National Housing Federation - Friend or Foe?
14/04/2011 7:20 pm
My ealrier post and subsequent conversation has been removed by IH/NHF.
I assume someone took issue with my and others' criticism of the NHF for misleading and mis-selling to its members.
This one won't go away David.............
Sort: Newest first | Oldest first
14/04/2011 7:21 pm
I'll be back.............
15/04/2011 0:12 am
I ask the question again is the NHF response for the Board Members of a RSL actions. Due to the fact the TSA is suppose to deal with the Management. But in my mind does deal with the Management the TSA should of been dealing with the Customer Trigger but saying its not interested in complaint of a person/group/body of Tenants. So whom do the Customer's Tenants go to then. We send our correspondence to the Chair of the Board whom does not answer us.
We gone to the Local Authority whom Councillor's and MP's sit or our Board and whom are Shareholders.
Our will not let Tenants into the AGM since 2009 (calling us disputive Tenants)
The Ombudsman tells us to go via the Complaint Procedures but our will not accept our Complaint about the Governance and the way the Board is not involving the General Needs Tenant's.
Where do we go then - so can the NHF look into our Complaint about the Chair and Board Members which some given themselves the title of being Shareholder too. One happens to be a employee of the NHF
WELL ANY SUGGESTIONS PLEASE
15/04/2011 0:45 am
You asked "is the NHF response for the Board Members of a RSL actions", and "can the NHF look into our Complaint about the Chair and Board Members."
The answer to both questions is no. The NHF is a private company that promotes the work RSLs, and campaigns on related issues. They have no 'powers.'
In terms of future regulation the early indications are that all the TSA will be concerned with is whether RSLs are financially viable. They are not going to be continuing with what is termed 'consumer regulation' - i.e. they are not going to get involved if organisations do not deliver on Local Offers, or do not 'empower' tenants etc.
'Co-regulation' is a way for the government to devolve the responsibility of keeping an eye on service delivery. If you have a problem with your RSL's repairs service, for example, the TSA's view will be that you and your landlord should sort things out amongst yourselves. The TSA's regulatory framework will, in the main, be a set of guidelines rather than requirements.
Inside Housing staff post
15/04/2011 10:03 am
The earlier thread was removed after the NHF complained that it contained factual inaccuracies. It dealt with the directors and officers liability insurance offered to members of the organisation, and how useful this is.
15/04/2011 10:21 am
Anony What if you have a Senior Management Team who are stubborn like a mule and believe are always right. Because when they write it you have to believe it is so. With our RSL the Customer is always wrong and Staff, Manager's and Management always think they right.
I ask well who is they was the Consumer, Customer & Tenant where we can proof our RSL is not abiding my rules and regulations.
Our Housing Association is not Empowering our Customer's, Tenant's
15/04/2011 10:40 am
Like I said before, in my view - based on the early guidance we are seeing - the only grounds on which the TSA will get involved is if a RSL is in financial difficulties.
If you "have a Senior Management Team who are stubborn like a mule and believe are always right" then I don't see this changing. The TSA will not intervene if, for example, you don't believe the RSL is involving tenants.
They may take notice if the Ombudsman receives a lot of complaints on an issue, but I don't think this will lead to inspections - all the TSA will do is write to the RSL and ask for an 'action plan' to address the issue. The message will be, under co-regulation the organisation and complainant should work things out together.
The 'tenant trigger' is a dead concept, by the way.
15/04/2011 10:46 am
To my mind, the NHF is neither friend nor foe, just an irrelevance. They serve absolutely no purpose other than in putting on the odd conference with the same people every time and offering training courses that would better be provided by others. Why anyone pays to be a member is a mystery to me.
15/04/2011 12:08 pm
It would be useful to have a statement from the NHF as to whether they balanced being pro/anti establishment from the prospective of being pro-people.
Whilst the political debate over tenure will continue for years the NHF could take a consistent stance that need not be fickle in the face of establishment change.
For instance, the NHF could be campaigning for a principle that regardless of tenure housing supply must provide a product that can be afforded by even the lowest paid, and that tenure types targeted to meeting the needs of the low paid are in sufficient enough supply to meet that need. This could lead on to opinion that subsidy at the time of build is preferable to continued and repeated subsidy of the individual, on the basis that the pay once option represents better value for money and inflicts less stigma on individuals. Types of, standards of, and management of housing are all areas that the NHF could lead policy on.
It is concerning that instead the NHF seems to follow policy and is keen to fit into the latest government view and not risk disfavour. At times it feels the organisation is representing the view of government to the sector rather than the sector to the government.
15/04/2011 12:24 pm
My post was completely factually correct. I can prove it. To censor in this way just because the NHF has been caught with its pants down is not healthy or in the spirit of IH debate.
The NHF has not provided me with any satisfactory respone to date despite having been given every opportunity to do so. I have no other option but to use IH as a vehicle to alert members to this important issue.
What about covering this as an editorial matter? I am happy to contribute.....
15/04/2011 12:25 pm
.........response............ batteries in wireless keyboard failing.........
15/04/2011 1:07 pm
Dolly be fair to Tom. Whether you have evidence or not, gossiping on these boards doesn't prove your claims and IH are not obliged to investigate. As for having 'no other option', you mentioned that you're a Chief Executive of a RSL (correct me if I'm wrong!) therefore just speak to your contacts at other organisations and seek their point of view. You'll get a far better idea of what the situation really rather than creating chinese whispers on here. Surely if many of you have the same concern then you'll be in a better position to get a response from NHF.
15/04/2011 1:42 pm
Princess -- the NHF have naff all to do with tenants as such and are a sort of trade body to do with social landlords. They do not have to take notice of you or any other tenant. However, some trade bodies to check that their members keep within the 'rules' of the trade body which MAY include proper governance and procedures in dealing with their customers,
Co-regulation is what the landlord wants it to be and may be not what the tenants want it to be.
Tenants' trigger -- not on your nelly, absolutely no chance of the Tea Supping Agency actually reacting to tenants; concerns even if there was undeniable proof!
Dolly Dandy -- Tom is certainly not going to enter "a war" with any 'rival' organisation just as a housing association would not do with another one.
The batteries in my brain die from time to time.
PSR - The likelihood of the NHF admitting anything is very small indeed. Is the NHF going to upset the government by opposing it in any practical way? I should cocoa!
Anon @ 1-27 pm -- For what it's worth, I concur.
Sancho -- Same here.
Aunty Tom -- You have a job to do and you tend to respond appropriately. I am minded over the "Eva" malarkey with the large number of posters raising issues re "Eva".
However, one criticism -- where's the round of drinks, then?
15/04/2011 6:00 pm
Anon @ 5-51 pm --
"Who is talking Nonsense Rick Campbell"
The meaning of your post is not clear and it would assist me if you could let me know what it is meant to convey -- I am assuming (and it can be dangerous to assume) that there is a question mark missing somewhere in those 6 words of your 5-51 pm post.