By Alistair McIntosh, HQN CEO

Well done to Norwich City Council. A few years ago, the RSH issued a notice because safety was poor. Now they’ve climbed to C1. That’s the highest mark inspectors can give for consumer services. Is this a miracle of Biblical proportions? No, it’s the result of a lot of hard work. The RSH “…gained assurance that Norwich CC is taking reasonable and proactive steps to comply with legal health and safety requirements”.

We’re mightily impressed by this turnaround. HQN saw Norwich CC identify the issues that needed sorting and they got on with it quickly. Well done to all concerned. Norwich will always have a place in my affections. Back in 1981 they stood – almost alone – against the right to buy, so Heseltine sent his goons in. Thankfully, there are still 14,000 council homes in the Fine City.

What happens next? Well, complacency will not set in. The executive director of communities and housing tells us that: “The work now starts to retain the C1 and to keep focusing on the improvement plans…there is always so much more to do.” Just like Guildford a few weeks ago, Norwich shows that progress is possible. If you’re stuck in the C3 or C4 trenches, let that inspire you.

Thank goodness for Liverpool’s housing associations. One Vision and Torus also got top marks. That’ll take their minds off the football for a bit. At the end of this briefing, we set out again the key criteria for C1 and the RSH reports show that these associations certainly hit the spot.

This is the first bout of inspection for One Vision. Torus have been there before, scoring C2 at inspection about a year ago. The RSH kept in touch with them to check progress. Here’s what the RSH said. Note the emphasis on the boardroom. That’s a hallmark of the regime.

“Through our subsequent responsive engagement, we have assurance that Torus has strengthened the board’s oversight of health and safety compliance and can now demonstrate that its repairs service is delivering the required outcomes for tenants. Torus provided evidence that it now has stronger oversight of repairs performance and has taken steps to further improve the quality of its information in this area.”

Inspectors found that Worthing Homes was doing well across most of the health and safety areas they look at. But Worthing is an area that is known for high levels of radon. The RSH didn’t think that the association was doing enough to deal with this. This was a big part of the reason why Worthing Homes got C2 instead of C1. We know the people at Worthing and they will fix this.

Could radon be a factor for you?

Here is the official map showing areas where radon is significant:

UKradon – UK maps of radon

And this is advice on what to do about radon:

UKradon – How to reduce radon levels

Incommunities also scored C2. They hit the mark on stock knowledge and health and safety. As we know from looking at lots of RSH inspections, that’s no small feat. What let them down? There are high volumes of complaints about the repairs service, and the board isn’t on top of monitoring ASB. The RSH had concerns about the TSM results. As of March 2025, Incommunities satisfaction levels were 67.5% for speed of repairs, 38.4% for complaint handling and 54.7% for dealing with ASB. We hear that the RSH is asking tough questions about low satisfaction in other places too. You must take action to pinpoint the reasons for poor satisfaction and put a plan in place to get better.

Coming back to the councils. Local elections are looming. That always sharpens accountability. It’s the whole point. While Norwich got C1, Basildon scored C4. What will the voters in their 10,750 homes do at the ballot box?

Basildon reads like an especially poor C4. The council knew it had problems on safety but refused point blank to self-refer to the RSH. That’s a mortal sin in the eyes of the regulator. Please don’t make that mistake.

The regulator says that Basildon must make “fundamental changes”. Here’s a synopsis of the defects at the borough:

• On Safety and Quality – “…we have seen limited evidence that it fully understands the scale and breadth of the issues  or that it has the capacity to resolve these”
• The RSH couldn’t find an assessment of hazards under the Housing Health and Safety Rating System
• 4,600 fire safety remedial actions outstanding
• Lack of data on speed and quality of repairs
• Lack of understanding of diverse needs of tenants
• Didn’t collect TSMs properly (sample was not representative and changes to methodology without proper explanation).

Basildon used to be a strong housing service. How do we end up in this mess?

When the ALMO shut in 2011 there were high hopes. Here’s what the cabinet member said at the time: “Not only can we make major savings, but we can also invest in frontline services that will help to improve the lives of our tenants, leaseholders and residents.” So much, for that.

Deborah Fenton has just taken over at Basildon. She’s playing a blinder. All too often the new regime in situations like this crush morale by throwing all the staff under the bus. Not Deborah. Right after the result came out, she issued a statement saying unequivocally that “Basildon has many committed and capable people who genuinely want to do a good job for the residents”. That, my friends, is good management.

As she puts it: “Let me be clear: as a housing professional, I chose to move to Basildon because I knew the organisation needed strong leadership and clear direction, particularly in housing. There can sometimes be a reluctance for professionals to move into an organisation requiring wholesale transformation, but having worked in a similar authority before, I would encourage anyone considering such a move to be confident and take on the challenge.”

Mark my words – it’s not if C1, it’s when at Basildon.

Common attributes across the C1s

• Accurate up-to-date data on all homes based on physical surveys now (or in very near future). Surveys must incorporate the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) and C1 landlords act on the results
• Managing damp and mould effectively – meeting Awaab’s Law
• Evidence that systems in place to ensure health and safety of tenants in homes and communal areas
• Effective, efficient and timely repairs and planned improvements
• Repairs service tailored around diverse needs of tenants
• Tenants treated with fairness and respect
• Tenant feedback/challenge used to improve services
• Handling complaints fairly, effectively and promptly
• Using learning from complaints to improve services
• High levels of satisfaction (not mentioned in all reports).

C1 isn’t perfection. As the RSH strapline puts it: “The landlord has demonstrated that it identifies when issues occur and puts plans in place to remedy and minimise recurrence.”