Agenda item

Gary Penticost - Head of Repairs, Engineering, Planned Works and Facilities Management and Liam Bentley - Operations Manager – Corporate and Housing Repairs and Voids, presented the report.

The Committee heard that the Repairs Service had a Direct Labour Organisation of 44 trades operatives which dealt with about 40,000 repairs requests per year. These repairs ranged from roofing defects to drainage issues, fencing, plumbing, electrical defects etc. The service had been reviewed about 4 years previously and had made very good progress since then. Minor disability adaptations work and minor fabric remedial works associated with fire safety risk assessments were being turned around quickly and it had proved to be more cost effective to use Council operatives to perform this work.

It was noted that the Head of Repairs, Engineering, Planned Works and Facilities Management would be happy to come back to the Committee at a future date to report on other statutory compliance areas within his remit, such as gas servicing, asbestos removal, legionella etc. Members heard that monthly and quarterly reports were produced for the Service Director on these areas and issues addressed accordingly. The service also worked closely with Rod Smith particularly on gas servicing contracts where access could be an issue.

In terms of KPIs, it was confirmed that Liam Bentley presented monthly updates to Gary Penticost and Perry Scott. An example was set out at Appendix A of the report. A minor correction to a figure on page 28 of the agenda pack was noted – the total repairs figure for August 2021 should read 2770 rather than 2662. It was noted that, since 2019, the number of repair requests was increasing by approximately 3,000 jobs on average year on year. This was being monitored as there may be a need to expand the Service or subcontract work to meet demand. The output of operatives was also measured – on average 5 jobs were being carried out per operative per day.

In terms of benchmarking, the Committee was informed that the Service submitted data to HouseMark which collected data from all social landlords and provided a benchmarking standard. It was noted that Hillingdon compared well against other local authorities and the average days to complete repairs, first time fix and resident satisfaction data were all above benchmark. These figures were submitted to Naveed’s team for incorporation in the monthly reporting to CMT.

With regards to complaints, compliments and resident satisfaction, Members were informed that the current service was generally perceived as very good. Compliments were being received (including for work completed by apprentices) and only 0.2% of jobs completed resulted in a complaint. The learning from these complaints and compliments was being built into working practices. 

The Committee was informed that Legal Disrepair matters were coming to the fore and more enquiries were being received. These were being addressed. In terms of operative productivity, over 5 jobs per operative per day were being completed which was a good figure. Monthly Toolbox Talks were held which included safety talks and 4 local apprentices had been employed. It was hoped that these apprentices would stay in post and in time replace retiring operatives.

Members heard that Oneserve / Active Housing Integration Phase 2 had gone live on 30 June 2021. This meant that residents were able to book appointments for non-urgent repairs online. In terms of materials, on average £71 was spent per repair. A full stock management system was in operation and vehicle audits were carried out to enable a first-time fix where possible and minimise disruption to tenants.

It was confirmed that two new voids contractors had been employed in 2021 but this had not worked out hence attempts were being made to mobilise additional resourcing.

Minor adaptations had been transferred to the Repairs Team in April 2020. This was going well and operatives were generally able to affect repairs quickly. It was reported that, overall, the team was performing very well.

In terms of data, particularly in relation to communal repairs, Members enquired how resident satisfaction was measured. It was confirmed that a follow up call was made once a repair had been completed to ascertain whether the resident was satisfied with the work. In terms of communal repairs, the reporter did not always leave a name and contact details, but a follow up call would be made whenever possible. Moreover, pre- and post-work photos were taken. Unfortunately, it was not possible to confirm what percentage of communal repairs were followed up on.

The Committee enquired whether the increase in the number of repairs could be attributed to a lack of maintenance. Members were informed that there had been a number of issues in relation to planned programming in the past but the backlog was being addressed. It was acknowledged that a lot of money had been spent a number of years ago on new kitchens etc but some of these things were now coming to the end of their useful life and needed replacing. Repairs’ data was being used to inform planned programming. Members heard that a number of roofs had been replaced around the Borough and the Service was preparing for a number of significant programmes in the future. 250 kitchens, 250 bathrooms and 60 roofs were to be replaced in the current year and painting programmes were being prioritised for the following year. It was reported that programmes were to be ramped up over the next couple of years to address the backlog. It was acknowledged that approximately 20% of the Service’s data was suspect – this was being assessed on an ongoing basis and attempts were being made to target replacements to the best benefit of all.

In response to Members’ requests for clarification, it was confirmed that between 35,000 – 40,000 repairs were expected in the current year. Repairs requests had increased during the pandemic with people spending more time at home. It was hoped that the figure would not reach 40,000 as this would impact on budgets, resources etc. It was hoped that numbers would be reduced to approximately 33,000 at some point in the future.

Members enquired whether a Plan B was in place to address the challenges of a potential new wave of the pandemic. The Committee was advised that the Service was still operating under Plan A which included keeping the operative workforce split and trying to keep people apart as much as possible by working on a rota basis. Managers attempted to meet operatives outside when possible and some people were still working from home.

In response to questions from the Committee regarding standard repair times to measure operatives’ productivity, it was explained that the Service operated a priority system – for an emergency the team would respond within 4 hours and for urgent cases they would respond within 24 hours. Normally about an hour was allocated per job but this was flexible. It was important to allow a reasonable amount of time per job to enable operatives to get from one job to another without the need to rush their work. Members enquired whether measures were in place to set out standard times in which different types of jobs were expected to be completed. It was confirmed that such measures were in place. Operatives were targeted to the smaller jobs while larger jobs were subbed out to specialist support contractors.

Councillors requested further clarification regarding the 1800 jobs in the WIP (work in progress). It was reported that the WIP had increased during the pandemic but was now slowly decreasing – the aim would be to have approximately 1500 jobs in the WIP (2-3 weeks of work). Tenants were kept informed of progress.

The Committee enquired whether proactive repairs could reduce the number of repair jobs required. It was noted that this was being reviewed. Members heard that a large number of repairs were required on certain estates which were being regenerated. Others needed planned works which, once completed, would hopefully reduce demand. It was anticipated that there would be a decline in numbers of repairs over the next two years. Tenants would also be reminded of their responsibilities in respect of repairs. Members were informed that the Team comprised 44 operatives and a management team.

In response to further questions from the Committee, it was confirmed that communication with the resident was managed by the Contact Centre who set up an appointment at the first point of contact. It was sometimes necessary to amend this appointment due to resource issues. Tenants were reminded about appointments to assist in gaining access effectively.

RESOLVED That:

1)    The Repairs and Maintenance report be noted.