|
|
 |
| |
HfI boss Eamon McGoldrick |
Homes body wins 3 stars – and takes flak
Inspectors’ top ranking fails to silence critics
THE body which manages Islington’s council homes has won a maximum three-star rating from outside inspectors – but not everyone is happy with the accolade.
Early inspection reports had marked Homes for Islington (HfI) down for two stars but, after appealing, the Audit Commission – which monitors public spending – raised the rating in a report published last week.
HfI chief executive Eamon McGoldrick said: “This is another excellent report, which gives us the maximum award, and puts us among the highest performing Almos [arm’s length management organisations].”
But the ranking has attracted criticism from some who say HfI should have concentrated its energy on improving services rather than wasting time on an appeal.
The commission has also drawn criticism for giving HfI a maximum rating when residents feel their homes are below standard.
Brian Potter, chairman of the Federation of Islington Tenants’ Associations, said: “It’s all very well crowing about having three stars but how many stars do they need before they do things properly? There’s something amiss when an organisation that’s refused three stars has to appeal to get it rescinded. They should accept their two stars and improve rather than fighting it.”
Thomas Cooper, acting chairman of Coombe House residents’ association, said: “There’s much room for improvement. I regularly find excrement on the walls. Approximately a third of our lights work in the day but not at night. The two-year-old paths are now merging with the lawn for lack of ground maintenance.”
He added: “These are standards that wouldn’t be acceptable in the private sector. If HfI is described as excellent then this means social housing residents are seen as second-class citizens.”
A HfI spokesman said: “It’s disappointing that yet again Mr Potter and Mr Cooper choose to take a negative stance, criticising us through the press rather than engaging with us properly or taking a more constructive approach to improving services.
“We are keen to have a good and productive working relationship with leaseholders and their representatives and, as the Audit Commission report recognised, this endless negative attitude makes effective working difficult.”
Mr McGoldrick said the report had highlighted improvements in levels of service, satisfaction from residents and value for money. “It is a tribute to the hard work of the staff and board,” he added.
The Audit Commission found that satisfaction with caretaking went up from 62 per cent in 2004 to 76 per cent last year and that overall satisfaction rose from 52 per cent to 69 per cent over the same period.
HfI was praised for being easily accessible, supporting vulnerable tenants, turning round empty properties quickly, making repairs easy to report, keeping leaseholders’ charges low and providing an effective response to anti-social behaviour. |
 |
|
|
Your comments:
AS a relatively new leaseholder (just over 2 years) of HfI - managed property, I was surprised that they were given 3 star status by the Audit Commission, albeit after an appeal and a long delay.
I consider myself a prudent householder and am constantly struck by HfI's reckless spending of other people's money. I am currently investigating their most recent expense on my behalf - seven signs on my estate which have cost more than £2000 and weren't even needed as the old ones were fine! As far as I can tell, they accepted one quote for the work at its face value - hardly a cost-conscious approach. If this is how they manage small items, I am fearful of their management of major works.
V. Leonard
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
