MINUTES
of the
CHP Residents Voice Meeting
held on
Wednesday 17thth July 2013
held at
Myriad House
Present
Fiona Stirling (FS) Chair
Colin Rolfe (CR) Vice Chair
Sue Cornelious (SC), Joint Vice Chair
Maureen Wade (MW)
Karima Ali (KA)
Ruth Jarvis (RJ)
John Smart (JS) Vice Chair CHP RV GB / Guests
Ron Goodyear, Board Trustee
Linda Ollet (LO) Scrutiny Panel
George Webber (GW) Guest
Vanessa Thomas (VT) Guest
Denise Kent (DK) CHP
Michael Hadjimichael (MH) CHP
Ray Canham (RSC) CHP
Lesley Kitchen (LK) CHP
Apologies
Mark Shaw (MS)
Simon Barrier (SB) Temporarily stepped down
ACTION
The Chair opened the meeting at 6pm and welcomed the guests.
The Chair advised the Committee that Simon Barrier (SB) had temporarily stepped down for a few months.
KA thanked everyone for their emails, cards and messages after her recent bereavement.
1. / Minutes of the previous meeting
The minutes of the previous meeting held on the 19th June 2013 were taken as a true and accurate record.
2. / Matters arising
Sheltered unit visits: These visits have been arranged. SB will not be taking any futurepart.
Data Protection training: KA and MS still to complete this training.This must be completed by the next meeting.
Green deal: No further information available at present.
Grass cutting: LO stated that this would be discussed at the next Scrutiny meeting.
Loan Sharks: SC had spoken with Kay Caldwell and Martin Hammond. MH and Mathew Huberon were still trying to find a suitable time for the events.
SC stated that two sets of boards had been received last week. RSC would speak to Jade Parker about this item. SC asked how long it would take once all items arrived. RSC stated that it would be done as soon after arrival as possible.
You to work: RSC had asked for a member of the Committee to attend the presentation from this company. MS had volunteered but did not turn up on the day. FS reminded members that if they were unable to attend a meeting they should make sure that the appropriate person was notified.
Welfare Reform: FS asked if CHP are building more one bedroom properties. RSC stated that family accommodation was the priority. DK commented that it was CHP’s intention to still build some further one bedroom properties.
RSC commented that it was expected that Universal Credit would come into force in October in Essex. It is now thought that this will not take place until much later and may not happen until next year.
Leaseholders: A discussion had taken place with Kay Caldwell at the Officers meeting on this subject. A meeting will be held with KA and Melodie Hampson before the meeting taking place on the 12th August.
TPAS: CR has been without the internet for a week or two so has not received any information on the workshops at this event.To date theTenant Participation Advisory Service has not issued the full workshops FS commented that money cannot be spent on this event without knowing what the workshops would cover. All members were in agreement with this.
Leaflet: The leaflet has now been finalised and drafts were made available at the meeting. RSC asked if members could let him have any comments in the break. The price obtained for printing the leaflets was just over £500.00 for 10,000 copies which was very competitive.
Complaints: SB had volunteered to help in this area but due to taking some time out another volunteer is needed. FS suggestedto JS that it may be good for him to find out about this. JS agreed. / RSC
ALL
JS
3. / Any other business
Youth engagement provision: RJ had provided a report on this subject and would be covered later in the agenda. FS asked if all reports could either contain a key of abbreviations or abbreviations put in full.
Disability Action Group: DAG has been nominated for the National Diversity Awards and if successfully shortlisted the final will be held on the 20th September 2013.
Meadgate Festival: SC stated that this would be coming up shortly and held in Meadgate. The request for funding had been left late but the organisers had asked for £250 from CHP Residents Voice and £250 from CHP. FS asked if CHP would be funding this event. RSC stated that he could not see why not but would let FS know. The Committee was asked if they wanted to support the event. The members agreed to fund the event to the sum of £250.
FS stated that as the group was not quorum. All decisions would need to be agreed again at next month’s meeting. / ALL
RSC
4. / Value for Money – Michael Hadjimichael
How is value for money defined?
- The best possible combination of cost, quality and time.
- Definition re-launched
- Re-drafting of value for money log and value for money section of Yoursite
- Assisted the Investment panel
- Value for money Corporate Induction rewritten
- Embed culture
- Enhanced reporting
- Assist Investment panel
- Annual Action Plan 12/13
Enhanced reporting
Big spend areas – ICT, utilities
How do we monitor value for money?
- HCA requirement to report value for money within our annual financial accounts
- Staff value for money log
- Staff scrutiny panel
- A review of procurement and contract management
- Modify staff log to also capture time and quality
- Review big spend area e.g. ICT
SC asked if the new building will produce utility savings with the solar heating etc. DK commented that various options were being investigated like free air flow instead of air conditioning and other energy saving devices. / ALL/
RSC
5. / Fire Risk Assessments and new actions – Denise Kent
The requirement of all landlords is to undertake a fire risk assessment for all blocks with communal areas and review regularly. The guidance on review periods is very varied. All CHP blocks have a fire risk assessment and as review regulations are not defined CHP’s approach is varied depending on the risk associated with the block and residents:
- Complex Buildings - building such as Parkside, sheltered schemes and 4 stories high and 2 stories with vulnerable residents
- Non-complex Buildings – 3 stories high and under
Fire risk assessments are subjective and there are different views from the fire service and Consultants on recommended works. CHP intend to consult residents on some matters. The main focus is going to be on flat doors. Doors will be a priority to meet new regulations as cat flap and letter boxes are considered a risk as they reduce the 30 minute fire safety protection. Costs are going to be incurred by leaseholders and agreement was sought to allow an extension to the repayment period where other works are going ahead.
CHP intend to put in place a specification and will be communicating with all residents about the requirements and regulations.
A discussion took place on cat flaps and letterboxes. FS stated that this had been discussed at Housing and Services and was a very emotive subject. FS had asked KC to find out how many residents would be affected. DK commented that CHP had 4 fires in its properties to date, no injuries sustained, which was not deemed a high risk but the priority was to keep everyone safe.
CR stated that there had been a number of residents who had recently purchased new doors how would they be affected as CHP had already agreed they were happy with the doors fitted prior to these changes. DK stated that older doors would need to be replaced but recent installations should be to current fire safety standards but all doors would need to be inspected. CR also stated that residents were expected to cover the costs of fire walls that were going in.
A discussion took place on fire walls, cat flaps, letter boxes outside buildings and building regulations. Members were keen that consultation took place prior to any decisions being made. DK stated that consultation had already begun and the first Notice had been sent out. The specification is in the process of being put together and this may be consulted on also.
CR stated that residents had received a letter regarding the fire walls and as a Residents Association why were they not asked or consulted as 48 flats will have to pay to have this work carried out. A discussion took place on Section 29 and Section 21 and DK would find out the details of why a consultation did not take place and report back.
A discussion took place on meeting points, fire strips on doors; fire safety information and where this should be placed in blocks.
It was agreed that there was limited information at present but once the specification was in place DK would be happy to come back and discuss this matter in further detail. Members requested that paperwork was sent in advance to enable them to ask questions.
A consultant was currently looking at putting a sprinkler system into Parkside.
DK stated that an article would be going in Your Home so that everyone is aware of what is going on. SC suggested that fire safety information was sent also. RSC could see if there was space available and prepare an action plan. DK and FS would meet to discuss what was included in the article. Vanessa Thomas suggested that maybe this sort of thing could be covered on the Welcome visits. RSC commented that Quality of Life had enough information to hand out during these visits but would investigate.
FS asked if DAG could be consulted on the letterbox issue. DK would ensure that this happened. / DK
RSC
DK/FS
RSC
DK
6. / CHP Residents Voice – the future
Youth Engagement: RJ stated she was researching the provision for youth engagement across Chelmsford and had produced a report which had been sent out to members. A map had been suggested to record locations and although the Youth Service does not cover the age group 11-19 they do oversee the 13-19 year old group. CR commented that he would like something that could be used electronically. RJ will arrange a meeting with RSC to discuss this in more detail.
RJ stated that it would be a good idea to work in partnership with Essex Youth Service and had been invited to a meeting next week to discuss further ideas and will report back. VT expressed an interest in getting involved with this project.
CR stated that Steven Robinson a local councillor was meeting with the Church later this month to discuss putting a youth centre/community building on a piece of land. Steven will also be meeting with the Bishop of Bradwell.
Awayday: MW had sent out an email on 11th July asking members to decide which date would be the most convenient to meet at the Marks Tey Hotel – 3 replies were received.
MW asked the group which dates they could make 1st or 8th February:
KA 1st, SC either, CR either, RJ either, FS either, RSC either, JS either.
MW will try and book the 1st February. Members agreed but this could not be ratified until next month.
Governance Policy: CR has completed this policy which has basically been re-written a copy will be sent to all members and discussed at the next meeting and ratified. Only point raised so far is “5 directors” should be changed to “any director”. LK to send out as CR has no internet at present.
FS commented that there were a number of policies to be reviewed and a list was displayed. FS asked for members to take one each for review. The Code of Conduct policy will be reviewed at the September meeting.
Leaflet: The leaflet was complete and agreed.
Promotional goods: FS stated that the joint conference was currently being discussed for this year. New promotional goods will be investigated. What is to be purchased and prices will be presented to members shortly.
New Residents Association: The Clacton group are ready to affiliate to CHP Residents Voice. The Chair of this group will attend the September meeting.
CR stated that he was a little concerned that the residents outside Chelmsford need to travel and would like to get Skype or some form of video conferencing in place. RSC stated that he would test the Lync system on Office 365 committee members would need a computer with a webcam. / RJ
LK
ALL
FS
RCS
There being no other business the meeting closed at 7:50pm. The date of the next meeting was scheduled for Wednesday 14thAugust 2013.
Signed as a true and accurate record:
Name:
Title:
Date:
CHP Residents VoiceMinutes 17th July 2013 FINAL
1