Agenda item

Councillors Lynne Allen and Peter Curling attended as Ward Councillors in support of the petition.   

Concerns, comments and suggestions raised at the meeting included the following:

• The petitioners advised that there were several inaccuracies within the report in relation to:
  • the opening size of the windows – the open space created by the widows was now larger;
  • the information contained within the Council’s press statement which was only changed after a complaint to the Press Complaints Commission was upheld;
  • the petition having comprised one survey when it was in fact three residents’ surveys; and
  • the statement about residents’ concerns being of utmost importance to the Council – the lead petitioner suggested that this would be best proved through actions and not words;
• Residents noted that there had be no representatives from the windows programme, installers, etc,  present at their AGM in 2010 despite 8  or 9 individuals being invited;
• It was suggested that, rather than fitting Jacklocs, it would be better (and cheaper) to fit lockable handles which could probably be sourced locally;
• Children had been seen standing at open windows in flats that were on the upper levels of the blocks and an elderly lady had been seen hanging out of her open window;
• Although residents had been advised that the Jacklocs would be fitted by the end of August 2011, the work had still not been completed.  When a Ward Councillor had contacted officers to find out what had caused the delay, they had been advised that officers would chase the contractor.  It was subsequently established that the contract had not yet been let;
• It had been left to the residents to identify the safety issues in relation to the new windows;
• When the windows were fitted in the pilot property, residents had raised concerns about safety but that nothing could be done as the windows had already been purchased.  There had been no consultation even though it had been promised;
• Residents insisted that there had been posters available at the open meeting held in March 2010 but that there had not been a slide show;
• The windows at Skeffington Court were half the size of the new ones which implied that they were half as dangerous;
• Some residents had had to ask the Council for poles to use to close their windows once they had been opened.  It was believed that these should have been given out as standard;
• The window replacement programme started on 20 September 2010 and the operating instructions for the windows were received by residents on 17 December 2010;
• One of the residents had already reported a total failure with one of the windows that had been replaced;
• Although the sills were not low, there were a number of people that would need to stand on a chair to clean their windows which would increase their chance of falling out;
• It was suggested that any funding available would be better spent on the installation of window safety features rather than on an independent window expert;
• Not all of the residents had requested the installation of Jacklocs.  Petitioners believed that this might be, in part, due to residents’ reluctance to have the contractors back in their houses again; and
• Residents requested that they be given the option of Jacklocs as well as lockable handles which should be compulsory.

Councillor Philip Corthorne listened to the concerns of those present and responded to the points raised.  It was noted that Jacklocs had been suggested as they were a visible indicator as to whether or not the windows were secure.  The installation of these would be starting in the 77 properties that had requested them in the week commencing 3 October 2011. 

All of the replacement windows had built in safety devices – two of which needed to be released to enable the window to rotate on the central axis.  Furthermore, as the sill height was 1100mm, the chance of an individual toppling out had been mitigated. 

As a result of the points raised, Councillor Corthorne stated that he would require more time to be able to look at the options available and possible solutions.  He would make a decision on the matter outside the meeting and the petition organiser would be contacted and advised of this decision in due course.

RESOLVED:  That the Cabinet Member:

1. noted the actions being taken by Hillingdon Housing Service to address the concerns raised by the petitioners about the safety, suitability and functions of the new windows installed in their flats; and
2. advised that he would reflect on the discussion at the meeting and seek further information from officers about the installation of Jacklocs and lockable handles before advising the petition organiser of any further action that would be taken.

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION

To identify a way forward that addresses the concerns of residents about the safety, suitability and function of the windows.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED

To commission an independent window expert to advise.