Reading Borough Council (00MC) - Regulatory Judgement: 30 April 2025
Published 30 April 2025
Applies to England
© Crown copyright 2025
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reading-borough-council/reading-borough-council-00mc-regulatory-judgement-30-april-2025
Our Judgement
| Grade/Judgement | Change | Date of assessment | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consumer | C3 Our judgement is that there are serious failings in the landlord delivering the outcomes of the consumer standards and significant improvement is needed. |
First grading | April 2025 |
Reason for publication
We are publishing a regulatory judgement for Reading Borough Council (Reading BC) following an inspection completed in April 2025.
The regulatory judgement confirms a consumer grading of C3. This is the first time we have issued a consumer grade in relation to this landlord.
Summary of the decision
From the evidence and assurance gained during the inspection, we have concluded that there are serious failings in Reading BC’s delivery of the outcomes of the consumer standards and significant improvement is needed, specifically in relation to the Safety and Quality Standard, the Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard and the Neighbourhood and Community Standard. Based on this assessment, we have concluded a C3 grade for Reading BC.
How we reached our judgement
We conducted an inspection of Reading BC to assess how well it is delivering the outcomes of the consumer standards, as part of our planned regulatory inspection programme. During the inspection, we considered all four of the consumer standards: Neighbourhood and Community Standard, Safety and Quality Standard, Tenancy Standard, and the Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard.
During the inspection we observed Reading BC’s Housing, Neighbourhood and Leisure Committee, lead councillor briefings, Strategic Housing Board and the Tenant Engagement Strategy Working Group (comprising of tenants and Reading BC officers). We met with tenants, officers, the leader of Reading BC, and the councillor who is the portfolio holder for housing. We also reviewed a wide range of documents provided by Reading BC.
Our regulatory judgment is based on a review of all the relevant information during the inspection as well as analysis of information received from Reading BC through routine regulatory returns and other regulatory activity.
Summary of findings
Consumer – C3 – April 2025
The Safety and Quality Standard requires landlords to have an accurate, up to date and evidenced understanding of the condition of their homes at an individual property level based on a physical assessment of all homes and to ensure that homes meet the requirements of the Decent Homes Standard (DHS). We saw evidence that Reading BC had only surveyed around 50% of its homes in the last five years. Whilst Reading BC had surveyed most of its homes in the last eight years, and it reported that most of its stock was meeting the DHS, it does not yet have an up to date understanding of the condition of all its homes. Reading BC plans to survey all remaining homes and ensure that they meet the requirements of the DHS. We will continue to monitor and gain assurance that it is delivering these plans.
We have some assurance that Reading BC has appropriate systems in place to manage its health and safety responsibilities and to ensure the health and safety of tenants in their homes and communal areas. At the time of the inspection, the outcomes across health and safety compliance areas were broadly being met. We identified some weaknesses with the completion of overdue fire remedial actions; however these were due to be completed quickly and the risks to tenants were being mitigated. We also identified that Reading BC needed to improve the reporting of health and safety compliance so councillors and tenants could have effective oversight of performance. This included reporting of remedial actions, the installation of smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, and the completion of damp and mould cases. During the inspection Reading BC provided evidence of its plans to address these weaknesses. We will continue to engage with Reading BC to monitor its progress and obtain assurance that it is delivering these plans.
Our inspection identified that there are serious failings in the provision of an effective, efficient and timely repairs service. At the time of the inspection internal performance targets for emergency, urgent, routine and void repairs were not being met, and there were approximately 1,600 overdue repairs. Whilst Reading BC has been implementing plans to address these issues, there remains significant work to do in this area. We will continue to engage intensively with Reading BC and seek assurance that progress is made so that outcomes for tenants are improved.
The Neighbourhood and Community Standard requires landlords to work in partnership to promote positive outcomes for tenants. Reading BC had identified improvements required in this area including improving the accuracy of anti-social behaviour (ASB) data reporting and addressing issues with management supervision of cases. Whilst Reading BC has largely resolved the data reporting issue, its plans to implement greater management supervision have not yet been embedded. Therefore, Reading BC lacks some assurance, currently, that staff are taking prompt and appropriate action in response to ASB and hate incidents. We found serious failings in the outcomes for tenants in homes managed on behalf of Reading BC as part of a Public Finance Initiative (PFI), notably around the lack of risk assessments and assessment of the vulnerability of witnesses of ASB and hate incidents. There is also a lack of information for tenants on the PFI’s website about ASB and hate incidents, and domestic abuse.
Regarding the Tenancy Standard, we saw evidence that Reading BC offers tenancies or terms of occupation that are compatible with the purpose of its accommodation, the needs of individual households, the sustainability of the community and the efficient use of its housing stock.
The Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard sets out the outcomes landlords must deliver about being open with tenants and treating them with fairness and respect so that tenants can access services. During the inspection we observed a respectful approach to tenants. However, whilst Reading BC collects information about its tenants at tenancy sign up, this information was not being consistently updated, and we saw limited evidence of how Reading BC uses this information to assess whether the housing and landlord services deliver fair and equitable outcomes for tenants.
The Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard also requires landlords to take tenants’ views into account in their decision-making about how landlord services are delivered and communicate how tenants’ views have been considered. We found serious failings in Reading BC’s provision of meaningful opportunities for tenants to effectively scrutinise its performance, with it acknowledging that this provision had not been in place for several years. We only saw limited evidence of tenant engagement and consultations shaping some policies. Reading BC is committed to improving engagement and scrutiny opportunities with tenants, including non‑engaged tenants, and has recently approved its new tenant engagement strategy to help address these failings.
The Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard also requires landlords to ensure complaints are addressed fairly, effectively, and promptly. We saw serious failings in Reading BC’s approach to complaints handling. Reading BC is not meeting its targets for responding to complaints and we found that not all tenants had access to a fair and effective complaints process. Tenants living in homes managed as part of the PFI contract had access to a three-stage complaints process which includes an informal complaint stage, and were given incorrect information about access to the Housing Ombudsman Service – neither of which are in line with the Housing Ombudsman Service’s Complaints Handling Code. Reading BC is therefore failing to ensure that it ensures all complaints are addressed fairly, effectively and promptly. It is also missing opportunities to learn from all complaints.
The Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard requires landlords to provide relevant and accessible information so that tenants can use landlord services and understand what to expect from their landlord. We saw evidence that tenants living in homes managed by Reading BC receive relevant and accessible information. However, the information provided to tenants living in homes managed under the PFI contract was either out of date, limited in its scope or not provided.
Reading BC has been engaging constructively with us and has plans in place to address most of these failings, including delivering an effective, efficient and timely repairs service, and ensuring that tenants have meaningful opportunities to influence and scrutinise services. However, it needs to consider how it can address the disparities in some of the outcomes being delivered for tenants living in homes managed under the PFI contract, notably in relation to complaints, ASB and hate incidents, and the provision of performance information for all relevant landlord services.
We are continuing to engage with Reading BC as it continues to address all the issues outlined in this regulatory judgement. Our engagement is intensive, and we are seeking evidence that gives us assurance that sufficient change and progress is being made, including ongoing monitoring of how it delivers its improvement programme. Our priority is that risks to tenants are adequately managed and mitigated. We are not proposing to use our enforcement powers at this stage but will keep this under review as Reading BC seeks to resolve these issues.
Background to the judgement
About the landlord
Reading BC owns around 7,000 social housing properties. Approximately 1,250 of these homes are managed under a PFI contract by Affinity Reading Ltd though Reading BC remains the landlord and is responsible for its social housing homes that are managed this way.
Our role and regulatory approach
We regulate for a viable, efficient, and well governed social housing sector able to deliver quality homes and services for current and future tenants.
We regulate at the landlord level to drive improvement in how landlords operate. By landlord we mean a registered provider of social housing. These can either be local authorities, or private registered providers (other organisations registered with us such as non-profit housing associations, co-operatives, or profit-making organisations).
We set standards which state outcomes that landlords must deliver. The outcomes of our standards include both the required outcomes and specific expectations we set. Where we find there are significant failures in landlords which we consider to be material to the landlord’s delivery of those outcomes, we hold them to account. Ultimately this provides protection for tenants’ homes and services and achieves better outcomes for current and future tenants. It also contributes to a sustainable sector which can attract strong investment.
We have a different role for regulating local authorities than for other landlords. This is because we have a narrower role for local authorities and the Governance and Financial Viability Standard, and Value for Money Standard do not apply. Further detail on which standards apply to different landlords can be found on our standards page.
We assess the performance of landlords through inspections and by reviewing data that landlords are required to submit to us. In Depth Assessments (IDAs) were one of our previous assessment processes, which are now replaced by our new inspections programme from 1 April 2024. We also respond where there is an issue or a potential issue that may be material to a landlord’s delivery of the outcomes of our standards. We publish regulatory judgements that describe our view of landlords’ performance with our standards. We also publish grades for landlords with more than 1,000 social housing homes.
The Housing Ombudsman deals with individual complaints. When individual complaints are referred to us, we investigate if we consider that the issue may be material to a landlord’s delivery of the outcomes of our standards.
For more information about our approach to regulation, please see Regulating the standards.