SHR Board Minutes Minutes - 3 December 2024

Present

Welcome, apologies & declarations

GW welcomed all present to the last Board meeting for 2024.  The Board noted apologies from SHR Director of Digital & Business Support Iain Muirhead.  It also noted that MD would leave the meeting after item 6.  

LP declared her work with the Covid Inquiry team and the Board noted the inquiry is referenced in papers.

GW declared a conflict of interest with Blackwood Homes and the Board noted it is referenced in the Corporate Performance report.  It agreed that GW should not participate in any related discussion.

SW reported that she sits on the advisory audit Board for the Scottish Human Rights Commission (SHRC).  The Board noted reference to SHRC in the Board pack. 

There were no further declarations of interest.  

Consent Agenda

The Board noted and approved the consent agenda including:

• the Chair and Member activity report;
• 8 October 2024 and 6 November 2024 Board minutes; and
• the matters arising report. 

CEO report

MC presented on issues and developments that impact regulated bodies, the wider housing environment and SHR.   He highlighted the Housing to 2040 Strategy Board and that no forward meeting dates are currently planned, the expected budget position for SHR and planning assumptions around National Insurance contributions – with clarity not expected until May 2025, legal advice SHR is seeking around the Phase 2 Report of the Grenfell Inquiry and changes planned around reporting serious cases to SHR Board.    

The Board considered plans for a new serious casework report and discussed:

• purpose, agreeing that it was not appropriate for the Board to become involved in operational activities, but  welcomed more frequent reporting, noting this will raise visibility around approach and timelines;
• serous concerns criteria and handling processes, noting these are set by legislation and laid out in SHR’s Regulatory Framework and factsheets;
• language, noting while SHR may not determine a concern raised as meeting the criteria set out in legislation, it will remain serious for those reporting it and agreed to discuss this further under agenda item 6;
• notifiable events, noting these are reported quarterly to the Board and that SHR is about to publish a new annual report on Notifiable Events.  It noted HS is considering if more detail, particularly around tenant and resident safety, can be provided for the Board in future quarterly performance reports; and
• the relationship between notifiable events and serous concerns.

The Board also discussed:

• work in relation to the Grenfell Inquiry report, welcoming the forthcoming legal advice commissioned and asking MC to share this and also with GW consider if it is appropriate to highlight to Scottish Ministers.  It also noted that one of the key messages from the Phase 2 Report of the Grenfell Inquiry was the tenants there tried to use every route available to raise concerns, but still felt ignored; and
• Scottish Government’s working group focussed on cladding that MC and CS attend, noting a future meeting date has not yet been proposed.

The Board noted the CEO report.

Actions:

• MC to provide AA with further information on the criteria and process for handling serious concerns set out in SHR’s regulatory Framework and factsheets.
• MC to circulate legal advice on the Grenfell report and consider with GW if there is anything appropriate to highlight to Scottish Ministers.

Charter Indicators

HS and NH presented to the Board on the outcome of the Charter Indicator consultation.  HS highlighted the work of the SHR team to provide analysis to the 71 responses to allow for outcomes to be shared with landlords early in 2025 to aide their preparation for submitting the revised Charter return at the end of May 2025.   NH outlined the consultation feedback detailed in the paper and set out proposals to remove or amend indicators and to introduce new ones.  The Board considered the proposals and discussed:

• removal of data on tenancy refusals, noting SHR can gather intelligence in other ways and that it is for landlords to collect data locally for analysis on why tenancies are refused to inform stock management and SHR can engage around more significant cases;
• information available on adaptations, noting that although cost data is used by some stakeholders, this is not something that SHR uses.  It also noted there is no information on unmet needs that are not attached to requests.  The Board noted the performance data that SHR will continue to collect;
• void performance, noting the impact that long term voids returned to use have on performance figures;
• gas safety, noting the cycle that most landlords apply in order to gain access and meet statutory safety duties; and
• technical guidance, noting the importance of the detail set out here and that it has been comprehensively reviewed alongside the FAQs to bring everything into one place for landlord reference.  It agreed directional footnotes to changes in the technical guidance  in the consultation response could be useful and noted that SHR will also explain the updates in the response. 

HS set out the wide variety of responses to the consultation around damp and mould indicators and proposed options for the Board to consider.  The Board noted the feedback and discussed:

• feedback from landlords at group meetings around the breakdown between fabric and condensation related damp and mould;
• issues around a lack of agreed definitions and the pros and cons of the options for SHR;
• how resolved cases are defined and counted, noting this will be covered in the technical guidance and that there is a variety of practices currently in place; and
• the relationship with fuel poverty and insultation in buildings.

The Board thanked HS, NH, and the team for all the work to date.  It agreed to proceed with three proposed indicators that provide a breakdown of cases of damp and mould split by condensation and structural causes and to review this position after one year to consider the usefulness of the data. It also agreed that further work should be done to consider how we report the first year of data on this.  It also agreed to seek to carry out a thematic review of landlord approaches after the first collection if resources allow and to use the outcome of this to inform any future changes.   The Board also approved the proposed amendments and removals.  

Action: HS & NH to take account of the Board’s feedback in finalising the response to the ARC indicator consultation and resulting outcome.  

Q2 Corporate Performance Report

MC presented SHR’s corporate performance report for quarter two 2024/25.  The Board considered the report and discussed:

• suspension of non-emergency repairs, obligations for landlords around carrying out repairs and reporting, even during periods of paused actions, as well as the impact on existing tenants, noting all health and safety related repairs should continue;
• engagement SHR may have with RSLs if a pause in repairs relates to financial viability; and
• when serious concerns might apply to pauses in repairs services.

The Board also noted updates on engagement with Reidvale and Blackwood Housing Associations and discussed engagement with City of Edinburgh Council around voids, noting current considerations.     

The Board noted the Corporate Performance report.

Lessons Learned – serious concern case

GW set out the importance of considering the use of language and the timescale and process related to serious concerns.   The Board noted that a further two concerns have been raised with SHR.  The Board agreed that any concern raised will remain serious for the individuals , even it if their concerns does not meet the criterial that SHR must apply for a significant performance failure. The Board welcomed that SHR is considering us of language to reflect this.

MC set out how SHR had received, determined, and handled a serious concern at a Gypsy/Travellers site in Fife. He highlighted:

• that it was the first determination as set out in the new Regulatory Framework;
• the timeline and continued engagement with Fife Council and site residents explaining works are due for completion buy May 2025;
• further planned lessons learned work that will seek to involve both the Council and site residents and their representative; and
• feedback from Making Rights Real, who are working with some site residents.

MC explained some of the areas that SHR is considering, including:

• timelines and if it could have come to a determination sooner;
• the impact of SHR’s approach;
• work with the Scottish Human Rights Commission and Making Rights Real – explaining further submissions for other sites are expected and discussions with these stakeholders are ongoing around a strategic approach;
• cultural sensitivities and the importance of SHR staff being aware of these; and
• the level of the Scottish Government’s minimum standards for Gypsy/Travellers sites that SHR must regulate against.

The Board considered the paper and discussed:

• fire safety at Gypsy/Travellers sites, noting that the recent serious concern included some safety elements and engagement SHR has had with landlords beyond this case, to seek assurance on compliance with fire regulations;
• the criteria detail and guidance provided in the Regulatory Framework and associated factsheets for tenants and landlords; 
• the handling stages in place, noting there are timescales for acknowledgement, but that as each case differs in nature and complexity there are not universal response time targets.  The Board agreed it is important to provide clarity in each case for those involved;
• plans to update SHR’s internal procedures following the completion of the lessons learned work;
• legal advice gained through the first case that will inform future cases;
• work Fife Council is doing to review how it handled the original complaint, noting that it fully engaged with SHR around the serious concern and continues to do so;
• the positive feedback received about the impact the Fife serious concern case has had on the confidence of tenants, residents and their representative to bring potential future cases to SHR;
• requirements on landlords to inform their tenants and residents about SHR; and
• SHR’s case conference approach that brings together a range of internal colleagues to determine any changes in engagement.  

The Board thanked MC and HS for the update.  It welcomed that a further update on lessons learned will come to a future Board meeting and it also agreed to discuss SHR’s profile with tenants further at a future workshop.  

Action: SHR Board to consider the outcome of the lessons learned exercise and to discuss SHR’s profile with tenants at a future workshop.  

Presentation on the Tenant and Gypsy/Travellers participation thematic

KM and GR presented to the Board on the recently-published thematic on tenant and Gypsy/Traveller participation in Scottish social housing. They provided an overview of the methodology and the key findings from surveys, focus groups and work with SHR’s Tenant Advisors.  KM and GR also highlighted the recommendations set out in the thematic.  The Board considered the presentation and discussed:

• use of art and other methods to reach people that could be harder to connect with,
• artwork that the Covid Inquiry Team used to record some meetings;
• movement away from traditional types of engagement with groups of tenants, noting  work on themed or community events and informal opportunities targeted at individuals;
• SHR’s profile with tenants,
• impact tenants can make on landlord policy and practice, noting section on you said - we did; and
• cultural barriers, particularly for Gypsy/Travellers, noting the feedback set out in the report.

The Board thanked KM and GR for presenting the report and agree to revisit how SHR might raise its profile with tenants. 

Action: Management Team and SHR Board to consider further SHR’s profile with tenants. 

AOB, Agenda Planner, Effectiveness & DONM

GW  updated the Board on progress with recruitment to the Chair and member posts in 2025.  He reported that following consideration of notes of interest, he is seeking to recommend EF to Scottish Ministers to be appointed as Deputy Chair from 1 April 2025 for two years.  The Board thanked AW for all his work as Deputy and welcomed the recommendation.   The Board noted that ARAC membership may change further when the new Board member joins in 2025.  

The Board discussed the effectiveness of the meeting and papers.  It noted there were Wi-Fi connection issues in the building that day.  The Board asked RH to explore building passes for Board members. 

The Board noted that it will meet with the Management Team for a workshop on 28 January 2025. It also noted the forward agenda planner and that it will meet via Teams in February 2025.

The Board also noted scrutiny work by the Scottish Parliament’s Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee.  

The Chair thanked all for their work in 2024.  

Actions: RH to explore building passes for SHR Board members. 

Post meeting decisions by email

Data collection on empty homes

6 February 2025 – The Board agreed that SHR will carry out a one-off data collection on behalf of Scottish Government around empty homes, asking landlords to provide the data by 14 March 2025, and which SHR will publish by the end of March 2025.

CIH membership

7 February 2025 – The Board noted in-year savings achieved through cost controls and it approved the use of contingency to fund purchase of CIH membership for Board and staff members to enable attendance at the forthcoming CIH conference in March 2025.  

Briefings

Between the 3 December 2024 and 25 February 2025.

• SHR publications;
• media updates;
• Scottish Government homelessness statistics;
• Ethical Standards Commissioner research;
• Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee work; and
• SHR’s people survey results.