I am sure you may have heard stories about social housing organisations across the UK that have had bad experiences of all types of heat pumps; Biomass, ASHP and GSHP – good news travels down the street but bad news spreads all over the town. The ending is normally the same in that these new “green” systems had to be taken out, or only a small number installed, with little harm done.
After far too wet a winter period, finally spring has arrived. Some of you reading this article may be adding to that list the issues of structural damage, the costs associated with reinstatement, loss of rental income, rehousing/temporarily housing residents and increases in insurance premiums. For others, this is thankfully someone else’s problem, not yours. However, in the future it might well be, and if it is, how resilient is your stock to climatic events and changes?
First Wessex’s estate of over 20,000 homes, predominantly in Hampshire, has been in an area of water stress since 2007. Supply of this essential resource is often taken for granted, and its conservation clearly important. Excluding our commercial use, residents consume approximately seven million litres per day, and there is a need to reduce this consumption and save this precious resource.
It is 12 months since the Rule 43 letters were issued after the Lakanal House and Shirley Towers inquests. A Rule 43 letter is issued by a coroner in order to highlight issues raised during an inquest and to prevent future deaths in similar circumstances. Unusually, the Southwark Coroner issued four letters to various parties including the London Borough of Southwark. The Coroner for the Shirley Towers Inquest issued a Rule 43 letter and quoted a previous Rule 43 letter that was issued in Stevenage following an Inquest into the deaths of two firefighters in 2005.
Faberge ...correctly regarded as the height of jewellery excellence ...exquisitely replicated flower and foliage designs crafted in precious metals and gems. However beware ‘all that glitters’.
2017 will see the most sweeping changes to lift codes for many years. We are familiar with EN81 part 1 and 2, which has represented the standard for lift installations, and has been the best point of reference for housing development and maintenance professionals to ensure that lift equipment is appropriate and safe for their residents.
With a proportion of recalcitrant tenants always likely to cause problems in allowing access for the servicing and/or safety checks on heating systems, we have witnessed a variety of procedures springing up to ensure social landlords hit that magic 100% score. Some of these are very labour intensive, some of them appear heavy-handed and some of them may not be Human Rights Act compliant. Others succeed by bringing forward the start of the service programme to 11, ten or even a nine month cycle. This may result in achieving a 100% score, but at what cost? Is there a more cost effective method of gaining access? Is it time to take our 100% score and replicate it at lower cost year on year?