Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was received on behalf of Councillor Monica Stringfellow.

To invite Councillors to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests and / or Other Disclosable Interests they may have in items on the agenda, and to confirm the nature of those interests.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Leader advised that at a meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 1^st September 2025, Members had pre-scrutinised the following items on the Executive Committee’s agenda:

·             Minute Item No. 31 – Voluntary Sector Grants Scheme 2026/27 to 2029/30

·             Minute Item No. 32 – Adoption of Fixed Penalty Charge for Breach of Community Protection Notice

·             Minute Item No. 33 – Housing Ombudsman Findings Report 1 Ref 202417927

·             Minute Item No. 34 – Housing Ombudsman Findings Report 2 Ref 202331009

·             Minute Item No. 35 – Quarter 1 Housing Consumer Standards Report

·             Minute Item No. 36 – Regulator of Social Housing Inspection Report

·             Minute Item No. 41 – Disposal of Housing Revenue Account Assets – Four Garages at Ashorne Close, Matchborough, Redditch

·             Minute Item No. 44 – Disposal of Housing Revenue Account Assets – 53 Parsons Road, Southcrest Redditch and 53 Crabbs Cross Lane, Crabbs Cross, Redditch

At the end of their discussions, the Committee had endorsed the recommendations contained within the reports.  Whilst the Committee did not make any further recommendations, the Leader highlighted that for the Regulator of Social Housing Inspection Report, the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had discussed potentially setting up a scrutiny working group focusing on this subject area.

In advance of the Executive Committee meeting, the Budget Scrutiny Working Group had pre-scrutinised the following items on the Executive Committee’s agenda at a meeting held on 28^th August 2025:

·             Minute Item No. 37: Quarter 1 Finance and Performance Monitoring Report 2025/26

·             Minute Item No. 38: Medium Term Financial Plan Scene Setting Report 2026/2027

Members were advised that the Budget Scrutiny Working Group had not made any recommendations on either item.

On behalf of the Executive Committee, the Leader thanked the members of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the Budget Scrutiny Working Group for their hard work in pre-scrutinising these reports prior to the Executive Committee’s consideration.

RESOLVED that

the minutes of the meeting of the Executive Committee held on 8^th July 2025 be approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chair.

The Chair of the Fly Tipping and Bulky Waste Task Group, Councillor Matthew Dormer, presented the group’s final report for the Executive Committee’s consideration.

Members were informed that the review had been completed over a period of two years.  During this time, there had been a change to the membership of the Task Group, which had been launched following the submission of a Motion on the subject by Councillor Sid Khan at a Council meeting.

The remit of the Task Group had been:

·             To review the current rates of fly tipping and bulky waste collections in the Borough.

·             To assess how collection rates in the Borough compared to other local authority areas and to identify how those Councils managed their fly tipping and bulky waste collection services.

·             To review the Council’s current approach to communicating with the public about how the authority responded to fly tipping and promoted the Bulky Waste Collection service.

·             To identify any actions that could be taken to reduce fly tipping and improve Bulky Waste collection services, taking into account the financial and legal implications of any proposals.

The Executive Committee was advised that the review had coincided with a change to the Council’s arrangements for tackling fly tipping.  In 2024, the Council had agreed that Worcestershire Regulatory Services (WRS) should take on responsibility for environmental enforcement, including in respect of fly tipping. 

The Council’s Bulky Waste Collection Service was well used and demand was increasing.  The Executive Committee was asked to note that the Council’s charge for using the service was relatively cheap, particularly compared to equivalent services provided by private sector organisations.  The suggestion was made that this should be highlighted in communications promoting the service in order to encourage greater uptake.

Fly tipping was a challenging issue for the Council to address.  The group had learned that there were a number of hot spots across the Borough where fly tipping tended to be more prevalent.  In more rural parts of the Borough, trade waste was more likely to be the subject of fly tipping whilst domestic waste tended to be more prevalent in residential areas.

At the end of the review, the Fly Tipping and Bulky Waste Task Group had concluded that WRS should be invited to provide a bi-annual update to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on the subject of fly tipping data and enforcement work in the Borough.  This recommendation had been approved by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at a meeting held on 7^th July 2025.  As the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had the power to determine items to be added to the Committee’s work programme, no decision was required from the Executive Committee on this subject.  However, due to the importance of the subject and in recognition of the group’s hard work, the Task Group’s final report and findings were being presented for the Executive Committee’s consideration.

Following the presentation of the report, Members discussed the group’s findings and in so doing commented that they were aware of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

The Community Services Manager presented a report on the subject of the Voluntary Sector Grants Scheme 2026/27 to 2029/30.

The Executive Committee was informed that for the previous three-year period, the Council had provided £150,000 in support to the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS).  This included a grant of £50,000 to the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) and £100,000 in major as well as small grants to a range of VCS organisations and local groups.  During this time, decisions on funding had been made by Officers.

In the report, Officers were proposing to change the Council’s approach to funding VCS organisations, although it was important to note that funding would remain available.  Under these proposals, it was proposed that the Council should allocate £175,000 per year to support VCS groups.  This would include £75,000 for a financial advice service and distribution of higher and lower value grants to VCS groups.  It was further proposed that a Grants Panel, comprising a membership of elected Members, should be reintroduced to consider applications for higher value grants.  Smaller grants would continue to be determined by Officers.

Members were asked to note that there was funding, derived from scrap metal recovered through the cremation scheme operated by Bereavement Services, which was invested in VCS activities.  This was entirely separate to the rest of the VCS funding programme and the level of funding could not be predicted in advance as it varied year to year.  Officers were proposing that authority should be delegated to the Assistant Director of Community and Housing Services, following consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Community Spaces and the Voluntary Sector, to distribute this funding.

Following the presentation of the report, Members discussed the arrangements for the proposed Grants Panel and in doing so questioned whether Officers would score applications prior to consideration by the panel.  Clarification was provided that Members would undertake scoring at meetings of the Grants Panel.  The role of the Grants Officer would be to assess all applications prior to consideration by the Grants Panel to ensure that they were compliant with the process.

The purpose of a Grants Panel and the rationale for reintroducing such a panel after a number of years when Officers had had delegated authority to consider applications was also discussed.  Members suggested that a Grants Panel would create greater transparency and democratic accountability for the distribution of public money to VCS organisations.

Consideration was given to the proposed grant for a financial advice service.  Members questioned whether this would be the total grant or whether the funding would be valued at up to £75,000.  Officers confirmed that the value of this grant would be up to £75,000.

Reference was given to the evidence that had been provided in the report regarding the impact of the financial advice service that had been provided by the CAB on behalf of the Council in recent years.  Members commented that it was important to ensure that evidence was also available about the impact of major grants, in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

The Technical Services Manager (WRS) and the Principal Officer (Planning and Environmental Crime Enforcement – WRS) presented a report on the subject of the adoption of Fixed Penalty Charge Notices (FPNs) for breaches of Community Protection Notices (CPNs).

Members were informed that WRS had assumed responsibility for planning and environmental enforcement in 2024.  There were certain enforcement powers that could be deployed by the Council where non-compliance was identified.  There had been five cases since May 2025, involving fly tipping and littering, that had been closed. 

There was a process that needed to be followed in respect of enforcement.  Where anti-social behaviour (ASB) was identified, Officers would seek to impose a Community Protection Warning (CPW), which gave notice that an individual or organisation needed to address their behaviour.  There was a high bar that needed to be met in order to issue a CPW.  Should evidence emerge that a CPW was being breached, then a CPN could be issued.  Where a CPN was breached, an FPN could be issued.

In presenting the report, Members were asked to note that FPNs would provide an additional tool that could be used to address poor behaviour where breaches of CPNs occurred.  In some cases, it would be more appropriate to issue an FPN than to take court action.

Members welcomed the report and in doing so noted that enforcement action was important to deter and address poor behaviour, such as littering and fly tipping.  Concerns were raised that fly tipping and litter could create health and safety challenges, including by attracting pests which had a negative impact on the local community.  Members commented that it was important to ensure that business owners understood their responsibilities in respect of the environment and the consequences of poor behaviour.  Where poor behaviour was unreasonable and persistent there was a need for the Council to act and FPNs could assist with this process.

During consideration of this item, Members noted that the report had been pre-scrutinised at the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 1^st September 2025.  Concerns had been raised at that meeting about the extent to which enforcement action was being taken.  The Executive Committee noted that enforcement action was being taken and the FPNs would enhance this process by providing an additional tool that could be used by officers where appropriate.

In concluding their discussions in respect of this matter, Members commented that the Council had a duty to communicate to the public and local businesses the action that the authority was taking to address planning and environmental crimes through enforcement activities.

RECOMMENDED that

the Council adopt a Fixed Penalty Notice Charge of £100 for failure to comply with a Community Protection Notice.

The Assistant Director of Environmental and Housing Property Services presented the Housing Ombudsman’s Findings Report in respect of case 202417927. This related to a complaint that had been submitted to the Housing Ombudsman by a local resident.

The purpose of the report was to learn lessons from the Housing Ombudsman’s findings when investigating this complaint.  This had concluded that there had been maladministration at the Council in respect of the following areas:

·             The resident’s reports of damp and mould in the property.

·             The installation and maintenance of aids and adaptations.

·             The resident’s reports of structural problems with the balcony wall.

·             The resident’s reports of a leak to the communal entrance.

The Housing Ombudsman had identified issues with poor record keeping at the Council as well as in respect of how staff worked with people who had vulnerabilities.  Staff required training in order to provide appropriate support to residents with different vulnerabilities.  Issues had also been identified with complaint handling at the Council, with an emphasis having been placed on the need for staff to have empathy when working with residents.  Officers were working through the Housing Ombudsman’s findings with a view to identifying the most appropriate action to be taken to prevent similar issues from occurring in the future. 

There was a need for the Council to be open and transparent in acknowledging that mistakes had been made and to highlight that action was being taken to address the issues that had been identified by the Housing Ombudsman.  In addition, the authority needed to improve arrangements for reporting back to residents when complaints were received.

After the report had been delivered, Members discussed the Housing Ombudsman’s findings and in doing so expressed disappointment that the issues that had been identified had occurred.  Members acknowledged that the Council had failed the resident on this occasion and that lessons needed to be learned in order to ensure that other residents did not have similar experiences in the future.

During consideration of this item, Members noted that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had pre-scrutinised this report at a meeting held on 1^st September 2025.  The Overview and Scrutiny Committee had discussed the findings in the report in some detail and there had been robust debate and challenge, which was welcomed by the Executive Committee.  Members of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had suggested that it might be helpful for the Council to recruit a case worker, or multiple case workers.  Executive Committee Members suggested that this could involve recruiting family liaison case workers to help address issues when they were reported to the authority at a much earlier stage.  In addition, the potential to work in partnership with other organisations to recruit these case workers as multi-agency staff was highlighted for consideration.

The role of staff in handling complaints and responding to initial requests for help was discussed.  Members expressed concerns that the issues identified by the Housing Ombudsman appeared to indicate that there were cultural issues amongst staff in the Housing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

The Assistant Director of Environmental and Housing Property Services presented the Housing Ombudsman’s Findings Report in respect of case 202331009.  As with the previous item, Members were informed that this report related to a complaint that had been received from a local resident.

In the report, the Housing Ombudsman had highlighted two key areas in which maladministration by the Council had been identified in relation to this case:

·             Maladministration in the Council’s response to reports from the resident of damp and mould.

·             Maladministration in the Council’s complaint handling.

Officers were keen to learn lessons from this case and to ensure that action was taken to address the issues that had been identified by the Housing Ombudsman moving forward.

In considering the report, Members were asked to note that the Council had already agreed to introduce a specialist Damp and Mould team.  There had been successful recruitment to all of the posts in this team and new staff would commence employment with the authority over the coming weeks and months.

Consideration was given to performance data relating to damp and mould.  The performance data for the first quarter of 2025/26 indicated that there had been improvements compared to the previous quarter in 2024/25. 

Members discussed the report and in doing so acknowledged that there were serious issues that had been identified in the report which should not have occurred.  The report had been pre-scrutinised at the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 1^st September and there had been a very robust and challenging debate on the subject which had been very helpful.

The Committee welcomed the introduction of the Damp and Mould team and noted that new staff in this department would be commencing employment with the authority at a time when, following the end of summer, reports of damp and mould were likely to start to increase.  The introduction of this team was therefore considered to be timely and would hopefully help to ensure that reports of damp and mould were handled more appropriately in future.

The need for the Council to be open and transparent in admitting failings and focusing on learning lessons for the future was highlighted by Members.  It was noted that complaints needed to be taken seriously and the needs and experiences of residents was the Council’s priority moving forward.

RESOLVED that

1)          the findings, orders and recommendation from the Housing Ombudsman be noted; and

2)          compliance with those matters by the Council and the wider learning points be noted.

The Assistant Director of Environmental and Housing Property Services presented the Housing Consumer Standards Report for the first quarter of the 2025/26 financial year. In considering the report, Members were asked to note that the title of the report would be changing in the future.  The new title would highlight the purpose of the report in monitoring the performance of Housing Services.

The report detailed the Council’s performance in relation to the Regulator of Social Housing’s tenant satisfaction measures.  These measures were monitored as Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the service, alongside performance in relation to important health and safety actions, such as completion of gas inspections at Council properties.  The available data indicated that the Council’s performance in relation to these KPIs was improving, when compared to the same quarter in the 2024/25 financial year.  In addition, information available from the Power BI system that the Council was now using was enabling Officers to more accurately identify and assess issues when they occurred.

Following the presentation of the report, Members noted that the report had been pre-scrutinised at a meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 1^st September 2025.  At this meeting, the issues raised and the Council’s response had been scrutinised in detail.  Comments had been made at this meeting that there had been some slippage in performance in recent years and questions were raised about whether this was supported by available evidence.  Officers clarified that there were difficulties in assessing the available data as the Council had moved from an archaic IT system to a modern system in 2022 and therefore the data would need to be reviewed carefully.  However, the focus of the Council remained on improving performance moving forward rather than on reflecting back to the past.

Members welcomed information contained in the report that indicated that overall performance was improving compared to the same quarter in 2024/25, although there remained areas for improvement.  The suggestion was made that once handheld Totalmobile devices were introduced for the use of frontline staff, performance, including records of performance, would improve.

RESOLVED that

the Council’s 2025/26 performance against the Tenant Satisfaction Measures (Landlord) be noted.

The Assistant Director of Environmental and Housing Property Services presented the Regulator of Social Housing Inspection Report for the Executive Committee’s consideration.  Members were asked to note that this report included an Improvement Plan, which had incorporated a proposed governance structure, designed to address areas of concern identified by the regulator.

Following changes nationally, all social landlords managing in excess of 1,000 properties, which included Redditch Borough Council, were required to undergo an inspection by the Regulator of Social Housing.  An inspection had been carried out of Redditch Borough Council’s Housing Service, starting in January 2025 with a final report having been issued by the regulator in July 2025.  During this inspection process, the Council’s performance had been assessed in relation to housing consumer standards. 

There were four different grades that could be awarded to a social housing provider in an inspection:

·             C1, which was awarded to the providers that demonstrated best practice.

·             C2

·             C3

·             C4, which was the worst grade that could be awarded.

In the final report issued by the regulator, the Council had been awarded a C3 rating.  This rating had been issued for a number of reasons including:

·             A lack of effective and efficient repair and maintenance services.

·             Concerns relating to fire remediation actions.

·             A limited stock condition survey having been conducted in the preceding five-year period.  Members were asked to note that this would have been assessed at a higher level if stock condition surveys conducted in the years immediately leading up to this period had been taken into account.

·             A lack of tenant engagement mechanisms where residents had opportunities to hold the authority, as landlord, to account. 

There had been some positive areas of practice which had been highlighted by the regulator.  This included:

·             Staff at the Council knew what stage the Council had reached and where it needed to be.

·             The Council was open and transparent.

Tenant engagement was recognised as an area where the Council needed to improve.  Funding was therefore proposed to support the employment of a new Tenant Engagement and Participation Officer.

Following the presentation of the report, Members noted that this item had been pre-scrutinised at the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 1^st September 2025.  All Members had been invited to attend that meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to observe the debate in respect of this item as it was recognised that it was important to ensure that all Members were informed on this subject.  There had been a robust debate at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding this item and the Executive Committee welcome the challenge arising.

Consideration was given to the grade that had been awarded to Redditch Borough Council’s Housing Service in the inspection.  Members expressed disappointment that the Council had received a C3 grading, although it was noted that over 50 per cent of local authority social housing providers had received the same grade.  To address the issues identified, Officers were already liaising with a Council that had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

The Chief Finance Officer presented the finance and performance monitoring report for the first quarter of the 2025/26 financial year.  Members were advised that in future, financial and performance monitoring data would be reported separately for the Executive Committee’s consideration.

By the end of the first quarter, Officers were anticipating that there would be an overspend of £19,900 by the end of the financial year.  Changes could occur prior to the end of the financial year but Officers would continue to monitor the budget position moving forward.

In respect of treasury management, the Council had not borrowed from external sources during the quarter and the authority was debt free in the General Fund.  Investments were held in security, liquidity and yield, which ensured that the Council received a rate of return.

Information had been included in the report in respect of expenditure on Members’ ward budgets.  This revealed that Members had spent more than a third of the available ward budgets by the end of the first quarter of the financial year.

Once the report had been presented, Members discussed the content and in doing so noted that savings targets had been included in the report.  The Executive Committee would continue to monitor progress in relation to these savings targets as the financial year progressed.

Reference was made to the figures that had been included in the report in respect of expenditure of Members’ ward budgets and questions were raised about whether the detail provided was accurate.  Members commented that they were aware of some Councillors who were recorded as not having spent their budgets when they had in fact agreed to some expenditure.  Officers clarified that the report related to expenditure in the first quarter of the financial year, from April to June 2025, and would not include any expenditure of ward budgets agreed by Members in July or August.  This would be addressed in the monitoring report for the second quarter of the financial year instead.

The deadline for expenditure of the Members’ ward budgets was also questioned.  Members noted that they were being encouraged to spend ward budgets by the end of December 2025 and they queried whether this represented the final deadline.  Clarification was provided that ideally ward budgets would be spent by the end of December 2025, as this would help with budget monitoring and planning for the future.  However, the actual deadline for expenditure of the Members’ ward budgets would be the end of the financial year on 31^st March 2026.  To ensure that these budgets were spent in a timely manner and in accordance with the proper process, Members requested that a reminder be issued to all Councillors regarding the deadline for expenditure of Members’ ward budgets together with a copy of the form that Members needed to complete.

The performance data included in the report was also discussed.  Members welcomed the inclusion of additional contextual information for some of the measures included in the report.  The suggestion was made that it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

The Chief Finance Officer presented the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) Scene Setting Report 2026/27 for the Executive Committee’s consideration.

The report detailed the proposed approach to setting the budget for the period 2026/27 to 2028/29.  Officers acknowledged that by the final year of the plan, the Council was no longer due to exist and would have been replaced by a unitary authority.  However, it was considered prudent to include this final year in case any changes were made to the Government’s timetable for Local Government Reorganisation in the meantime.

The main change that was being proposed to the budget setting process in 2026/27 was that this would be reported to Council on a single occasion, in February 2026, rather than in two tranches.  This change had been made to the process in recognition of the fact that the issues identified in the Section 24 Notice that was issued to the Council in 2022 had been resolved and therefore the additional steps that had occurred in the two tranche process were no longer necessary.  There would continue to be multiple opportunities for the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Budget Scrutiny Working Group to challenge and scrutinise the content of the budget.  In addition, it was proposed that there would be check and challenge sessions for each of the Assistant Directors as well as a Star Chamber process reviewing the budget, which would help to challenge expectations.

Following the presentation of the report, Members discussed the content and in doing so noted that there were three key elements to this report:

·             Increased transparency

·             Increased simplicity

·             Enhanced performance monitoring

Members commented that the two-tranche process for budget setting had been very time consuming.  The approach detailed in the report would be more efficient and would enable Officers to also dedicate sufficient time to working on Local Government Reorganisation.

Consideration was given to the proposed pay award of 2 per cent that had been incorporated into the report alongside a cost of living increase of 1 per cent.  Members questioned whether this was prudent at a time when inflation was at 3 per cent.  Officers clarified that it was considered best practice to anticipate a pay increase that matched the Government’s guidelines for where inflation should be.  There was a risk that if the Council recorded an anticipated increase of 3 per cent or above this could raise expectations that staff would receive greater increases to their pay than the target inflation level.  However, Officers were anticipating that inflation would be higher than 2 per cent and for that reason, the 1 per cent cost of living increase had been included as a contingency.

Questions were also raised with regard to the Fairer Funding Review for local government and whether the outcomes of this review had been confirmed.  Clarification was provided that the Council had responded to the Government’s recent consultation on the Fairer Funding Review.  External experts consulted about the review had indicated that they were anticipating that Redditch Borough Council would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

Members considered the minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 7^th July 2025 and in doing so noted that there were no outstanding recommendations requiring consideration on this occasion.

RESOLVED that

the minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 7^th July 2025 be noted.

To receive and consider any outstanding minutes or referrals from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Executive Panels etc. since the last meeting of the Executive Committee, other than as detailed in the items above.

There were no referrals from either the Overview and Scrutiny Committee or the Executive Advisory Panels on this occasion.

The Housing Property Services Manager presented the Disposal of Housing Revenue Account Assets – Four Garages at Ashorne Close, Matchborough Redditch report.

The Executive Committee was informed that Redditch Borough Council managed in excess of 1,000 garages located across the Borough.  These garages had been built in a variety of styles and were in various different conditions by the date of the meeting.  Unfortunately, some of the garages were dilapidated and could become a potential hazard to the public if they were left in their current condition.  Many of the garages had been designed in the 1960s and 1970s and they were now difficult to repair.  Whilst four garages had been referred to in the title of the item, Members were in fact being asked to agree to dispose of eight garages.

Members discussed the proposals detailed in the report and in doing so commented that many of the garages were quite small and not fit for purpose for modern vehicles, which tended to be quite large.  Furthermore, many of the garages were no longer used by local residents.  At the same time, parking remained a challenge, particularly in Matchborough.  Once removed, the garages would be replaced with car parking spaces and Members commented that this was likely to be welcomed by local residents.

RESOLVED that

1)          the 8 garages located at Ashorne Close, Matchborough be declared surplus to requirements and demolished on the grounds of structural safety; and

2)          subject to planning permission, the garages be replaced with 10 parking spaces.

There was no urgent business discussed on this occasion.

“That, under S.100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following matter(s) on the grounds that it/they involve(s) the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the relevant paragraphs (to be specified) of Part 1 of Schedule 12 (A) of the said Act”.

These paragraphs are as follows:

Subject to the “public interest” test, information relating to:

·         Para 1 – any individual;

·         Para 2 – the identity of any individual;

·         Para 3 – financial or business affairs;

                     and may need to be considered as ‘exempt’.

RESOLVED that:

Under S100 A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended by the Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following matters on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12 of the said act, as amended.

Minute Item No 44 – Disposal of Housing Revenue Account Assets – 53 Parsons Road, Southcrest, Redditch and 53 Crabbs Cross Lane, Crabbs Cross, Redditch.

The Housing Property Services Manager presented a report concerning the disposal of Housing Revenue Account (HRA) assets at 53 Parsons Road, Southcrest, Redditch and 53 Crabbs Cross Lane, Crabbs Cross, Redditch.

The Executive Committee was informed that both properties were in a dilapidated condition.  The potential for the Council to upgrade these properties had been reviewed but the conclusion had been reached that it would be too financially costly to bring these properties into a habitable state.  Therefore, it was considered preferable to dispose of both properties and the Council could use the capital receipts to invest in new properties as part of the Housing Growth Programme.

Members noted that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had pre-scrutinised this report at the meeting held on 1^st September 2025.  There had been robust debate, including in exempt session, at that meeting.  The Overview and Scrutiny Committee was thanked for their hard work in reviewing this matter.

There was general consensus amongst Members that it would be appropriate for the Council to dispose of these assets due to the condition of the properties.  Members expressed hopes that the capital receipts arising could be used to make better investments moving forward.

RESOLVED that

1)          53 Parsons Road, Southcrest, Redditch be declared surplus to Council requirements;

2)          authority be delegated to the Deputy Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officer and to the Assistant Director of Legal, Democratic and Procurement Services to dispose of the site at market value;

3)          any HRA capital receipt received from the sale of No. 53 Parsons Road, Southcrest be allocated to the HRA Capital Programme;

4)          53 Crabbs Cross Lane, Crabbs Cross, be declared surplus to Council requirements;

5)          authority be delegated to the Deputy Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officer and to the Assistant Director of Legal, Democratic and Procurement Services to dispose of the site at market value; and

6)          any HRA capital receipt received from the sale of 53 Crabbs Cross Lane, Crabbs Cross be allocated to the HRA Capital Programme.

(During consideration of this item, Members voted on matters that, if debated in public session, would have necessitated the disclosure of exempt information. This information was not discussed in the public domain on the grounds that information would be revealed which related to any individual, information which was likely to reveal the identity of any individual and information relating to the financial and business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)).