Agenda item

The Committee had before it a report by the Chief Internal Auditor which presented the planned Internal Audit report on Housing Allocations and Choice Based Letting.

The report recommended:-

that the Committee review, discuss and comment on the issues raised within the report and the attached appendix.

In response to a question as to whether officers agreed with the risks highlighted by Internal Audit, the Team Leader Housing Options and Allocations advised that the team agreed with the findings however noted the many variables as to why different applications took different time to process.

In response to a question about void properties being empty for an extended period of time, as well as the upkeep of gardens at those properties, the Chief Officer – Corporate Landlord advised that he would review the policy around the upkeep of such properties and advise Members accordingly, noting the potential cost implications involved.

In response to a question on page 111 of the report and whether the deadline for the introduction of an application checklist to ensure consistent processing of applications would be met, the Team Leader Housing Options and Allocations advised that a checklist had previously existed but there had been an issue with consistency and a digital checklist had now been implemented.

In response to a question on the introduction of Choice Based Letting and whether the Council had perhaps not anticipated the risk of it being so popular, the Team Leader Housing Options and Allocations considered that it had not necessarily increased demand.  The Executive Director Corporate Services further noted that the system was introduced to manage the automation of the allocations policy to provide greater reach.  He acknowledged that there were still some issues to iron out but that the system was about reducing administration, rather than increasing the amount of applications.

In response to a question as to whether the risks would diminish around the bidding process, the Team Leader Housing Options and Allocations advised that he could give that assurance as customers became more accustomed to the process.  He explained that the team had also been on a similar learning curve and so expected that that the risks would diminish.

In response to a question as to whether the audit sampling had included properties in Torry which might have been part of a different allocation process as a result of the issues with RAAC, the Team Leader Housing Options and Allocations advised that the RAAC affected households had been part of a separate process, dealt with by a separate team, and so had not been part of the sample.  The Executive Director Corporate Services advised that these properties had not been part of the scope of the audit.

In response to a question seeking further information on restructuring within Housing Services, including consideration of the Housing Board and Quality Improvement Framework, the Chief Officer – Corporate Landlord advised that the planned restructure in the Housing team was out for consultation with staff and Trade Unions and was going through the formal negotiation process at present.  He explained that within that, there would be a review of the allocations process, roles and responsibilities and the support available to staff.  He advised that there had been work undertaken around the QI framework for housing, but that it was too early at this point to provide information on the exact mechanism of the framework as a number of options were being discussed.

In response to a question about where the figures contained within the report (218,000 applications against 6,000 people on the waiting list) sat against the national framework of housing applications, the Executive Director Corporate Services clarified that the 218,000 figure related to bids rather than applications, as applicants would bid on multiple properties.  He advised that officers had data available on the number of waiting lists and applications per property and could share that benchmarking information with Members outwith the meeting, as well as the local government benchmarking framework.

It was noted that the report advised that some of the data referred to was not reflective of overall housing application processing times which had been reported to Committee in 2024, and a question was raised as to how prevalent the numbers were in terms of the wider situation, and whether this would be part of a further report to the Communities, Housing and Public Protection (CHPP) Committee.  The Chief Officer – Corporate Landlord noted the points raised and advised that he could add this to the next Housing Board agenda, which would in turn go through the CHPP Committee.  He added that it was important to put the figures in the context of the Council having let more than 2,500 properties in the last year, which was a high percentage of stock to turnover on an annual basis.  The Executive Director Corporate Services advised that he would also work with the Team Leader Housing Options and Allocations to ascertain the detail included in the reports due to CHPP Committee, and provide a service update to Members of the Audit, Risk and Scrutiny Committee with any additional information not included in those reports.

In response to a question as to whether the service was confident that the deadlines for actions would be met, the Team Leader Housing Options and Allocations advised that the team was confident of meeting the deadlines, and some procedural and process changes had been made already.

In response to a question as to how many bids people were entitled to make over a fixed period of time, the Team Leader Housing Options and Allocations advised that each applicant was limited to 10 bids per weekly cycle.

In response to a question relating to the current staffing situation within the team, the Team Leader Housing Options and Allocations advised that there were 11 staff within the Allocations and Placement Team, with 1 vacancy.  In response to a further question as to what was felt to be the optimum number of staff, the Team Leader advised that demand fluctuated and so it was difficult to quantify, but he noted that the team was working on increasing the digital capability of customers to enable them to provide information to allow the team to deal more quickly with applications.

Finally, in response to a question as to where the data would be presented from the Tenant Satisfaction Survey, it was noted that this would be provided to the Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee.

The Committee resolved:-

(i)       to note the concerns raised in relation to upkeep of gardens at void properties and that the Chief Officer – Corporate Landlord had undertaken to discuss this with colleagues in Environmental Services outwith the meeting;

(ii)       to note that the Executive Director Corporate Services would liaise with officers outwith the meeting to review the information due to be presented in reports to the Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee in respect of the queries raised around the number of waiting lists and applications per property and national benchmarking of these figures, as well as how prevalent the issues raised in the audit were in terms of the wider situation as opposed to the sample data, and that officers would provide a service update to Members on any information which was not due to be covered in a report to the Committee;

(iii)      to note that the Chief Officer – Corporate Landlord had also undertaken to raise the above at the next Housing Board meeting; and

(iv)      to otherwise note the report.