SCANDAL UPDATE: Brent Council's remediation costs for Granville New Homes, puchased from Higgins for £17.1m, could rise to £22m plus VAT. Number of residents due to be decanted during works is uncertain.

 

The buildings known collectively as Granville New Homes sold by builders Higgins to Brent Council for £17.1m now look likely to cost Brent Council taxpayers  £20m-£22m to bring up to standard. Market conditions, including the cost of materials means that officers warn the council that costs could rise further. If more people have to be decanted than allowed for whilst works go on, that will also add to costs.

The whole thing is a scandal and a nightmare for residentts and tenants in which Higgins seem to have got away scot free. They have even been given additional work by Brent Council:

 

The report going to Cabinet on November 14th clearly outlines the poor quality of the build:

4.0  Survey Findings

4.1  There are two main issues with the blocks. These are the water ingress at various locations in the blocks and uncertainty about the fire rating of the external and internal walls and floors. These two issues are interlinked as they are generally related to the same construction elements. Thus, both issues will be resolved in tandem.

Fire Safety

4.2  The fire risk assessment for the blocks, and the subsequent intrusive investigations have identified that the construction is poor. The blocks have two distinct methods of cladding. One is formed of cementitious panels and the other is of brick effect panels. Both of these appear to have a variety of insulation materials, including expanded polystyrene, mineral wool and void spaces. Because of this, the fire rating of the blocks is uncertain. However, they will certainly not comply with current building regulations and are unlikely to have complied with the class 0 requirements at the time of construction.

4.3  The panels and insulation will require to be removed and replaced with A1 or A2 rated materials to comply with building regulations.

Water Penetration

4.4  The properties have suffered from water penetration for many years. Attempts at remediation have been unsuccessful.

4.5  Ridge Consultants were commissioned to undertake an intrusive survey of the blocks and to identify any significant areas of defect.

4.6  Ridge’s findings are as follows:-

o The external envelopes on these buildings have been constructed from relatively inexpensive materials and there is evidence of poor-quality workmanship.

o There is a lack of information available, relating to the original build and it is clear that what has been installed on site has not worked.

o The doors and windows are suffering rot and timber decay, which is not, a defect readily associated with buildings of this age.

o The horizontal surfaces to the external envelopes (roofs, balconies and walkways) have been poorly finished.

o A further note is that none of the components that have been installed should have failed because of age.

4.7  Ridge’s recommendations are as follows:

o   ·  The defects noted in relation to the buildings’ external envelopes are not easily repairable in a way that will offer a guaranteed and satisfactory solution. On this basis, the only available option is to replace the facades, roof coverings and balcony waterproofing systems.

o   ·  All specified systems and products will have long insurance backed guarantees. All designers and the main contractor will provide warranties. The Council’s legal team will review these before making any appointments.

 

4.8  A key to being able to complete these works without decanting residents is being able to work without disturbing the internal blockwork leaf of the system. It is likely that once the cladding is removed, the blockwork wall behind it will remain intact. This may mean that not all residents require being decanted. Only vulnerable residents may require decanting.

Energy Efficiency

4.9  As a consequence of the fire safety works specification. The energy efficiency rating of the properties will also be improved.

5.0  Works undertaken to Date

5.1  It was identified that the blocks have suffered from a number of defects, which included fire safety issues, water penetration, window and cladding defects.

5.2  In addition to the above the Fire Brigade served FWH with Enforcement Notices, which led to a waking watch to be introduced in the blocks.

5.3  A comprehensive communal and dwelling interlinked fire alarm system has been installed into the properties. This has now been set up with alarm monitoring arrangements.

5.4  In addition, combustible materials have been removed from communal areas and additional fire stopping has being installed. The waking watch has been removed as the alarm monitoring has been commissioned and now in use.

5.5  The fire alarm system will be monitored in order that any suspected smoke or fire is alerted to the London Fire Brigade.

6.0  Budget Requirements

6.1  The nature of the works is significant and therefore costly. The estimated cost of the works and associated works and consultancy services is £19,870,804. This includes costs associated with supporting more vulnerable residents such as respite care and temporary decanting, inflation and a contingency. The works are high risk and the market is currently extremely volatile in terms of costs and pricing, hence the large contingency. In addition, it is prudent at this stage to make provision for the potential decant of a significant number of residents who may not be vulnerable but who may not be able to stay in their homes during some or all of the works. Therefore, Cabinet is requested to allocate £22M plus VAT to this project.

6.2 The difference in cost from the 6 December Cabinet report is due to ongoing uncertain market cost conditions, and the addition of VAT. Some allowance has been made for ongoing building cost inflation. However, due to several uncertainties in the marketplace and world events, there may be further building cost increases. Cabinet will be advised of this should this become apparent during the course of the project.

 HISTORICAL INFORMATION

Brent Executive Plans including Wembley and South Kilburn when there was a Liberal Democrat-Conservative Coalition LINK

Impact Needs Assessment completed by Robert Johnson, then Housing and Community Care Project Manager, South Kilburn, now a Labour councillor.  LINK

Reponse to a Freedom of Information Request re the South Kilburn Redevelopment LINK

Full Scrutiny recommendations to Brent Council Cabinet after Granville New Homes costly debacle

The full recommendations to the Cabinet from Brent Scrutiny Committee after their meeting last night have now been published as a Supplementary report on the agenda of Monday's 10am Cabinet meeting. LINK

Supplementary Paper – Cabinet: 11 October 2021

Agenda Item 9 (Proposals for ownership & refurbishment of Granville New Homes Blocks)

Scrutiny of implications for BHM (Brent Housing Management) and HRA (Housing Revenue Account) of proposals for ownership and refurbishment of Granville New Homes blocks undertaken by Community & Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee on Thursday 7 October 21

Scrutiny Committee recommendations to Cabinet:

· That the officers give assurance that the council has undertaken due diligence reviews of its subsidiary bodies, including governance, fitness for purpose, financial soundness and reputational risk. 

· That the officers ensure the Ridge report is made available to the scrutiny committee and audit committee. 

· That the officers review arrangements for entering into contracts of this kind, in particular to ensure adequate arrangements are made to ensure appropriate design/build quality – and that the council has appropriate recourse where latent defects are later identified. 

· That the officers ensure all potential contractors are made aware of the standards expected by the council – and to ensure these are met before buildings are formally accepted by the council. 

· That the council provide written assurance that it has taken or will take independent legal and financial advice (including tax) regarding the proposals and next steps. 

· That all contracts procured by the council and its subsidiaries include a review of past delivery of any potential contractors. 

· That the council ensures where issues are evident in a particular project, all remaining projects by the same contractor are reviewed as a matter of urgency. 

· That the officers review the steps that make-up the procurement, commissioning and contract monitoring system to identify any gaps especially in relation to risk and review aspects. Where these are identified that immediate action is taken. 

· That the council put in place arrangements to ensure learning about this case – and any others raising issues of similar significance – is shared across the council as well as with existing and potential future partners/contractors. 

· That the officers establish and publish a comprehensive plan for ongoing engagement with residents.

 

Scrutiny's recommendations published following examination of Brent's housing scandal

 

Older readers mat recall the Tony Hancock sketch 'The Last Page' where he engaged fully with a crime novel with all its plot twists only to be frustrated at the end when he found the last page torn out.

Well, last night's Scrutiny Committee was rather like that with the live feed ended just when the Committee had sent out officers and were about to discuss their recommendations.

This morning the recording of the meeting was published by Brent Council with a minute added when the clerk read out the recommendations for confirmation.  However, the section of the meeting where the Committee discussed their reactions to the officers' answers and their subsequent recommendation was not included in the published recording.

These are the recommendations as read out by the clerk but the wording is likely to be tidied up before they are formally minuted.*

• For officers to give assurances to the Committee of the commissioning of these contracts.
• For officers to give assurances to the Committee that the Council has undertaken due diligence for subsidiary bodies including that they are financially sound and the potential reputational risk to the Council.
• That external written legal and tax advice is sought on the options presenrted and tht all contracts and procurement include a review of past deliveries of any potential contractors.

The Full Recording of the meeting is below and worth viewing for the evasions and unanswered questions.

*The 'tidying up' has been extensive see https://wembleymatters.blogspot.com/2021/10/full-scrutiny-recommendations-to-brent.html

Public cut off from discussion of Scrutiny's recommendations on Brent Council's £35m council housing scandal

 

It looked as if Brent Scrutiny Committee was going to get down to the nitty gritty of the housing scandal that saw Brent Council paying £17.5m for the Granville New Housing in South Kilburn and now having to fork out £18.5m to remedy all the defects. A further issue is that Higgins the builder that built the faulty development is currently building more homes for Brent Council in Stonebridge.

After some excellent questioning from the chair, Cllr Ketan Sheth, Cllr Gaynor Lloyd and Cllr Mary Daly, officers were sent out so that the Committee could discuss their recommendations to Cabinet, who meet to discuss the issue on Monday morning.

Except that the public could not hear the discussion on the recommendations because the live feed to the meeting was abruptly cut off!

In the circumstances it is right that we should be suspicious.

There was much prevarication about when the defects had first been noticed and which part of the council they had been reported to.  Residents have told Wembley Matters they have been reporting defects in the housing built in 2009 for a long time but officers claimed that they had become aware only after post Grenfell surveys and a full intrusive survey involving taking out windows and cutting into walls

This meant that they were not 'fully aware' until May of this year.  The seriousness of the issues had not been picked up by Brent Housing Partnership, Brent Housing Management, First Wave Housing, Brent Council as Guarantor of the original loan or the Audit Committee. Cllr Kasangra who sits on Audit said they have been given the impression that 'everything was rosy.' They had been assured that the issues that came up in Croydon were not relevant to Brent - 'now we know that First Wave could have gone into liquidation!'

Cllr Lloyd challenged these expressions of ignorance quoting Cllr Janice Long as remarking that she felt guilty because 'we were always hearing about problems at these blocks.' Tenants had been complaining for a long time and it was nonsense for First Wave Housing to say that they didn't know.

In response to questions First Wave said they had had no discussions with Higgins about the defects since they had been discovered. They had been advised that there was no possibility of redress due to the passage of time.  Cllr Sheth asked why there had been no dialogue with Higgins given that they were still Brent Council's partner and even more important, why were they still a partner? 

First Wave said they couldn't comment. 

The officer responsible for Brent's actions as Guarantor was asked if he had received any complaints about Higgins and he replied that nothing had been brought to his attention.

Sheth said that the Council needed to think about how to get assurances from Higgins about their work. Cllr Lloyd asked if during the procurement process the past record of the company was taken into account before awarding the Stonebridge contract, for example.  The officer said that he couldn't provide an answer now but would provide a written answer.

First Wave were asked about consultation with residents. They had been told about the need for a waking watch at the time of the fire survey but only a few turned up to a zoom meeting, he added 'There hasn’t been too much response from residents.'

The head of housing said that even if residents did not attend meeting they were engaged with and they said they were very happy with their homes. He claimed that normally in such a situation residents would be at the meeting protesting but none had turned up tonight so this showed they were content.

The comment at the top of the page from a resident speaks for itself. 

The report and Scrutiny recommendations will be discussed at Brent Council's Cabinet on Monday morning at 10am. LINK