Agenda item

John Scott, Audit Manager:

a)    presented an update to Audit Committee on outstanding audit recommendations including recommendations over 12 months old, with the ability at the meeting to request managers to provide further feedback

b)    referred to Appendix A attached to his report which provided details of relevant audits, outstanding recommendations, agreed actions and the current position/explanation from the service manager

c)    invited members’ questions and comments.

Keeley Johnson, Tenancy Services Manager, updated Audit Committee in respect of outstanding audit recommendation over 2 years old relating to Tenancy Services, covering the following main points:

·         Consideration was being given to permanent transfer of the voids team (in whole or part) to tenancy services to provide a more coordinated approach, with options to be discussed at Executive on 31 March 2020.

·         A business case for the pre–tenancy process was now complete and pre-tenancy mapping was now underway.

·         A review of service standards would be updated by the Resident Involvement Manager and brought back to Audit Committee.

·         Photographic ID evidence would be stored on Workflow records to check tenants’ identity seen initially at sign up as well as the 3 week visit, hopefully in place by the end of December 2019.

·         The Tenancy Fraud Risk Assessment awaited completion once the current tenancy verification match was concluded which would inform the risk assessment.

Members raised questions in relation to outstanding Tenancy Services audit recommendations, which received relevant responses as follows:

Question: Had all these matters gone through Lincoln Tenants Panel? It was written into tenancy agreements that an annual review be conducted.

Response: Yes. A tenancy review had been carried out by the Assistant Director, Housing Management. It was important for council residents to maintain peaceful enjoyment of their private lives. It was not written into tenancy agreements for them to be reviewed every year, however, advice was taken from operatives when accessing properties for gas inspections/engineer visits if any problems were identified.

Question: If gas inspectors were being asked to assess the living state of council properties, the tenant should also be made aware of this?

Response: Officers were in agreement. A supportive approach was important. The council as housing authority was not trying to catch people out, however, it was possible to investigate any other issues identified in this way.

Question: There still seemed to be issues with voids in terms of turn-around time?

Response: There had been a particular issue with the contractor in relation to void properties. This was being looked at as part of the review. The council tried hard to promote tenancy sustainability and to limit the number of days properties were left void.

Question: Would the potential to carry out annual tenancy inspections require additional resources? Would this not be a waste of time spent on good tenants rather than targeting vulnerable properties?

Response: Issues existed with a minority of tenants only. It would be easier to establish the potential workload involved once a trial sample exercise was conducted. A supportive approach was adopted towards those tenants with specific issues such as mental health problems.

Comment: There should be a decline in day to day repairs/maintenance requests due to decent homes standard and the installation of new kitchens and bathrooms in council houses.

Members commented in relation to the remaining outstanding audit recommendations in general, which received relevant responses as follows:

Question: In terms of getting the older outstanding audit recommendations cleared, progress seemed to have stalled and auditors now had less time to monitor them. Was time chasing these recommendations impacting on other audit work?

Councillor Ellis, Chair, agreed that time spent on chasing recommendations was costly.

Response: Outstanding audit recommendations were reported to every Directorate’s Management Team meeting on a quarterly basis.

Further discussion took place on the merits of how frequently audit recommendations should be chased and reported.

RESOLVED that:

1.    The current policy of reporting high priority and medium priority audit recommendations to Audit Committee be continued, the remaining ones to be reported on alternate meeting basis as well as being referred to relevant Portfolio Holders to push for a resolution.

2.    Updates on audit recommendations older than 12 months be noted.