Agenda item

The Chairman of the Committee welcomed Ed Shaylor – Community Safety and ASB Investigations Service Manager, Paul Richards - Green Spaces, Sport and Leisure Senior Manager, Shabeg Nagra - Public Protection Services Manager and Colin Russell - Waste Division Manager as witnesses to their second Review of Local Pest Control Services and the Impact of Waste Management Processes on these.

In response to concerns raised about residents living in social housing, Ed Shaylor raised the points listed and responded to queries from members as follows:

·        A free pest control service was available to tenants provided by Housing Repairs

·        Residents would be obliged to comply with their tenancy conditions with regard to managing waste properly.

·        All occupiers are obliged to take reasonable steps to keep their individual areas clean but some private tenants and tenants of social landlords are confused with regard to who is responsible for dealing with rats and mice. Tenants often believe that the landlord is responsible for eradicating rats and mice

·        Responsibility for management of waste would normally rest with the tenant but the landlord would be responsible for any repairs necessary to the property, eg hole in a wall or around pipes, provision of bin stores etc. Where the issue was related to the storage of waste, land lords would say that the responsibility lay with the occupier of the property.

·        Notices can be served by the Council on owners and occupiers giving 21 days to remove waste products such as soft materials and baiting to kill rats and mice. If this is not done and the Council does the work, payment for the removal of such products and for baiting would be required to be paid for by the householders.

·        It was noted that a concession for this service applied for residents over the age of 65 for whom it would be free after April 2013.

·        With regard to pests inside a property, such as fleas and bugs, the landlord would be informed by the Council and would be asked to assist and were usually sympathetic. There would be a dialogue to establish the cause of the infestation and a contractor would be engaged to fumigate or eradicate the pests. For Hillingdon Council tenants in a Council property, the service would be provided free. However, if the tenant was housed by a social landlord, the tenant would be responsible for payment. 

·        It was highlighted that where the Council housed residents through social landlords, why the responsibility for payment lie with the tenants? Members were advised that although the Council accepted the duty to house, with regard to tenants placed in private property, the tenants had a tenancy agreement with the Council but not on Council land, where as Council tenants would have a tenancy agreement on Council land.

·        Advised that where tenants were housed on land owned by the Council, the Council provided a free service due to its duty to keep its own land clear of rats and mice.

·        Tenants housed in private properties were allowed some concessions.

The Committee raised the issue of cohesion between departments, as it was not clear to residents what the Council was responsible for and what aspects the residents were responsible for. 

Officers explained that:

·        If the problem was established as emanating from a neighbour’s property, the neighbour would be liable.

·        Where rats and mice were coming from a source then the liability for repairing the source would be established as quickly as possible.

·        With regard to a broken sewer pipe, if it was within the boundary of the property, the occupier of the property would be served with a notice to repair (obliged under the Building Act 1984) within a time specified by the Council usually between 7 to 14 days. However, in an emergency, within 24 hours.  If outside the property, Thames Water would deal with it.

·        Calls would usually be taken by the Contact Centre where key issues would be identified. The Anti-Social Behaviour Investigations Team ASB IT) would liaise with the Waste Division regarding investigations involving trade waste.  Trade waste contracts would be inspected, as well as the licence for trade waste carriers.

·        Most of the regulations required a notice to be served by ASBIT or Environmental Protection Unit (EPU) for a person to take necessary remedial action (eg Prevention of Damage by Pest Act 1949).

·        The Waste Division did not routinely clear access roads that had not been adopted by the Local Authority; these were the responsibility of the houses served or adjacent to the road. The rubbish in these access roads was often dumped by other people and not by the residents with access to that road, so this was a sensitive issue and the ASBIT would investigate if those responsible for dumping rubbish could be identified. The Waste Division would collect rubbish that had been dumped and open the bags to find evidence of the culprit. Card board packaging with addresses would usually be sent to the ASBIT to follow-up with the identified owners.

·        Environmental Protection Unit dealt with commercial premises and matters resulting in environment health issues, such as, pollution.

Members asked how people in commercial properties, as well as occupiers of flats above could be educated to handle their own wastes.

Colin Russell advised that:

·        Leaflets were available for residents - Your guide to Waste & recycling for every collection day.

·        There was also a leaflet called Street Scene Enforcement Team Trade Waste for businesses.

·        The leaflets were posted to residents and properties when it was established that there were problems in an area and if it continued, then it was reported to the ASBIT to follow-up by sending an inspector in.

·        The ASBIT and the Waste Division worked closely together.

·        Both teams tried to encourage residents and businesses to properly manage their waste and gained more success by being proactive, such as having inspectors visit, rather than by using prosecution as a yardstick.

·        Leaflet drops for issues such as, dumping in alleyways would serve no purpose as materials dumped were usually not just domestic rubbish but mattresses and sofas.

·        There was also the issue of the quick turn around in occupancy and leaflet drop would serve little purpose due to the frequent change in tenancy.

·         The two main issues with regard to waste management were highlighted as fly tipping and dumping in alleyways.

Members commented that:

• Residents associations should be encouraged to educate residents in their areas via their News letters.
• It should be stressed in the leaflets, the effects of pests to indicate that badly managed waste encouraged pests.
• The leaflets should be included on an annual basis in the Hillingdon People, the Council’s free magazine delivered to all residents. To include a page on ‘dos’ and ‘don’t’ of managing waste.
• There was a need to clearly define pests and charges levied and

      for which services.

• It should be noted that the Council did not provide treatment for all pests, only for rats and mice.
• It would be helpful to provide some information on the Council website about bees and wasp, including useful contact details, as it was likely that the initial step would be to contact the Council for advice/assistance

In response to queries raised, officers responded as follows:

• Enquires relating to pest control, for residents not in receipt of a concession, would be directed to a local contractor.
• No ‘super’ rats had been identified in Hillingdon, if bait was not taken by the rats or mice, a different type of poison would be used.
• Following a call out for rats and mice, the contractor would try and identify the source and put the bait down at the same time.
• The free concession for the over 65 year olds was not means tested, but they must be in receipt of State Pension but this was not yet clearly stated on the Council’s website. However, this would be initiated in the Hillingdon Homes contract.

It was noted that copies of the leaflets would be scanned and circulated to members of the Committee for information.

The Chairman of the Committee thanked officers for attending the meeting and in assisting by providing evidence to the Committee.