Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Would you pay more for a 'proper' service?

A small group of leaseholders from Crossfields, St John's Vale and Sydenham Hill, met with the Audit Commission on Tuesday 29th June. The AC had already met the night before with a handpicked group who we suspect had been personally invited by Lewisham Homes two weeks before.

We were there because I had received Homes magazine on Friday 18th June, and had actually read it. On page 7 was an announcement that we could meet with the Audit Commission to have our say. I called the number in the afternoon, wary of not being able to get on the list if I wasn't quick enough. Adele Stevens, Communications Manager, took my name down for a leaseholders' meeting with the Audit Commission on Monday 28th. Tenants were to meet them the week before this, which seemed very short notice.

Over that weekend I emailed leaseholders in St John's Vale and Sydenham. The guys in Sydenham couldn't go (my main contact was off on holiday), but the St John's Vale team called Adele on Monday and were told the meeting was full. Rather audaciously they wrote to the Audit Commission and asked if they could meet somehow. Another meeting was arranged for them through Adele for Tuesday 29th. They were asked for names and in addition to their own team, they put forward myself and Crossfields Repairs rep Raphael.

So we went on Tuesday. We were joined by one of the guys from Sydenham. He had decided to foregoe a special family event to attend but when he'd called to add himself to the list, he'd been told he couldn't attend because his estate was due to be transferred to London & Quadrant Housing Association in October (in the meantime, his estate has been run into the ground)...He decided to turn up anyway.

The meeting started 20 minutes late (because the two chaps from the AC were stuck in another meeting), was supposed to last an hour, and ran on by 20 minutes....
--------------

Near the end of a very tense meeting (due to time limits more than anything), the Audit guys asked us if we would be prepared to pay more for a better service.

We were baffled by this question. Lewisham Homes keep telling us that we are getting a 'great' service...and we keep having to pay more for it with no visible improvements...and we were meeting with the Audit Commission that evening to tell them that we were paying too much for a third rate service. If services were as First Rate as Lewisham Homes claim, why would we want to pay more?

Was there a Triple Gold Standard about to be introduced that everyone including tenants would benefit from but that only leaseholders would pay for? Or would tenant's rents go up proportionally? What a strange question. What was wrong with just plain old Silver, a good enough standard for everyone, rather than the bit of old tin for council house scum everyone's getting now?

The leaseholder from Sydenham pointed out that Glendales had promised to maintain our grounds to the same standards as our local parks. If we paid more, would we get a better service than that? Rose gardens on every estate? Flowerbeds bursting with colour? Fountains in courtyards? (steady on)...

In Caretaking, Programmed Inspections rate the quality of service as almost 100% every time despite the grime, dirt, cobwebs, flies and stains (which are often noted, and have to be rectified within a week or two, but still there is a great score because, well, basically, there's no litter about). (Search Caretaking Standards on LH website and see what you get)...

It should be noted that at St John's Vale they are happy with the level of caretaking – they only have 16 flats and there is little to do. They wanted to know why they were paying for three hours' work a week when a perfectly adequate job was presently being done in half an hour.

Their attempts to raise queries like that over the past couple of years only to be met with lies and obfuscation means that their experience serves as a microcosmic version of our own – where we have 365 flats and similar problems are amplified massively. The problems experienced on a tiny estate reverberate across the borough.

The Audit Commission guys didn't seem to be very puzzled by their own observation that at the meeting the night before, participants were scoring Lewisham Homes quite high...(mostly 8 out of 10, apparently, as opposed to our own average 3/10). We too were puzzled, although I knew from a couple of those people (who voted 5/10) that they had been personally invited to the meeting by Lewisham Homes...The AC guys said it must be that some estates are better than others. (Oi MATE! Our estate is one of the best, considering its location in the middle of Deptford, and it's not thanks to Lewisham Homes!!!)

The problem with the question "Would we pay more for a better service?" is that last year we were asked to pay around £800 in advance for a totally crap service. This year we were asked to pay much less in advance for a service we're still not getting, but my bill has gone up 44% overall in three years, but the only difference I've seen is the branding of the delivery.

Why is it crap? See my next post...

No comments:

Post a Comment