Agenda item

Damian Dempsey, Group Leader – Quantity Surveyors, and Stuart Fuller, Construction, Fire, and Gas Safety Manager, answered questions on the evidence circulated with the agenda.

The following main points were noted in the discussion:

·         The Committee noted that housing officers had been under considerable pressure since the Grenfell Tower fire and thanked them for work.

·         In response to a question, officers thought that interim findings on the causes of the Grenfell Tower fire would be available by the end of the calendar year.

·         A member reported that a number of residents were still using barbeques on their balconies despite a letter from the council warning against this. It was suggested that stronger communication and action from the council was needed.

·         The Committee considered the fire risks posed by faulty electrical appliances, and if the council would PAT test residents’ appliances if they were suspected of being unsafe. In response, officers advised that this was not a service offered by the council. Residents were the owners of the electrical appliances in their property and it was their responsibility to ensure that they were safe to use. Officers queried the role of the council if an appliance failed the PAT test; it was not clear if the council would have the authority to disable the appliance by removing the plug, or what action could be taken if the resident chose to continue to use the faulty appliance. If the appliance was disabled by the council, it was not clear who would be responsible for removing the appliance and sourcing a replacement. It was noted that there were on average 40 electrical appliances in each household.

·         Members queried the fire risks associated with houses of multiple occupation in the private rented sector. Whilst it was known that some HMO properties were of a low standard, it was acknowledged that Environmental Health had a licensing and inspection regime which was intended to identify such issues. It was commented that the council had recently been very successful in prosecuting HMO landlords that did not comply with safety standards, and further details would be submitted to a future committee meeting. 

·         A member advised of a vulnerable resident with mental health issues. The resident was a known hoarder and had been asked to remove a number of items stored on her balcony. It was understood that the resident had received correspondence about the fire risks associated with hoarding, however it was suggested that the resident did not have the capacity to understand these risks and remove the items herself. It was queried it there was support available for residents with such issues. In response, the Executive Member for Housing and Development advised that the resident may be eligible for support and agreed to take this case up with officers.

·         Officers advised that the council had sufficient capital resources to ensure that its properties complied with current fire safety regulations. However, if regulations were to change and additional works were required, then additional capital investment would be required.

·         The Committee asked officers if they considered current fire regulations to be adequate. In response, it was advised that they thought they were adequate, however the findings of the Grenfell Tower inquiry may highlight inadequacies.

·         The Committee commented on the different fire safety regulatory regimes internationally, noting that tower blocks in New York City were required to have external fire escapes.

·         A member queried if leaseholders were required to have insurance which would indemnify the owners and tenants of neighbouring properties against any damage caused to their property or possessions through fire or flood. Officers believed that having insurance was a condition of the lease, however advised that they would seek confirmation from the relevant officers.

·         Following a question, it was advised that Housing officers met with the Fire Brigade in various capacities approximately once a week. The Fire Brigade also held familiarisation meetings in larger blocks so they were aware of their structure and access routes. The Fire Brigade carried out ‘post fire visits’ jointly with housing officers to evaluate the causes and impact of fires in council properties, and occasionally carried out joint inspections with Housing officers if there was a specific fire safety concern.

·         Some parking bays in the borough had been removed to ensure that the emergency services had adequate access to buildings.

·         It was queried if the council had evacuation plans for housing blocks, and if these were shared with the fire brigade. In response, it was advised that the housing service did not maintain evacuation plans as mass evacuation was not encouraged or expected. It was reiterated that the fire safety advice for larger blocks was to stay put unless the fire is directly affecting you. In such circumstances, residents were expected to self-evacuate.

·         It was queried if the council had details of vulnerable and disabled residents who may be unable to evacuate in a fire, and if this information was shared with the Fire Brigade. In response, it was advised that information on vulnerable residents was held and had previously been provided to the Fire Brigade, however the Fire Brigade had commented that this was too much information. Officers suggested that the Fire Brigade was primarily concerned with the location of fire hazards, such as residents with oxygen canisters for medical purposes.

·         The Housing Service had previously considered installing local information boxes in larger blocks to enable the emergency services to access information on resident vulnerabilities, however it was decided not to take this up due to concerns over data protection and how the information would be kept up to date.  The Committee suggested that an electronic solution could hold this data in a secure and practical way for the fire service, and proposed that an app could be developed for this purpose.

·         Concern was expressed that some vulnerable people could be heating their homes through portable gas appliances fuelled by canisters, as some people believed that these were cheaper than central heating.

·         The Committee was addressed by a wheelchair user who lived in a council housing block. She commented that she was unable to escape her property in the event of a fire. Her plan was to escape to the balcony, and although her neighbours had helped to clear access, her door needed adjusting for her to access the balcony. She commented that these issues had been raised with the housing service however had not been followed up, and expressed concern that the Fire Brigade may be unaware of her specific needs. Officers advised that these issues would be taken up outside of the meeting.

·         Dr Brian Potter, Chair of the Islington Leaseholders Association, advised that leaseholders were required to pay towards an insurance policy held by the council, however this only insured leaseholders up to the rebuild value of their property, and not the full value of their mortgage. It was queried if leaseholders were able to take out an insurance policy to a higher value, as it was understood that homeowners were not able to insure their property with two insurers. In response, officers advised that their understanding was that insurers only ever insured to the rebuild value of properties, however this would be raised with the council’s Insurance Team and officers would contact Dr Potter to confirm the council’s position.

·         Dr Brian Potter, Chair of the Islington Leaseholders Association, queried the ownership of the front door frame to leasehold properties. Dr Potter’s understanding was that the council owned the door frame and the leaseholder owned the door; however, following recent correspondence to leaseholders on the requirement to install a fire-safe door, Dr Potter had been advised that both the door and the frame were the responsibility of the leaseholder. Officers advised that their understanding was that the door and frame were the responsibility of the leaseholder, and they would confirm the position and respond to Dr Potter. Dr Potter asked that the council’s legal advice on this matter be made public, however officers advised that leaseholders should seek their own independent legal advice on matters relating to the enforcement of lease conditions.

·         The Committee noted that building regulations did not apply retrospectively. It was commented that if any changes to building regulations were made following the Grenfell Tower inquiry, then these would not be applicable to existing properties.

·         It was required that a briefing note be circulated to members on changes to the landlord regulations to be introduced in April 2018.

The Committee thanked the officers for their attendance.

The Committee noted the revised Scrutiny Initiation Document and Witness Evidence Plan.