In this episode of the Housing Sector Podcast, I’m joined by Hannah, a consultant at Data Clan with experience across both the private housing sector and large national housing providers.

We start by talking about service charges and the lack of insight and scrutiny around them, including how councils assess and pay housing-related costs. From there, the conversation broadens into a more honest discussion about power, cost, accountability, and transparency in housing.

Hannah draws on her experience in the private sector to explain how service charges are expected to withstand challenge, tribunal scrutiny, and case law — and why that level of discipline is often missing in social housing. We talk about build quality, long-term costs, siloed organisations, the impact of mergers, and why residents are increasingly questioning what they are being asked to pay for.

We also discuss:

Why service charges have become a flashpoint for residents
How development decisions affect long-term costs
The disconnect between service delivery and what residents are charged
Fragmented systems and the loss of local knowledge
The rise of defensive responses and legal escalation
New Social Tenant Access to Information requirements and what they are intended to address
Leasehold reform and the imbalance of power between residents and landlords

This episode is about having a calm, open, and honest conversation about how housing works in practice — and why accountability matters.

#HousingSector, #ServiceCharges, #HousingAccountability, #SocialHousing, #LeaseholdReform, #HousingAssociations, #Transparency, #TenantRights, #HousingCosts, #ResidentVoice

Support the show

In this episode of the Housing Sector Podcast, I speak with Jane Hill, a long-term leaseholder, and Morley Young, a former third-party technical consultant, about a window replacement programme involving Guildford Borough Council.

What began as a routine planned upgrade became, according to those involved, a deeply distressing experience for the resident concerned. The discussion covers what Jane and Morley say happened during the works, including concerns around safety, health impacts, specification of materials, internal decision-making, and how the situation was handled once problems were identified.

Jane describes the impact the works had on her home and wellbeing, while Morley explains why he raised concerns when he was brought in to assess the situation. This includes issues relating to health and safety processes, asbestos risk management, and whether the works being carried out matched the specification provided to leaseholders.

The episode also explores what followed: the halting and restarting of works, subsequent damage, charging concerns, and the ongoing complaint now with the Housing Ombudsman. More broadly, it raises questions about oversight, accountability, and how residents are protected when major works go wrong.

This episode is presented as part one. A follow-up episode will examine developments once the Housing Ombudsman process has concluded and will include any further response provided by the council.

Important context and clarification

This episode presents the personal accounts and opinions of those involved. Any references to illegality, negligence, or misconduct reflect the views and experiences described by the speakers and are contested. They should not be taken as findings of fact or legal conclusions.

Right to reply – Guildford Borough Council

Guildford Borough Council was contacted ahead of publication and offered a right to reply. The council provided the following response:

“Thank you for your enquiry. Below is our factual response.

Two previously published independent reports – the Heminsley Law report and the SOLACE report, provide factual analysis and narrative into our historic housing repairs. Our improvement plans set out what we are doing to address the issues raised in these reports. The Independent Assurance Panel has reported twice on our progress, and their reports have been published as part of our journey to improvement.

We understand that Mr & Mrs Hill have contacted the Housing Ombudsman and therefore it is not appropriate for us to provide further comment.”

Referenced reports and material

In their response, Guildford Borough Council referred to previously published reports and improvement documentation. For transparency, links are provided below:

https://democracy.guildford.gov.uk/documents/s38003/Item+11+1+-+App+1+-+Heminsley+Law+Report.pdf

https://democracy.guildford.gov.uk/documents/s32854/Item%2003%201%20-%20Corporate%20Improvement%20Plan%20-%20App%201%20-%20SOLACE%20Report%20March%2024.pdf

https://www.guildford.gov.uk/article/27169/Our-journey-to-improvement

These documents relate to historic governance and housing repairs issues referenced by the council. They do not address the specific resident experience discussed in this episode.

The council did not address the specific questions raised in the episode and said it would not comment further while the matter is under consideration by the Housing Ombudsman.

#HousingSector #HousingSectorPodcast #SocialHousing #Leaseholders #Section20 #MajorWorks #WindowReplacement #BuildingSafety #ResidentVoices #Accountability #LocalGovernment #Guildford #HousingOmbudsman #HousingStandards

Support the show

In this episode, I’m joined by Ebrahim Goolamally to examine what happens when housing governance, performance data, and lived experience are placed side by side — and don’t align.

Drawing on Housing Ombudsman statistics, Tenant Satisfaction Measures, and Regulator of Social Housing gradings, we explore a dataset that reveals a persistent and troubling gap: landlords can retain strong governance and viability ratings while residents report poor complaint handling, repeated service failures, and escalating disputes.

The conversation focuses in particular on complaint handling — consistently the weakest satisfaction metric across the sector — and how failures at this stage drive escalation, maladministration findings, and long-term harm for residents. We discuss why high satisfaction scores elsewhere do not prevent serious failings, and what this says about how success is currently measured in social housing.

This is not a discussion about one landlord. It’s about a system that assesses itself in silos — and the consequences when governance frameworks fail to reflect lived reality on modern housing estates.

In this episode we cover:
• What Ombudsman data reveals when viewed alongside satisfaction scores
• Why complaint handling is the sector’s critical fault line
• The disconnect between “good governance” ratings and resident experience
• How scale, process, and performance metrics can obscure accountability
• Why joined-up data matters for trust, transparency, and reform

This episode is essential listening for residents, housing professionals, policymakers, and anyone concerned with accountability in the housing sector.

https://housingservicechargeandrentpiperdy.com/
https://www.linkedin.com/in/ebrahimpi/

#HousingSector #SocialHousing #HousingOmbudsman #ComplaintHandling #LivedExperience #Governance

Support the show