it's not just reassessing in light of funding reassessing in light of our understanding of the issues that residents are raising and that's what she thought that the officers had taken away from that meeting on the night but it seems that those concerns don't seem to have been figuring in the undertaking for the reassessment.

Select Committee Work Programme

The committee reviewed the HCSC WP Report 160925 and agreed the next steps of the Consultation Working Group.

Councillor Gardner said that they would like a member of the team to join them next Tuesday to talk about whether there is an element of the housing group that we should look at or indeed whether we as members of the working group when we talk about what we would like to focus on in a session is whether actually housing consultation is actually one of them and your engagement.

Councillor Gardner said that at what point do you have to have a consultation rather than a notification so this change is happening and we send you a letter and we tell you what is the threshold for an actual proper consultation because some residents consulted and whatever but without going into details it was I think not such a big thing but yeah if you could just consider that particular area or department this was highways no environmental services.

Councillor Simmons thanked the committee for raising it, and said that they would expect once something has been completed it will then be taken off the track so we would expect everything it's on here to be in progress or pending but the question is for instance 19th September 2023 so I think this is a piece of work for me and Joanna and work with Bella to look at what needs to be chased out on that and thought forward but thank you for raising it.