EASTENDHOMES BOARD MEETING Thursday 26 th November 2015, 7.00PM 3 Resolution Plaza, London, E1 6PS M I N U T E S. Apologies:

Transcription

1 EASTENDHOMES BOARD MEETING Thursday 26 th November 2015, 7.00PM 3 Resolution Plaza, London, E1 6PS M I N U T E S Present: Board Members Resident Members Onjona Begum [OB] Les Eldon [LE] Helen Goody [HG] Council Members Cllr Andrew Cregan [AC] Independent Members John Kettlewell [JK] Neil McAree [NM] Janet Seward [JS] Apologies: Resident Members Colin Antoine Margaret Higgins Council Members Independent Members Jane Lewis Maureen McEleney Amjad Rahi Officers Paul Bloss [PB] Chief Executive Peter Gibbs [PG] Finance Director, Company Secretary John Henderson [JH] Managing Director Steve Inkpen [SI] Director of Special Projects In attendance Alex Bailey (Minutes) 1. Apologies for absence 1.1 Apologies had been received from Amjad Rahi; Maureen McEleney; Jane Lewis; Margaret Higgins; and Janet Seward for late arrival. 2. Declarations of Interest There was none. 3. Minutes of the meeting held 3 rd September The Board AGREED the minutes as an accurate record. 4. Minutes of the extraordinary meeting held 24 th September The Board AGREED the minutes as an accurate record. 5. Appointment of Board Members 5.1 NM explained that a series of interviews had taken place, hosted by himself along with PB, JH and LE. The interview panel had recommended from the nominations the appointment of three new members: Jane Lewis, Cllr Andrew Cregan, and Onjona Begum. The Board paper contained brief profiles of each of the recommended appointees. ACTION

2 The Board UNANIMOUSLY AGREED the appointments of Jane Lewis, Cllr Andrew Cregan and Onjona Begum to the Board. NM asked the Company Secretary to file the necessary paperwork with Companies House within 14 days. PG will supply the registration form to each of the new Members. 6. Nomination to Committees 6.1 NM explained that there are some vacancies on the Board subcommittees and invited all Board Members including the new members to consider membership of at least one of the committees. 6.2 AC expressed interest in the Finance & Audit and Service Review Committees and it was AGREED that he be appointed to the committee(s) matching his interests following further information being provided. 6.3 JH will contact OB to give her more details on how the sub-committees of the Board work and what they cover. 7. Annual Risk Register Review 7.1 PB noted that the recent Board training session had featured lengthy discussions on the Risk Register and these had been incorporated into the revised register. 7.2 AC asked for clarification on the two RAG (Red-Amber-Green) scales. NM and PB explained that the first rating is the inherent level of risk associated with the issue, and that the second is the residual risk after the mitigating actions which EEH has put in place. 7.3 JK asked about the VAT risk. PG highlighted that this was referred to at 3.5. JK proposed that the residual risk for this item should be red and this amendment was AGREED. Pending this amendment, the Board AGREED the updated Risk Register. 8. BBBC Consultation Update 8.1 PB and SI explained that this was an update on what was considered to have been a detailed consultation, which had been tailored to each block, and with specific information for tenants and leaseholders. The consultation had included a pack being delivered to every affected household, together with drop-in sessions. 8.2 Although there had only been an 11% response rate, what seemed to be clear is that on all the blocks apart from Barnett and Wheler Houses there was a disposition against full redevelopment. It was proposed to further consult on the BBBC blocks (Brune, Bernard, Barnett and Carter Houses) on the options for refurbishment; to withdraw the Initial Demolition Notice currently in place for these four blocks; and to further consult at Wheler House on a possible full redevelopment. 8.3 With regard to refurbishment options, NM asked what the difference is between planned repairs and refurbishment; and a comprehensive refurbishment. SI explained that comprehensive refurbishment includes environmental works and external estate works. PG / JL / AC / OB JH / OB 2

3 8.4 PB explained some of the conversations which have taken place with leaseholders regarding how works would be phased. Whilst it would be cheaper to do everything at once, this would make it more difficult for leaseholders to plan their finances to meet their contributions. Some example costs for the works had been included in the consultation. 8.5 AC asked if sinking funds were in place for these blocks. PB confirmed that the leases do not allow for such an arrangement. 8.6 PB commented that the response rate had been somewhat disappointing given the apparent level of public interest in this topic. AC was slightly surprised as the low response. 8.7 NM felt that the report proposals were reasonable and anticipated that the topic of leaseholder recharging for works would arise strongly, and also that the impact on the communal estate areas of any proposed lift installations would be very significant. 8.8 LE highlighted that he felt some residents would be inclined to say that EastendHomes will be failing to fulfil offer promises if it is decided not to install lifts to those blocks. 8.9 OB asked if it was possible to install fewer than five lifts at Brune House. PB and SI explained that the layout of the block means five would be required SI commented that there seems to be a belief among some residents that lifts would be installed without charge, which is not the case, although some may qualify for a cap on the costs. NM asked for the Board to be provided with some indication of how many leaseholders would qualify for discretionary capping of these charges JK observed that there is not a provision in the Business Plan for these works and that these will need to be funded. PB replied that the works would most likely need to be phased, and that the tenure balance of these blocks contributes to a particularly high initial cost as Major Works charges are not fully recouped until after the works are completed SI highlighted that the majority of the responses in favour of lift installations had been from tenants, only 11 leaseholders had replied in favour SI added that the site would almost certainly need to be phased due to the needs to maintain availability of some parking for residents, and because of the density of the site PB highlighted that the response rate on Wheler House had been a relatively high 20%, and that there was certainly a core group of residents who are interested in full redevelopment, but identified that a decision not to withdraw the IDN for that block may incite a reaction. PB observed that any redevelopment of Wheler House would be a long-term project and would need to support of LBTH as well as residents PG commented that committing to a major project would have cashflow implications over a significant number of years AC asked if leaving the IDN in place at Wheler House committed EEH to proceeding with redevelopment works, and PB confirmed that it doesn t. SI 3

4 The Board AGREED to further consult the residents of Brune, Bernard, Barnett and Carter Houses regarding progressing refurbishment works to the blocks. The Board AGREED to withdraw the Initial Demolition Notice for Brune, Bernard, Barnett and Carter Houses. The Board AGREED to further consult the residents of Wheler House regarding possible redevelopment. 9. Data Protection Policy 9.1 PB explained that this policy had been revised in line with good practice, including an ongoing process of annual review. The Board AGREED the revised policy. 10. Budget 2016/17 Framework and timetable 10.1 NM commented favourably on the clarity of the report PG explained that the baseline figures had been derived from the reforecast Business Plan for 2015/16 agreed in the summer. The Board AGREED the timetable for progressing the Budget. 11. Corporate Plan Progress against Corporate Objectives 12. Assets & Liabilities Register 12.1 PB explained the history behind the requirement to create an assets and liabilities register, with the HCA looking for progress on this as a key regulatory expectation. Significant progress has been made since the last update report. Appendix A showed the categories of information which have been compiled PB has asked Tim Ravenscroft to prepare a Board presentation on this topic. NM and PB explained that the expectation is that any RP would be able to provide all the relevant information to the Regulator in the instance of a crisis. PG emphasised that this is a living document which is constantly under review. 13. Key Performance Indicators Q2 2015/ LE stated that the SRC had not found any particular areas of concern when reviewing the longer version of this report JH highlighted that the measures introduced since March which had helped to ensure that gas servicing performance remains very strong JH added that the fire safety PIs provided some assurance, especially given a recent regulatory downgrade for another RP for fire safety failures, and that EEH had had to tackle a small fire earlier that day. 14. Resident Satisfaction Surveys PB commented that a more detailed version of this report had previously been reviewed by the SRC. 4

5 14.2 AC asked about response rates to the surveys and PB noted that 33% of tenants and 18.5% of homeowners had responded to the mailings. These levels of response give a strong level of confidence in the results. 15. Housing and Planning Bill 15.1 NM asked if EEH has any plans for Starter Homes. PB commented that EEH s goal has been to prioritise the delivery of homes of social rent. SI did not believe that on the whole Starter Homes will be created by RPs, it is more likely that private developers will use them to meet affordable housing requirements NM asked if rogue landlords would include those of ex-rtb properties. JH confirmed that it would, and that EEH can and does provide evidence to LBTH as the enforcing authority PB highlighted that the bill included a commitment to deregulation of the sector (to a degree) to reverse the reclassification of the sector NM asked how pay to stay measures will work and PB and AB explained the most likely mechanisms, including a requirement for tenants to disclose and a presumption of market rents in the absence of information. 16. RTB Extension to Housing Associations and NHF Voluntary Offer 16.1 PB referred back to the previous meeting, at which the Board had been presented with one week to vote on an NHF/Government proposed deal to implement the RTB on a voluntary basis in the sector. A significant reason given for this deal was to prevent the reclassification of housing associations into the public sector Following the Board s discussion, and further consultation with all members via PB, it has been agreed to vote against the voluntary offer. A majority of RPs had however voted in favour Part of the rationale for the deal had been to avoid becoming part of the public sector but this has happened anyway. A pilot with five RPs has started on the day of this meeting. PB has discussed this topic with the Mayor of Tower Hamlets. 17. HCA Sector Risk Profile 18. Finance & Audit Committee Agenda and Reports 12 th November JK observed that the Committee now oversees a capital programme monitoring report, which makes it easier for the Board to make decision e.g. acquisitions. 5

6 18.2 JK continued that debt is now down to 39.5m, from a peak of 44.5m. JK highlighted that although the Budget had been reforecast, the latest management accounts showed the reforecast figures being missed in a couple of areas, notably service charge income collection and maintenance spend. Whilst the 2015/16 reforecast will be the baseline for setting the 2016/17 Budget, the Board will have to make reference to the actual performance JK observed that the project plans for schemes on Bede; Galleon House; and Glengarnock Avenue had been appended, and that the first two of these were very tight to the end of the financial year. PB felt that they were tight but manageable JK added that Major Works arrears levels have gone up, although this mainly related to new contracts having been let. The Board NOTED the minutes. 19. Service Review Committee Minutes 17 th September LE commented that the committee could do with an additional member to contribute to discussions. The Board NOTED the minutes. 20. Board Training 5 th November 20.1 PB explained that the Board were being given a copy of the presentation which had been delivered that night, and the notes of the discussion which had taken place. The Board NOTED these papers. 21. Board Member Attendance NM asked if it could be checked if it was correct that AR has missed every Board meeting in Any Other Business There was none. The meeting closed at 9.00pm. PB 6