Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 25 November 2024 be confirmed and signed by the Chair as a true record.

Please note that, in accordance with the Members' Code of Conduct, when declaring interests members must disclose the existence and nature of the interest, and whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) or personal and/or pecuniary.

Councillor Pat Vaughan declared a Personal Interest with regard to the agenda item titled ‘Discretionary Housing Payments Update’.

Reason: His granddaughter worked in the Finance Department at the City of Lincoln Council.

Mick Barber, Chair of Lincoln Tenants Panel (LTP), provided a written report which highlighted the Panel’s continued work on a variety of projects with tenancy services, fire safety assurance, maintenance, business management and resident involvement teams. The briefing note, designed as a regular update to members of Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee, covered the following areas:

• Mick Barber continued to attend Social Housing Quality Network Panel and ARCH committee meetings
• All members of LTP continued to attend training and seminars hosted by Four Million Homes and engaged with Tenant Participation Advisory Services (TPAS) national involvement week
• LTP were working with the Resident Involvement Team for the co-creation of a digital newsletter/magazine - HOME covering important updates, how to stay connected in communities, tips and advice, updates from Lincoln Tenants Panel (LTP) and more. The newsletter was due to be launched in February.

Members discussed the content of the report in further detail. The following questions and comments emerged:

Question: What would happen to the paper copy of the newsletter/magazine that had always been sent to tenants?

Response: The co-creation of a digital newsletter/magazine was in the early stages; work was in progress. Every avenue had been investigated as to how communication with tenants could be made. Circulation of the newsletter/magazine would take place differently; perhaps sent out with rent statements.

RESOLVED that the content of the report be noted with thanks.

Daren Turner, Strategic Director of Housing and Investment:

a)    presented a report to members to propose an increase to Council rents of 2.7% for dwellings, within the terms of the Government’s rent policy for social housing, and 3% for garages, respectively; and to seek approval for the introduction of revised rents from Monday 7 April 2025

b)    confirmed that Lincoln Tenants Panel LTP were consulted on the proposed increase to rents for the 2025-26 financial year, at their meeting on 7 January 2025

c)    added that the average 52-week net rent for Council dwellings would increase by £2.36 per week, across all property and rent types, under the proposed 2.7% increase. The average 52-week rent for Council garages would increase by £0.27 per week under the proposed 3% increase

d)    explained that annual increases to housing rents were capped at CPI + 1% per annum for dwelling rents. The CPI figure used was from September of the year prior to the annual increase, with September 2024 being the applicable CPI figure for rent setting for 2025-26. CPI in September 2024 was 1.7%. Therefore, the maximum housing rents can be increased in 2025-26 is 2.7%

e)    highlighted that there was a total of 7348 properties that were charged at social rent as at week commencing 2 December 2024. The average increase per property could be seen at paragraph 5.1 of the report on page 16 of the agenda pack

f)      added that there was a total of 441 properties that were charged at affordable rent as at week commencing 2 December 2024. The average increase per property could be seen at paragraph 5.2 of the report on page 16 of the agenda pack

g)    stated that an increase in garage rents of 3% was proposed in line with the Authority’s general Fees and Charges increase. The result in an average increase in the rent charged to £9.27 per week for 2025/26 (based on a calculated 52-week charge period), an increase of £0.27 per week

h)    concluded that a review of garage provision was ongoing, and City of Lincoln Council (CoLC) were committed to a fundamental revaluation of the garage rent structure as part of the wider garage strategy

i)      welcomed comments and questions from Members of the Committee.

Members discussed the content of the report in further detail. The following questions and comments emerged:

Question: Was the rental period for 50 weeks or 52 weeks per year?

Response: At present, the rental period was a 50-week rent year however consideration had been given to the movement to a 52-week rent year under new tenant agreements. A rent reduction scheme over four years resulted in a loss of circa £11M.

Comment: There were a lot of people out of the city that garage income could be generated from; a good way of additional revenue. There were some problems experienced in some areas but not others and therefore, all area should be different. Consideration should be given to the areas where parking spaces  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

Laura Brown, Benefits Team Leader:

a)    presented a report to provide Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee with information in relation to the Discretionary Housing Payments Scheme

b)    confirmed that LTP was consulted regarding the draft report and responses had been forwarded to the Resident Involvement Manager and incorporated within the report

c)    added that Discretionary Housing Payments (DHP) were available to local authorities to assist customers who needed additional help with their housing costs. A Central Government grant was awarded each year, specified to individual local authorities based on historical spend/ anticipated need

d)    explained that DHP was completely separate from the statutory Housing Benefit (HB) scheme apart from the fact that HB must be in payment and the weekly DHP amount awarded must not exceed the maximum HB that could be awarded in each case. Since Universal Credit (UC) had also been introduced in recent years, DHP could also be used to ‘top up’ the housing component of UC. DHP can, and was, also used for rent deposits and rent in advance, for appropriate cases

e)    highlighted that a joint DHP Policy was agreed for the Shared Revenues and Benefits Service between City of Lincoln Council and North Kesteven District Council in early 2013, to ensure consistency of decision-making and robust criteria to take account of impacts of welfare reforms

f)      added that the City of Lincoln Council’s DHP grant allocations from Central Government, from 2012/13 through to the upcoming financial year 2025/26 could be seen at paragraph 4.1 of the report on page 22 of the agenda pack

g)    stated that the allocation of DHP up to the end of Quarter 3 2024/25 and the number of applications received and awards made could be seen at paragraph 5.1 of the report on page 23 of the agenda pack

h)    concluded that there had been a reduction in the number of DHP awards made to City of Lincoln Council tenants since including Disability Living Allowance (DLA)/Personal Independence Payment (PIP)/Attendance Allowance (AA) as income within the income and expenditure calculation to assess DHP awards, which in turn had allowed officers to increase the amounts awarded to those in the private sector. This helped to largely keep spend within the Government grant allocated

i)      welcomed comments and questions from Members of the Committee.

Members discussed the content of the report in further detail. The following questions and comments emerged:

Question: Thanks were given for the informative report. Reference was made to page 23 of the report. Under what circumstances would DHP be refused?

Response: DHP could be refused due to excess income, so if a person had more income than expenditure. A refusal for DHP could also be because the applicant had not provided requested information and evidence or that a person did not qualify for example if they had their rent paid in full.

Question: Reference was made to the number of ongoing awards and tenure type at paragraph 5.1 of the report. What was the ‘30+ months’ on-going awards? How long  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

RESOLVED that the order of business be amended to allow the report entitled ‘Estate Inspections Review’ to be considered as the next agenda item.

Mick Barber, Chair of Lincoln Tenants Panel (LTP):

a)    confirmed the LTP had requested an update on the wider review of Estate Inspections at the Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee meeting on 25 November 2024

b)    added that the LTP had been and were currently involved in the area of work. Five members of LTP attended the Estate Inspections this year

c)    highlighted that the LTP working group had been meeting to review the issues raised on the 2024 Estate Inspections and to consider if the current process was delivering the outcomes that tenants wanted

d)    stated that the next meeting was booked for 14 February 2025 and the group had asked the Tenancy Services Manager to consider and feedback on four strands of work. The Tenants Panel Chair would update Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee on this workstream during future Lincoln Tenants Panel Project Updates as part of the Committee’s standard agenda

e)    welcomed comments and questions from Members of the Committee

Members discussed the content of the report in further detail. The following questions and comments emerged:

Comment: Work was in progress of which took time. It was hoped that there would be some documentation for the next meeting.

Comment: The idea was that there should be more documentation within each area such as anti-social behaviour (ASB) and fly-tipping etc. The old mechanism needed to be changed.

Comment: It would be interesting to discover if having three officers for rent, ASB and estates, had made a change. It appeared to work better.

Comment: Work had taken place in the background and LTP had worked alongside the Tenancy Services Manager. It had been recognised through the Committee that improvements were needed to estate inspection work. As a result of the request, there was a working group with the LTP for the four strands of work to be considered. Alternative options for estate inspections had been considered to ensure more was taken from them and for best practice elsewhere to be considered. It was necessary for the 2025 estate inspections to be planned in order that a model that provided more information and better outcomes be created. The range of audiences was difficult as some individuals wanted to consider grounds maintenance, some wanted to consider ASB and some wanted to consider repairs. It was difficult for an area to be covered in a few hour on one afternoon. More time may be required which would take longer.

Comment: The estate inspections were to discover how the quality of life for tenants in a given area could be improved.

Comment: Issues had been identified on estates last year which were sent to Investment however a timescale had not been received. 

RESOLVED that:

1. The LTP continued to work with the Tenancy Services Manager to co-create a process that worked effectively for the tenants and the Council.

2. The content of the report be noted with thanks.

Daren Turner, Strategic Director of Housing and Investment:

a)    presented a verbal report to provide Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee with an update on Tenancy Agreements

b)    stated that reviewing the tenancy agreement was very important which took time to redraft in order that legislative changes since it was last reviewed were considered

c)    added that an internal consultation process would begin over the coming weeks and once completed, an extensive consultation with tenants would be commenced

d)    highlighted that once the consultations had been completed, the final draft would be presented to Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee in order that it be scrutinised and comments and appropriate change be received. Once the process had been completed, the final draft would be progressed through to Executive for formal approval

e)    welcomed comments and questions from Members of the Committee

Members discussed the content of the verbal report in further detail. The following questions and comments emerged:

Comment: A request for an update on tenancy agreements to be added to the Work Programme for the new municipal year.

Comment: Best practice had been considered elsewhere and a summary of key points on the front page of a tenancy agreement was best moving forward in order that a new tenant be prevented from the requirement to read a 30/40-page document.  Many individuals were so relieved to have been given a Council property that they did not want to read a long document. Tenants still needed to be made aware of the key points in any instance.

Question: Could a probationary period be included in new tenancies?

Response: A probationary period of one year was included.

Supplementary Question: Could the period be amended to six months and then yearly afterwards? Was there anywhere for Council tenants that abused staff?

Supplementary Response: There was a section within the tenancy agreement with regard to treating people fairly and with dignity and respect. Abuse towards staff had sadly become more prevalent. Lifetime tenancies, at times, made behaviour and upkeep of properties difficult. If a tenancy was to be reviewed every 5 years to consider how a tenant treated their Council property and neighbours, notwithstanding rent arrears, there may be more of an incentive. Lifetime tenancies were problematic.

Question: Could individuals be vetted prior to being granted a tenancy?

Response: In the case of regular moves, references would be requested. However, there were individuals with chaotic lifestyles that needed a lot of help and extra support. The Council was a landlord, not a provider of social care however staff always went further than required.

Comment: When an individual caused issues, sometimes it became a big issue. The Council had a duty to find a property which included for those not on the housing waiting list but had become homeless and therefore, a priority. However, there was also a duty to good tenants to ensure that they weren’t placed in a vulnerable position.

Response: The Council worked hard to place people in the right areas in the right circumstances, both for them  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

The Democratic Services Officer:

a)    presented the work programme for Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee for 2024/25 as detailed at Appendix A of the report

b)    highlighted that the work programme could be further populated in accordance with Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committees requests for topics of discussion and areas of preferred scrutiny to be used as a working document, added to or amended at members discretion at any time during the 2024/25 Municipal Year

c)    confirmed that the work programme included those areas for scrutiny linked to the strategic priorities of the Council and themed housing matters, to ensure that the work of the committee was relevant and proportionate.

Councillor Gary Hewson, Chair of the Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee requested that a Tenancy Agreement Update be brought before Committee for consideration at a meeting in the new municipal year.

RESOLVED that the content of the Work Programme for 2024/25 be noted, subject to the following additional items to be included on the agenda for Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee to be held on 17 March 2025:

• Further scrutiny on long awarded Discretionary Housing Payments (Laura Brown)