Agenda and minutes
PDF 149 KBVenue: Room 102, Hackney Town Hall, Mare Street, London E8 1EA. View directions
Contact: Tom Thorn
| No. | Item | |
|---|---|---|
|
Apologies for Absence Minutes: 1.1 Apologies had been received from Cllr Etti who was abroad. |
||
|
Urgent Items / Order of Business Minutes: 2.1 There were no urgent items and the order of business was as laid out. |
||
|
Declarations of Interest Minutes: 3.1 There were no declarations of interest. |
||
|
Thames Water Main Burst in the Leabridge Ward - second update Additional documents: Minutes: 5.1 Guests in attendance for this item were: · Sean Walden, Head of Regional Networks, Thames Water
· Mark French, Sedgwick (appointed loss adjusters for Thames Water).
· Cecilia Larkin, Local and Regional Government Liaison, Thames Water
· Aled Richards, Director of Public Realm, Hackney Council
5.2 The Chair welcomed guests.
5.3 A Commission Member who represented the Ward affected by the flood suggested that opening comments from Thames Water should cover the latest situation on residents’ parking amenity which the flood had impacted upon, the current position in regards to Thames’ liaison with the charity owners of the Old School House (the renovation of which and a schedule of fund raising activities had been impacted by the incident and its aftermath), the latest progress on compensation payments to effected residents and businesses, and an update on Thames Water’s putting right of damage to a convenience store.
5.4 The Loss Adjuster, Sedgewick said that in terms of loss of parking, Thames Water had worked with Hackney Council to mitigate the issue. This had resulted in the Council providing temporary free of charge on-street parking permits to those residents who had lost their parking spaces in a private carpark. The Council had also agreed to reimburse the costs of penalty charge notices issued where the contravention had been associated with the incident and its immediate aftermath. Feedback from residents who had been through these processes showed them to have been working well.
5.5 In regards to the damaged shop – Archie Express – Thames Water continued to work closely with the owners. The owners had asked that repair work did not start until after the busy festive period. They had made the request that the task of putting right the shop was allocated contractors and engineers delivering improvement work on the wider affected area. Work had started in early 2019, as planned.
5.6 However - unfortunately – the damage incurred had been found to have been worse than first envisaged, with added complexities in regards to health and safety aspects. This had meant the project had needed to be larger and longer than initially forecast. Target for completion and reopening of the shop was now scheduled for the 27th April. The owners were being kept fully informed of developments. Thames Water had sought to provide financial assistance via interim payments.
5.7 Moving to the Old School House, the Loss Adjuster, Sedgewick advised that a recent meeting had taken place with the owner. Since that meeting and despite having made the request a number of times, some information required from the owner in order to move forward with the case, had yet to be provided. They would continue to liaise with the owner on the matter.
5.8 At this point the Chair noted that Long Huynh - the Chair of the charity (Chan Khong Monastery UK) which had bought the Old Schoolhouse – was in attendance. She recalled that in November the Commission had heard how the flood had impacted on the work of the ... view the full minutes text for item 4. |
||
|
Minutes: 5.1 Guests in attendance for this item were:
5.2 The Chair welcomed the Cabinet Member for Finance and Housing Needs to her question time session. She noted the first section of questions would be focused on the work of the Council and partners to tackle and alleviate rough sleeping over the winter period. She invited the Cabinet Member for Finance and Housing Needs to make any opening comments.
5.3 The Cabinet Member for Finance and Housing Needs made the following substantive points:
|
||
|
Update on discretionary private rented sector licensing Additional documents: Minutes: 6.1 Kevin Thompson, Head of Private Sector Housing, was in attendance for this item.
6.2 Asked to make any opening comments, the Head of Private Sector Housing said the following: · The Council like other local authorities had a mandatory licensing scheme in place covering larger Houses of Multiple Occupation.
· Research into housing conditions in the borough had found there to be some significant issues in the private rented sector which went beyond those covered by mandatory licensing. This research found that around 11% of rented properties in the borough had serious hazards or disrepair in with them. With HMOs this rose to 20%.
· Based on that data and in line with a manifesto commitment, an assessment was made as to whether this research gave cause for the Council to implement discretionary licensing schemes to run alongside the mandatory one, in order to bring more properties into a licensing framework.
· This assessment led to the implementation of two licensing schemes, which came into force on the 1st October 2018.
· An additional licensing scheme now covered all HMOs in the borough not covered by the mandatory scheme (covering properties occupied by two or more people who were not a single family).
· A geographically-based pilot selective licensing scheme now covered all rented units not within scope of the mandatory or additional schemes, in the wards of Cazenove, Brownswood and Stoke Newington. The data exercise highlighted relatively high levels of hazards in these three wards. The impact of this pilot scheme would be monitored with the insight used to inform future approaches.
· Prior to their coming into force, the Council had made the decision that active enforcement against those not coming forward for a license would not be started in the first few months of the scheme. At that point and as per public announcements made, enforcement measures would begin. The date for which the enforcement window opened was the 1st March. The Council was not about to embark on extensive enforcement activity. Instead at this point it would begin a publicity campaign, writing to landlords and agents and others encouraging them to come forward. Those actively choosing not to comply with the scheme would then be subject to enforcement action.
· Section 4.1 and 4.2 showed changes to procedures and policies. Section 4.1 related to how the Council would manage cases where landlords of properties in Hackney resided overseas. 4.2 set out the approach to be taken to selective licensing where the licenses were for flats in blocks, and gave consideration to whether a single license could be provided covering all flats, or whether individual licenses would be required for each flat. The policy now allowed for licenses covering more than one flat, in certain circumstances.
6.3 The Chair noted the 1st March timescale for starting enforcement action. She asked what form of enforcement this would take. She was keen to see what had happened since implementation of the schemes in October.
6.4 The Head of Private Sector Housing said ... view the full minutes text for item 6. |
||
|
Minutes of the Previous Meeting Additional documents: Minutes: 7.1 The Minutes of the last meeting were agreed as an accurate record. |
||
|
Living in Hackney Scrutiny Commission- 2018/19 Work Programme Additional documents: Minutes: 8.1 The work programme was noted.
8.2 A Member suggested that the Commission sought an item on the London Plan during the next municipal year.
8.3 Another Member had heard some reports of sex workers being treated more punitively by the police, and concerns around this. He suggested that this might be incorporated into a topic for next year.
8.4 A Member noted recent press coverage around some London boroughs ending the arrangement of having embedded Home Office workers within their organisations. This was within the context of work to assess and support vulnerable migrants. She understood that Hackney had a worker in place. She suggested that an update might be received around the approach in Hackney.
8.5 The Chair thanked Members. She understood that the police would be in attendance at the Safer Neighbourhood Board meeting the following week. As Chair of this Commission she was a Member of the Board. She would seek to raise the issue around the approach to sex workers and would feedback to the Commission. She would also discuss the matter of the Home Office Embedded Worker with the relevant Cabinet Member. |
||
|
Any Other Business Minutes: 9.1 The Chair noted that the Commission was nearing the end of its evidence gathering for its review related to serious violence.
9.2 She reminded Members of the meeting scheduled for the 14th March, with representatives of the Integrated Gangs Unit and the Children and Families Service.
9.3 This was to go through a list of questions which had been shared with these services, and which Members felt to be outstanding from previous discussions.
9.4 This was scheduled to be the last piece of evidence gathering for the review. She said that a record of that meeting would be published within the agenda papers for the next Commission meeting in April.
9.5 In addition, records of the other site visits and meetings carried out as part of the review, outside of the formal Commission meetings, would be published at that point.
|