Whilst the SHR highlights that it is keen to make only minor amendments to the framework at this stage, there are ten questions asked within the paper. These are summarised below.
1. SHR priorities (question 1)
The paper lists four SHR priorities and asks if RSLs agree with them. They state that landlords should be:
- listening and responding effectively to tenants and service users
- providing good quality and safe homes
- keeping homes as affordable as possible
- doing all they can to reduce the number of people who are experiencing homelessness
Interestingly, the paper also highlights that the SHR will continue its focus on equality and human rights in all landlords, alongside governance and financial management in RSLs. Neither are listed within the priorities however.
2. Annual assurance statements (question 2)
The paper suggests amendment of the statutory guidance on the annual assurance statements to allow the SHR to identify specific areas or issues on which assurance should be explicitly set out in a landlord AAS. In recent years the SHR has asked for explicit statements in the AAS re equalities and EICRs, but this would formalise the SHR's ability to ask for specific inclusions in the AAS.
3. Annual return on the Charter (questions 3, 4 & 5)
The paper asks three questions relating to the ARC. There is a broad question asking for any suggested changes to the ARC, then two questions specifically relating to tenant and resident safety.
Firstly, the paper asks if adding electrical, water, fire, asbestos and lift safety would be the right additions for the ARC to focus on. Secondly, the paper asks for suggestions as to how best to monitor the effectiveness of landlords' approach to managing reports and instances of damp and mould.
4. Listening and responding to tenants and service users (question 6)
The paper asks for views on whether the SHR should amend the section in the Regulatory Framework currently entitled "Tenant and Service User Redress" to focus include a focus on providing tenants, residents and service users with easy and safe ways to provide feedback and raise concerns.
5. Notifiable events (question 7)
The SHR propose reviewing the Notifiable Events statutory guidance - which was a recommendation of the SFHA's Regulatory Framework in Practice research. The SHR paper asks about ways to streamline the approach to ensure only the most critical issues are highlighted.
6. Regulatory status (question 8)
The SHR currently articulates the regulatory status of RSLs as one of four categories: compliant, compliant (under review), working towards compliance or statutory intervention. The paper seeks views on creating a further regulatory status between compliant and working towards compliance. The wording "compliant with improvements needed" has been suggested as an example.
7. Significant performance failures (question 9)
Tenants can report certain issues to the SHR directly as significant performance failures (SPFs). The SHR does not receive many reports of SPFs and when it investigates those that are reported, more often than not these turn out not to fit within their definition of an SPF. The SHR is seeking views on whether there should be any changes to how an SPF is defined or the approach in general.
8. Any other suggested changes (question 10)
The paper highlights that the SHR will make specific changes to indicators regarding EESSH following the Scottish Government's EESSH review group. The paper concludes by asking if there are any other suggested changes to the regulatory framework that RSLs might wish to highlight. The SFHA's recently published Regulatory framework in practice research provides 20 recommendations, and SFHA will consider how to incorporate these into our response to this question.
Next steps
SFHA will be discussing the paper with relevant practitioner forums directly, beginning with its Governance Forum on 23 June. If you would like to feed into the SFHA response please contact Alan Stokes, Policy Lead.
