Resident Scrutiny Panel
09/05/2011 7:16 pm
My RSL has just put the Resident Scrutiny Panel together and its not Tenant Led it was the Senior Management Team whom have chosen what Tenant's will sit on the Panel.
Can I report them to somebody.
I understand that Tenant's would be choosing whom would be sitting on the Scrutiny Panel not the Senior Management Committee/Team of the RSL
Sort: Newest first | Oldest first
10/05/2011 8:56 am
1. Yes I have been chosen and made my objection's at the meeting. Due to the TPAS findings and other TRA and the NTA
2. Whom is Eva nothing on the thread with a name of Eva sorry do not understand
10/05/2011 9:00 am
2. Whom is Eva nothing on the thread with a name of Eva sorry do not understand
ha ha ha! brilliant!
Eva, junior, dena, banned, penhouse, dawes and a thousand others we all know its you by the writing "style" and the copnstant repetition of the same questions.
incidentally - i think you should report them directly to the queen! i think she would be disgusted at the devious, malicious, purposeful cleansing of tenants that you have found within your RSL.......or, your just paranoid and a pain in the backside which is why no one anywhere wants to listen to you anymore or take you seriously.
do your landlord a favour, do us all a favour and move abroad - i hear siberia is nice.
10/05/2011 10:17 am
If we forget the abuse , this thread does raise a question though in terms of what has been acheived by the TSA and their hamfisted approach to "co regulation " and naivety about risk based regulation. How will this "selected" scrutiny panel add to the process and if it doesent is it VFM.
10/05/2011 10:31 am
Usual - I personally doubt that the panel was "selected" by SMT. what Dawes probably has issue with is that the residents appointed (following a selection and interview process) are not the ones she would have wanted.
No landlord - anywhere, ever, will recognise a panel of tenants electing themselves to be the scrutineers. they will always want to ensure that there is a proper code of conduct and terms. this is not to say the panel is inneffective - my landlord has a panel of residents who perform this function, they report directly to our board with their findings and suggestions, the difference is that they actually have an idea of how a business is / needs to be run and can appreciate the "larger picture"
The TSA are / were useless - self / co / tenant led (operative word "led) regulation is the only way to go forward - who is better to inform landlords of what performance they wish to see than the end users themselves?
10/05/2011 10:47 am
In theory quite right Bill, but totally dependent on the quality of the involved whether they be tenant panels or board members. and lets not forget the business has needs as well as the tenant.
Regulate and or control the quality of the individuals and you get some quality in the outputs.
This is something has been missed by the powers that be i feel.
10/05/2011 12:32 pm
Let's put this down in writing and tell you exactly what's happening with RSL
At Local Offers it was a decision by the group whom done its homework and the TPAS, TRA's and NTA said this should be Tenant's deciding whom sits on the SP i.e. Tenant's interviewing NOT A OTHERS CHOSEN BY THE BOARD MEMBER'S AND SMT
So whomever was interested filled out the Application. When we heard that the Board Members and Senior Management Team decided that outside people would interview the Tenant's and give finding to the Board and SMT again we send in our objections.
So has far has we our concerned its not Tenant's chosen by a Tenants of a group of Tenant's - The Tenant's have been chosen by the Board and Senior Management Team ONLY
Well in the case of some of the group's its not our concern because we no longer have meetings together so we do not know if object or not.
In the case of General Needs we had no meetings and having no meetings with the SMT under our objections and nor a write response and SMT will not answer our concerns . NOT allowing us to be present under a Open Invitation to attend the Meeting's and for Tenant's to ask question's from the floor.
10/05/2011 1:55 pm
I think tenant scrutiny is an area where a bit more direction would be helpful from the TSA. There is too much 'wriggle room' for organisations.
If scrutiny is the cornerstone of co-regulation than maybe the TSA should be more prescriptive on this particular issue.
I don't mean the TSA should tell residents what they should scutinise. But maybe if all organisations were told to set up their panels in the same way, with the same process, then it would be a lot less confusing and there would be a bit of consistancy.
Obviously we want as much choice as possible for residents, but maybe everyone would benefit from a few things being standardised.
10/05/2011 3:04 pm
Anon @ 1:55
heard of KLOEs? they were uniform, they were also crap and didnt actually measure a damned thing that mattered, they simply produced endless reports for box tickers. pointless.
Eva / Dawes @ 12:32.
If the panel was interviewed by an outside organisation and then presented to the board, how is that the SMT choosing who they want on the panel??? simple answer, it's not.
my advice: stop clinging to anything the TSA suggested would be a good idea, they are soon to go the way of the Dodo.
try instead to engage with your landlord, appreciating that just because you have an opinion, that it may not be shared by anyone else, in a way that improves services for the majority - get off the soapbox of wanting tenants to choose every minute detail in everything to do with your housing - it simply isnt going to happen. there is an interesting programme coming on TV shortly (this week i believe) about a group of residents empowered to take over from their council, the end result, chaos. i suggest you watch it.
10/05/2011 3:59 pm
Bill my name is not Eva and I am a man and my name is Michael and I'm talking about the TPAS, TRA'S and NTV and not the TSA.
10/05/2011 4:01 pm
Sorry Bill I out tonight at a Panel Meeting. What time is it on and I record from my Mob Phone has I working at the moment and will not be home to later
10/05/2011 4:29 pm
Bill, yes I've heard of KLOEs, and they wouldn't put me off having some degree of consistancy between organisations.
The problem with KLOEs was there were so many of them, and they were so detailed and restrictive that they led to the box-ticking you mention.
What we have now with the TSA and their vision of so-called 'co-regulation' is the opposite end of the scale; the other extreme. Adn while the TSA is almost "toast" their framework is going to be in place for some time.
Looking outside of this thread, there seems to me to be frustration amongst some tenants at the lack of accountability with regards to how scrutiny panels are being set up. There seems to be a desire for things to be done in a similar way across organisations - not to tick boxes, but so that residents of all social landlords can be sure they are getting a fair and consitant approach to scrutiny.
All I'm saying is that a bit of direction from the TSA might help everyone out here. The TSA standards are so ambiguous, and I don't think many organisations (both tenants or staff) can cope with what is essentially a blank sheet of paper.
11/05/2011 9:25 am
I agree that the standards are very ambigious, however we have taken this as a positive.
instead of looking at others around us and doing the same we instead choose to look inwards. we asked our residents what performance measures actually matter to them, and which ones they wanted us to report and how.
the result is that we now have scutiny of services and reports that our residents (i should add the majority as it is impossible to please 100% of the people 100% of the time) asked for and are responsible for overseeing and reporting to board - to me, a much better way of working.
as far as accountability goes. if the service perfroms below the expectations of the tenants - bearing in mind they have set the PI, we again ask them to shape the service.
we do of course have to educate and guide in terms of viability - for instance one group wanted every repair carried out within 24 hours - we can do this, but the costs will go up meaning rent will go up. by openly discussing this the residents agreed that some types of repair could in fact wait a few weeks (dripping tap for eg)
11/05/2011 11:44 am
The (Social housing ) sector is being de-regulated , along with the almost complete lack of accountability from PRS landlords (outside category 1 HHSRS issues and Selective licensing of HMOs) .
Tenants living in all tenures have become almost totally disempowered.
Tenant "Participation" has been developed to allow the retention of total control in the hands of the landlords . That's why Tenant Panels must be managed by (only) tenants themselves, retain full independence and be democratically accountable to the wider community as well as social tenants.
It's proposed in the Localism Bill that a new, closer relationship between Tenant Panels and the Housing Ombudsman be developed (once merged with the LG Ombudsman ), particularly with regard to handling complaints from tenants against the landlord/s is necessary.
Landlords can have no part in selecting /appointing ( compliant )tenants to organise and manage the Panels.
Tenants must control and operate Panels themselves, independently of any vested or outside interest/s.
I am aware that the so called 4 NTOs (I can't understand why TPAS is still referred to as a national tenants representative organisation when it has more than 300 Registered housing providers in its membership), are currently working together along with CIH and the NHF to develop a framework model for Tenant Panels .
Since every neighbourhood is demographically unique , and each Provider is a private company , every Tenant Panel will need to operate slightly differently to others, due to local issues and demographics etc.
Where TRAs exist , they are usually well capable of developing independent scrutiny panels, without the need for any expensive "Consultants " to design a panel for them.
Experienced tenant activists are often not only excellent expert Community Leaders , but also have untapped skills and expertise which should be used to drive this change to wider independent tenant scrutiny .
Having taken part in a wide range of discussions and policy debates RE: Localism and Social Housing Reform , since the Bill was published, I've been struck by the amount of tangible fear in the Housing Sector that Providers may be unable to control Tenants Panels and deflect criticism and complaints etc.
Large numbers of HAs are desperately attempting to perpetuate control as they have previously , by marginalising effective tenants and TRAs which are considered "too challenging ". Setting up "Compliant" Panels similar to that described by the poster.
Indeed in the recently published CIH Regional Members policy brief on the probable impact of Localism on the sector and housing professionals " Thematic discussion for CIH English Regions April2011- Practical Implications of Localism " , it states that : "The bill is proposing to change the way social tenants can complain to the Housing Ombudsman about their social landlords"
No reference whatever to "Tenants Panels", and certainly no recognition of the absolute requirment for independence and autonomy.
The original poster has touched on what appears to be a very raw nerve for Social Landlords.
Social tenants don't need patronising , we require nothing more than the opportunity to design and manage Tenants Panels ourselves .
Most experienced tenants represntatives are more than capable of succeeding.
Unless tenants fully support local Panels , they will be unacceptable to the majority of honest diligent tenants who work tirelessly (unpaid ) on behalf of their neighbourhoods to improve quality of life and services for everybody (including PRS tenants , leaseholders and home owners), and if Panels quickly become meaningless where will victimised tenants take their serious complaints once the TSA disappears?
Tenants should by now be clamouring (locally)to determine how Tenants Panels are to be designed and established, and more importanntly demanding complete indepedence from all outside interference, and /or vested interests.
This is the apparent intent of those proposals included in the De-centralisation & Localism Bill.(Social Housing Reforms)
North West Tenants & Residents Assembly
11/05/2011 12:25 pm
"Tenants should by now be clamouring (locally)to determine how Tenants Panels are to be designed and established, and more importanntly demanding complete indepedence from all outside interference, and /or vested interests."
Absolutlely.....but will they? It seems that all too often 98% of the work falls to 2% of the people, and whilst there are, as you say, a great many excellent tenant activists there is a danger that the burden of responsibility will be spread too thinly amoung too few people!
11/05/2011 12:26 pm
Bill, it's great that you have been able to take a positive from the standards being ambiguous.
But what happens if your landlord isn't working within the spirit of the standards?
There is too much wriggle room for organisations. This is reflected in the frustration of the orignal poster on this thread, and in what people are saying on other threads and elsewhere.
I'm not saying all the standards have to be prescriptive. But some clearer direction on setting up scrutiny panels would be helpful for all.
11/05/2011 3:45 pm
Jim Well said and believe a very good insight