Repairs - Sydenham Hill Estate

Antisocial Behaviour Review

Resident Involvement held a Focus Group on Antisocial Behaviour on 22 April 2010.
The invite went out a week before and by the time I came to reply I was told it was full. Our Repairs Rep was also told this but went anyway. (Apparently, the room was huge).

When I wrote to suggest they get a bigger room, Meechele Bowes (Projects Officer, Service Development Team) wrote to explain:

'This forum is feeding into the review of our ASB service as a whole in the context of our organisations remit and scope, the local area we work in, and agencies our service works alongside. This information will in turn feed into our overall future strategy, which we will also discuss and agree with our partner agencies.

Perhaps without going into too much detail, you could give me a general impression of what is being expected and not delivered by the service or its partners. We are also looking at what aspects of the service locally people feel is going right, or agree with and would like to see kept or strengthened or possibly resourced more in the future.'

So I did:

1. We do not know of one example where the ASB service has been of any assistance whatsoever.

2. Problems with noise have been dealt with by Envirocall. Many problems are already dealt with by services provided by the council. Where the ASB has intervened in police matters, there have been no follow up reports to the TRA.

3. The severe behaviourial problems of one tenant resulted in him attending court to be evicted after an entire year of witness statements, and then being let off. Witnesses were not kept up to date and the main witness was not told of the court date, despite all witnesses initially having been told that they might have to go to court. Furthermore, action is not taken where it might threaten the human rights of the perpetrator.

4. Dangerous dog problems have not been followed up properly by either ASB or Leasehold services.

5. Tenants have never been leafleted about the service and some do not know of its existence and therefore have not reported problems.

6. The process of keeping Incident Diaries, which are not acknowledged and sometimes lost, serves only to make the victim feel even more persecuted.

7. Only residents in flats in blocks are subjected to this service, and so must pay twice for a service which is duplicated by the Council. There is nothing exclusive to estate residents about the ASB service since there is no regular reporting made to the TRA.

8. There are no residents who want this service, and those who perpetrate ASB know it is ineffectual and that they can continue to get away with their behaviour.

To recap: nothing is being delivered, nothing is expected, nothing is going right, no aspects can be strengthened and no one wants to pay extra for it.

We hope this helps them in their review.

Leasehold Services - Sydenham Hill Estate

Guest author Silbury House writes:

Background:
Sydenham Hill Estate looks like a real 'problem estate', which is a shame because it's a lovely place to live: Right on the edge of Dulwich Woods it's leafy, green and quiet and the residents are (mostly) considerate and pleasant.
After buying a flat there I soon discovered the reason it looked the way it did. I got involved with Leasehold Services as soon as I moved in (2005) to enquire about the seemingly obvious defects to the estate, all of which 'should' be repaired, replaced and/or cleaned within the leasehold contract. The one I'm paying for, the one that states: I pay, they do what they promise.

Well as you can probably guess, that's not quite how it works. I've been writing to my leasehold officer (the same one) since 2005 and none of my complaints or reportings have been actioned. Not one. I hasten to add that the list of complaints is long and tedious, so won't go into details here (see future posts), but you'd think they might do something with the money we've all been paying?
It's not cheap after-all. In 2005/6 my actual charges were £448.89. This year they are estimated at £747.36: that's bearing in mind that Lewisham Homes will lose the estate to L&Q by October 2010! It was £882.90 last year (actual).
It's a big rise since 2005, it's doubled, and I can tell you there is no difference to the level of service we receive (picking up crisp packets and, well, that's about it really). And these figures don't take Major Works into account either; another 'grey area' in services provided (see future posts).

Why, oh why do our complaints and critisisms go unheard? I've been told it's not all Lewisham Homes fault, that it's been a long term of neglect by a whole host of management agencies(Dunlop Harwards, Pinnacle, Lewisham Council and Lewisham Homes etc.), but why should this make a difference if we've always been talking to the same 'physical person', a person who has always been very well informed of every instance of neglect reported by us.

It seems it doesn't matter how many letters we write, or complaints we make, the bottom line is there is no accountability for anything. Surely the Leasehold Team should be accountable? Or someone? PLEASE? (not that's it's their contractual obligation of anything...)

Let's hope L&Q can make a better job of it, let's hope they will make a difference. Let's hope our leaseholder services team will action the complaints we make. After 6 years of waiting, I can say I'm dubious, yet allowing myself a little hope...

Leasehold Charges 2010/2011 - YO YO charges

So, this year's charge is lower than last year's. That just means you paid too much last year. Remember you couldn't afford a holiday last year? This year you might pay off a bit of the overdraft and take two weeks off rather than just one. Is this fair?

The point is, no one can budget sensibly. Tax operates in a similar way, backdated and paid in advance, though you wouldn't notice the similarity if you weren't self employed or running a business. Many leaseholders will be on a fixed income, and some are now pensioners. Not knowing what they will be asked to pay from one year to the next is unreasonable. At least they know where they are with Council Tax. It will go up or stay the same.

Other bills, such as Utilities, rarely yo-yo in this way. When they go up, you try to cut back on your useage. If you have paid too much you can reclaim it at any time. No such facility with Lewisham Homes. You can't control their spending.

This is Holden charges over 10 years (yours may well have a different pattern depending on what dodgy repairs they did on your block):

2000  *           (Management up 7%, Caretaking up 7%, Grounds Maintenance no change)

2001 – 18%  (Management no change, Caretaking up 10%, Grounds down 43%)

2002 + 12%  (Management up 13%, Caretaking up 6%, Grounds up 61%)

2003 – 14%  (Management down 23%, Caretaking down 20%, Grounds down 22%)

2004 + 7%  (Management up 19%, Caretaking up 6%, Grounds up 10%)

2005 + 78%  (Management up 11%, Caretaking up 30%, Grounds up 15%)

2006 + 1%  (Management up 10%, Caretaking up 6%, Grounds up 14%)

------------------Lewisham Homes takes over Jan 2007 ---------------------

2007 + 30% (Management up 19%, Caretaking up 4%, Grounds up 14%)

2008 – 2%  (Management up 30%, Caretaking up 6%, Grounds up 45%)

-------Lewisham Homes introduces Flat Rate management charge-------- 

2009 + 41% (Management up 86%, Caretaking down 11%, Grounds up 224%)

2010 – 25% (Management up 2%, Caretaking no change, Grounds down 8%)

Down 25%? Compared to 2006 (before Lewisham Homes) this is a bearable 6% increase. But it's meaningless. In between they have creamed off 14%, and raised the stakes by 41% in 2009. And by applying varying rates to every block that should be charged the same for everything (except building repairs perhaps), we will all tell different stories. Smaller blocks have a worse story to tell.

Now they predict spending the same in 2010-11 on our block as they do Farrer House (£2500), smaller by 28 flats, yet they predict only spending £1350 on Castell, smaller by only 23 flats. What is wrong with Farrer? Surely they should be told what is wrong with their building? Could it be based on roof and drain spending which they have failed to solve by being completely useless or have the figures been plucked from thin air yet again?

* can't find figures from 1999 to compare.

Anomalies in Repair Breakdowns 08/09 for all blocks....

The following data is compiled from the Repair Breakdowns for all nine blocks on Crossfields, and makes reference to the Programmed Estate Report by Quality Officer Leif Law that took place last summer. This can be downloaded from the Appendix pages. 

What is also apparent is that items in Repairs Breakdowns, apart from being unintelligible, are quite often not presented in date order, making it harder to see a pattern of repeat orders in problem areas. This may be deliberate. It certainly does not aid transparency.

This is a long list, but look for your block in each section.

...................................................................................................................................

The repairs listed here are covered by the Programmed Estate Report where it was agreed that they were not done properly and should not be paid for. 

Cremer:
3697845    Repair paving in front of block      £180.86    06/10/08
All the paving was requested to be repaired free of cost since previous repairs have never been done properly. (See 4.11 of Leif Law's report)

Castell:
3612292    Please clear drain to front of No.1      £125.44    07/03/08
3611826    Tnt rpts external drain at front of the block is blocked     £40.40      06/03/08 
Problems with these drains are due to a) pooling of water during heavy rain, due to poor laying of tarmac, and more importantly b) gulleys that were put in to filter leaves etc and lead to these drains have been blocked for years and have never been cleared. They were cleared in the summer as a result of the Walkabout. (See 4.2 of Lief Law report). Blockages in 2008 should not be paid for. 

Castell:
3645819    Repair all cracks on grnd floor walkway facia from flats 1-9    £84.00   28/5/08
3728570    Pls rem cracked wall on grd floor      £15.87     15/01/09
These repairs were done inadequately since wall was in dire need of repair by June 2009 (see 4.3 of Leif Law report) and should not be paid for.

Farrer:
3653779    Rear/side of block replace missing section of fencing    £375.00    17/06/08
Could this be the same bit of fence referred to in 2.4 of Leif Law report, ie not done. Awaiting confirmation from Leasehold Services.

...................................................................................................................................

Wall by Nature Park front of Congers House (Finch, Congers, Farrer):

Finch  3653801   Rebuild wall by nature park front of Congers   £282.14  17/06/08
Farrer  3653801   Rebuild wall by nature park front of Congers   £451.20  17/06/08
Congers  3653801  Rebuild wall by nature park front of Congers Hse   £451.20  17/06/08
TOTAL  £1185.00
Which wall? If wall in front of Congers, why does Farrer have to pay more than Finch or even at all?
Possibly this is the broken wall next to the Memorial Garden by Farrer House. The one that was never rebuilt (see 3.2 in Lief Law report). We await confirmation from Leasehold Services' investigation.

...................................................................................................................................

Chute Shut Offs & Bin Chamber Doors (all done on 03/07/08):
Chute Shut offs are where the chute fans out into two funnels above the bins – either can be shut off  to direct rubbish to either bin. The caretakers have said it makes no difference whether they work or not.

Cremer:
3661791   Blk1-14 Unable to close chute shut off  £160.00   03/07/08
Finch:
3661784   Blk chute shut off will not close  £320.00   03/07/08
Wilshaw:   
3661800   Blk 1-20 unable to close chute shut off  £160.00  03/07/08
3661801   Blk 21-40 repair bolt that needs to be fixed  £160.00  03/07/08
3661804   Blk 41-60 unable to close chute shut off also fix bolt  £160.00  03/07/08
Holden:
3661795   Blk unable to close chute shut off  £160.00  03/07/08
3661796   Blk 21-40 unable to close chute shut off  £160.00  03/07/08
3661799   Blk 41-60 Unable to close chute shut off  £160.00  03/07/08
Congers:                   
3661785   Blk both chamb unable to lock nr no.2 unable to close chute £320.00 03/07/08
Castell:   
3661788   Blk 1-22 Ease and adjust also chute shut off not closing £320.00 03/07/08
TOTAL (NB Browne, Frankham, Farrer excluded)   £2080.00
This was a job lot all done on same day. Were Browne, Frankham and Farrer excluded because they didn't manage to fit them in or because they didn't need fixing?
How long had each been defective if at all? Each chute cost £160, NB in some cases the bolts were fixed as well or instead. The next month there were further repairs...Wilshaw got a double dose:

Wilshaw:
3577383    Pls fix lock on bin door that is broken as rptd by c/tkr  £37.03  12/08/08
Which bin door? Previously done above (see 3661801)
3677027    Block 20-40. Pls ease and adjust bolt lock to bin chamber  £117.60  11/08/08
This is a repeat of previous repair (above) 3661801 (£160.00) and should not be paid for
3702967    Lock to bin chamber faulty pls rem     £27.98    21/10/08
Which bin door? Previously done above?

Why are locks being repaired on NEW DOORS (that we didn’t need) for which we only just paid for last year?

...................................................................................................................................

Roof Leaks / Repairs

Cremer:
3665117    Leak from Roof Area     £163.01    14/07/08
3713636    Attn LDL flat nr13 Carry out roof repair    £900.60    21/01/09
Finch:
3691550  Attn LDL C/Picker and roofing work above 21 as per quote.  £850.25 16/09/08
Farrer:
3625125    Insp loft area for possible leak affecting flat 33    £171.14    09/04/08
3645122    As agreed several minor repairs to roof     £356.25    27/05/08
See previous post re Farrer roof
Frankham:
3682040    Pls trace and rem leak from roof above no37        £703.01    22/08/08
Browne:
3646713    Repair all gutters blocked 5 storeys            £259.54    30/05/08
3722085    Repair roof as it leaks into props 12-13-14        £163.01    19/12/08
3733737    Supply platform and carry out roof repairs        £621.77    19/12/08
3722085 and 3733737 same job?

...................................................................................................................................

Gully covers

Where are these gullys? Why do Holden/Congers cost more per unit? Listed according to date:

Farrer:  3608244    Renew 6 NO 6” gully covers & frames (£14.36 ea)  £86.47  26/02/08
Congers: 3608240    Renew 3 NO 6” gully covers    (£28.84 ea)    £86.53   26/02/08

Wilshaw: 3612918    Renew 10NO gully covers     (£15.28 ea)    £162.88  10/03/08
Holden: 3615103    Renew 11NO gully covers     (£31.50 ea)    £346.50  14/03/08
Farrer:  3655351    Renew 2NO gully covers     (£14.86 ea)    £29.73   20/06/08
Castell:  3608233    Supply & fit 2 5” gully plates    (£14.41 ea)   £28.82   26/12/08
Finch:  3608249    Renew 6NO 6” gully covers     (£14.42 ea)    £86.53    26/02/09

..................................................................................................................................

Drain Cleaning at Farrer House
There appears to be a lot of drain clearing at Farrer (these items are not provided in date order on the breakdowns).

3651102    9 rpts smelling blocked drains in front of flat     £42.57     10/06/08
3651823    Planned jetting maintenance                                £249.52    12/06/08
3652517    Confirmation of planned jetting maintenance      £265.39    13/06/08
3680661    15 rpts blocked main drains                                  £36.22     22/08/08
3697172    Programmed jetting clear all drains/gullies          £117.58     03/10/08
3697211    Programmed works clear 10 gullies                     £218.50     03/10/08
Why is this being done again, less than 3 months later? Were all drains cleared? How many gullies have Farrer got? On 12th & 13th June 2008 it cost £514.91. On 3rd October 2008 it cost another £336.08. What is the problem that cost £855.99 over 5 months?

..................................................................................................................................

Tank overflows at Wilshaw House
Wilshaw appears to have an excess of water problems (these items are not provided in date order on the breakdowns).

3629397   Investigate leak to main supply pipe to block    £60.29  18/04/08
3662730   Communal tank o/flow dripping onto canopy 25-40   £29.72   07/07/08
3663497   No11 rpts leak from balcony above running along down   £38.03  09/07/08
3700638   C/T repts leaking overflow pipe block 21-40    £32.84  14/10/08
What, again? See 3662730.
3704757   Attn Cliff Pankhurst as your MB1 Renew inch & halfball valve £36.49 27/10/08
3718530   Pls trace and rem water leak in the comm loft     £34.54   08/12/08
3721940   Pls rem the water tank that is overflowing    £37.54   18/12/08
3722065   Plz restore water to block no water in bathroom Block 21 to...  £41.47 19/12/08
Block 21 to what? This is the same day as below, funnily enough, and the day after a pipe overflow problem is fixed.
3722251    45-65 oflow to MST leaking pls rem access from 4th flr   £32.84   19/12/08
3723079    Insp loft area for possible leak affecting flat 39      £163.01   23/12/08
What the fuck is going on?

...................................................................................................................................

Miscellaneous

Finch:
3699507  Blk remove concrete step at back of bin chamber also take.  £325.00  01/10/08
What concrete step at the back of bin chamber?

...................................................................................................................................

Pest Control
No repair number was provided and no dates or whereabouts. Leasehold Services provided these details after enquiry. 

Holden House (Pram sheds): Rats (Baiting) 24/01/2009   £360.00

Browne House Tank Room:  Squirrels 31/12/2008   £150.00

Wilshaw House:  Baiting 09/09/2008 £75.00

Wilshaw House:  Baiting 08/10/2008 £360.00

 

...................................................................................................................................

Security Lights

Finch:
3699507    Light to com area 2nd flr outside 10 faulty please rem    £100.13   10/10/08
3712921    8 lights to block faulty pls rem 07736374616     £95.36  19/11/08
So one faulty light costs £100.13 but 8 lights only cost £95.36.
Wilshaw:
3660828    Trace and rem fault with light b/w top and 3rd flr. Rptd by.  £127.09  01/07/08
3691508    C/taker rpts faulty light override using sensor     £109.66  16/09/08
Holden:
3740684    Problem with all communal lights     £36.49   22/05/08 
3740503    Repair communal lights not working in Block 1-20   £114.43   25/02/09
Congers:
3736069    Trace fault(s) on communal lighting circuit and rectify  £114.43  10/02/09
Frankham:
3707610    Repair defective security light o/s no 37   £50.38    04/11/08 
3709054    C/t repts security light outside no 9 not working    £100.13  10/11/08
3713194    Ground floor lights not working x4 outside 1-9    £237.61  20/11/08
3715903    Two security lights are missing from the side of Frankham  £72.06   28/11/08

...................................................................................................................................

Enquiries yet to be made on Repair Breakdowns - Farrer House roof

Problems with the roof at Farrer House are historical. Top floor residents suffer leaking ceilings every time there is heavy rain. On occasions they have been requested to pay for repairs out of their own home insurance.

Here are the roof related charges for Farrer (here presented in date order which is not how they were presented to us by Lewisham Homes):

3619780   NO 33 REPTS GUTTERING ON ROOF BLOCKED £64.50  28/03/2008
See 3625125 below

3625125   INSP LOFT AREA FOR POSSIBLE LEAK AFFECTING FLAT 33  £171.14  09/04/2008
Related to 3619780 and done before 3645122.  

3645122 AS AGREED SEVERAL MINOR REPAIRS TO ROOF £356.25  27/05/2008
Is this related to 3619780 blocked guttering?
This repair was ordered a month after 3625125. Was roof repair required or was it just blocked guttering?

3676093 LOUD VIBRATING NOISE COMING FROM THE PIPE WORK IN THE LOFT  £36.27 08/08/2008 
Who reported this? Same as 3686400? Investigated again a month later (see below).

3686400  NO 32 REPORTS PIPES IN LOFT MAKING A LOT OF NOISE  £47.15  04/09/2008
Same as 3676093 where problem already persisting from one month before? Or different pipes?

The total cost of these charges is £675.31.

The resident at no.33 wrote to us:

"Re the £171 for no.33 I was gobsmacked when I saw that and wondered what on earth they were charging that amount of money for. The problem still exists, and all it needs is a regular gully clear out – which they never do. All they do when they come round here is go up to the roof, have a look, and where they see the gullies are stuffed with leaves empty them!"


A resident from Castell pointed this out to me and I took the photo on 21st March 2010. It shows the area where these 'roof repairs' have been taking place (during 2008) – note the structure above the stairwell. It has a door and two windows. One of these windows has no glazing and is completely open to the elements, and probably home to pigeons. It is directly above no.33 and no.32. All residents in Farrer are paying for this neglect.

Actual Charges Enquiries on Repair Breakdowns Part 1

I wrote to Sandra Canham on 19th February to make various enquiries on the Repair Breakdowns we were in receipt of. (These had to be specially requested since they are not provided with the statements). Repairs Breakdowns are copied verbatim from the Repairs Team's entries, which are naturally written in short form, which are often unintelligible to the leaseholder. I have requested that in future a Glossary of Terms be provided.

Ms Canham fielded these queries to the appropriate departments and replied with partial answers on March 5th.

1. What location exactly is the wall that was rebuilt ? Eg:

Finch: 3653801 REBUILD WALL BY NATURE PARK FRONT OF CONGERS £282.14  17/06/08

Farrer: 3653801 REBUILD WALL BY NATURE PARK FRONT OF CONGERS £451.20  17/06/08

Congers: 3653801 REBUILD WALL BY NATURE PARK FRONT OF CONGERS  £451.20  17/06/08

We suspect this wall was never rebuilt.

Still no answer to this.

2. What is the exact location of this fence? Eg:

Farrer: 3653779 REAR/SIDE OF BLOCK REPLACE MISSING SECTION OF FENCING  £375.00  17/06/08

Still no answer to this.

3. What are 'gully covers' and where are they situated?
4. Are 'gully plates' the same thing?
5. What is a 'gully grid'?
(NB Holden & Congers House' renewal of gully covers cost twice as much) Eg:

Castell: 3608233 SUPPLY & FIT 2 5" GULLY PLATES £28.82  26/12/08 (£14.41 per cover)
Finch: 3608249 RENEW 6NO 6" GULLY COVERS £86.53 26/02/09 (£14.42 per cover)
Wilshaw: 3612918 RENEW 10NO GULLY COVERS £162.88 10/03/08 (£16.28 per cover)
Holden: 3615103 RENEW 11NO GULLY COVERS   £346.50  14/03/08  (£31.50 per cover)
Farrer: 3608244 RENEW 6NO 6" GULLY COVERS & FRAMES £86.47 26/02/08 (£14.36 per cover)
Farrer: 3655351 RENEW 2NO GULLY COVERS  £29.73   20/06/08  (£14.86 per cover)
Farrer: 3662811  RENEW GULLY GRID  £29.72  07/07/08 (£29.72 per cover)
Congers: 3608240  RENEW 3 NO 6" GULLY COVERS £86.53 26/02/08 (£28.84 per cover)

Gully covers, grids and plates all refer to the grating used to keep undesirables, such as litter, leaves and people out of the gully, whilst allowing surface water easy passage to the drainage system.

Still no answer as to why they are costed differently.

7. What are 'programmed works' and how are they different? Eg:

Farrer: 3697211 PROGRAMMED WORKS CLEAR 10 GULLIES £218.50  30/10/08

We often refer to 'programmed works to clear gullies' as 'planned jetting maintenance'. This is where instead of trying to clear individual blocked drains we will carry out scheduled works to the block and/or the estate. We will often carry this out on occasions where our attempts to clear individual drains have been unsuccessful and plumbing surveys suggest that there is a wider drainage problem.

8. What is a bulkhead and luminaire?

A 'luminaire' is a general term for a complete light fitting. A 'bulkhead luminaire' usually refers to an external or communal light fitting (but not exclusively). It is usually ceiling mounted with the bulb encased by a heavy duty glass bowl, which is sometimes enclosed by a protective wire mesh.

9. Where did Pest Control take place?
- What was the date? Eg:

Holden: no repair number, no date PEST CONTROL BLOCK WORK  £360.00
Wilshaw: no repair number, no date PEST CONTROL BLOCK WORK  £360.00

The following pest control works were carried at Crossfield Estate in 2008/2009:

Holden House (Pram sheds) - Rats (Baiting) 24/01/2009 £360.00

Browne House Tank Room - Squirrels 31/12/2008 £150.00

Wilshaw House - Baiting 09/09/2008 £75.00

Wilshaw House - Baiting 08/10/2008 £360.00

10. Why is there no repair number for Pest Control items?

We include pest control works in your schedule of building repairs, but the works are not carried out by the repairs team. As such pest control works are not given an individual repair reference number in the same manner as building and estate repairs. The Council carry out pest control treatments to blocks and recharge the cost to us directly. We then recharge a portion of these costs to leaseholders. From 09/10 pest control charges will be shown separately and not included with the repair charges.

11. What is MST? Is it Main Storage Tank?

You are correct, MST is an abbreviation of Main Storage Tank.

12. What is this 'planned jetting maintenance' of? Is it to do with drains? Eg:

Farrer: 3652517 CONFIRMATION OF PLANNED JETTING MAINTENANCE £265.39  13/06/08
Farrer: 36808661 PLANNED JETTING MAINTENANCE £249.52 12/06/08

Please see my answer to Question 7.

13. Why are Repair Breakdowns not listed in any proper order? (Repair Order numbers are not always in order, and dates of repairs certainly are not).

When preparing a breakdown of repair costs, officers should present the repairs in either the order they were logged, or in the order that they were completed on our system.

Officers will be asked to present repair breakdowns in a clear, logical order.