Surrey Council is facing mounting criticism to overhaul its beleaguered housing service. This demand follows disturbing results from the latest national fire risk assessments. These assessments identified more than 1,000 problems in the council’s housing stock. I could go on with examples, but many of these issues aren’t new. This grieve has brought to light shocking issues regarding tenant welfare and the competency of the council’s housing management.
The council itself has a direct responsibility for around 2,400 homes. They stated that over 400 of these properties are past due for an electrical safety condition inspection. These long-overdue reviews have sparked questions into the council’s capacity to handle safety complaints in a timely manner. Kate Dodsworth, the council’s chief of regulatory engagement, emphasized the importance of tenant safety, stating, “We cannot accept tenants’ safety and wellbeing being put at risk and we will be engaging intensively with the council as it puts things right.”
Council has not done any condition surveys of their existing housing stock in nine years. To make matters worse, it came up short with records from prior surveys, calling into question fire hazards. This introduces serious transparency and accountability concerns about the council’s housing activities. In response to these findings, the council has committed to commissioning a new condition survey by November to address the existing deficiencies.
Councilmember Jeremy Pursehouse, chair of the council’s housing committee, acknowledged just how dire things have gotten. He stressed that officials must be willing to own the report’s conclusions. He noted, “We have put stuff into place since they wrote that.” Despite these challenges, Pursehouse reassured stakeholders that the housing department is “absolutely determined” to improve its ratings and rectify the issues identified.
Though the found problematic conditions during the recent inspection, the council took care of overdue electrical checks — an example of a proactive response to halt issues that affect safety. Whether any of these actions will be sufficient to improve the council’s overall safety rating, though, is still an open question. We’ll see, but my guess is that we’ll know within six to twelve months.
The ongoing developments highlight the urgent need for Surrey Council to prioritize tenant safety and ensure that housing services are managed effectively. As they work towards implementing necessary changes, the focus will remain on addressing outstanding fire risks and ensuring compliance with safety standards.
