Local changes in Huddersfield

Find out more about how your views have influenced change at a local level...

February 2021

You said: Residents were unhappy with the grounds maintenance service and some were unclear about the standard of service they should expect.

We did: We visited the estate to assess the performance of the grounds maintenance contractor. Where services had fallen short of the specification, we brought to this to their attention. Any shortcomings were quickly addressed. We worked with contractors to develop an 'action plan' to improve the appearance of the estate. Where improvement works were outside of the contract, we sought quotes and consulted with customers to find out whether they would be happy to pay for them. We agreed to cover the cost of minor works such as gritting and snow clearance so that residents can benefit from a safe and attractive living environment.


July 2021

You said: Residents raised concerns about the misuse of the communal car park.

We did: We asked residents whether they would be in favour of a parking permit scheme. The estate would be inspected daily by a third party to check that all vehicles were displaying a permit. The consultation did not yield enough responses for us to put the parking permit scheme in place. Instead, we used the opportunity to remind customers to park their vehicles considerately and responsibly, in accordance with their tenancy agreements.


December 2021

You said: Accent received a petition from customers, campaigning for improvements to the upkeep of the scheme.

We did: We visited the estate to speak with customers who were unhappy face-to-face. We used this opportunity to make sure that all customers were aware of what their service charges pay for and what standard of service they should expect from our grounds maintenance contractor. We identified that moss on the paths needed to be removed and treated, two beds needed to be weeded and a shrub needed trimming. We will consult with customers in the coming year about whether they would be happy to pay an additional charge for an enhanced service and improvements to the way the scheme is landscaped.

February 2021

You said: Residents were unhappy with the grounds maintenance service and some were unclear about the standard of service they should expect.

We did: We visited the estate to assess the performance of the grounds maintenance contractor. Where services had fallen short of the specification, we brought to this to their attention. Any shortcomings were quickly addressed. We worked with contractors to develop an 'action plan' to improve the appearance of the estate. Where improvement works were outside of the contract, we sought quotes and consulted with customers to find out whether they would be happy to pay for them. We agreed to cover the cost of minor works such as gritting and snow clearance so that residents can benefit from a safe and attractive living environment.


July 2021

You said: Residents raised concerns about the misuse of the communal car park.

We did: We asked residents whether they would be in favour of a parking permit scheme. The estate would be inspected daily by a third party to check that all vehicles were displaying a permit. The consultation did not yield enough responses for us to put the parking permit scheme in place. Instead, we used the opportunity to remind customers to park their vehicles considerately and responsibly, in accordance with their tenancy agreements.


December 2021

You said: Accent received a petition from customers, campaigning for improvements to the upkeep of the scheme.

We did: We visited the estate to speak with customers who were unhappy face-to-face. We used this opportunity to make sure that all customers were aware of what their service charges pay for and what standard of service they should expect from our grounds maintenance contractor. We identified that moss on the paths needed to be removed and treated, two beds needed to be weeded and a shrub needed trimming. We will consult with customers in the coming year about whether they would be happy to pay an additional charge for an enhanced service and improvements to the way the scheme is landscaped.

February 2021

You said: Residents were unhappy with the grounds maintenance service and some were unclear about the standard of service they should expect.

We did: We visited the estate to assess the performance of the grounds maintenance contractor. Where services had fallen short of the specification, we brought to this to their attention. Any shortcomings were quickly addressed. We worked with contractors to develop an 'action plan' to improve the appearance of the estate. Where improvement works were outside of the contract, we sought quotes and consulted with customers to find out whether they would be happy to pay for them. We agreed to cover the cost of minor works such as gritting and snow clearance so that residents can benefit from a safe and attractive living environment.


July 2021

You said: Residents raised concerns about the misuse of the communal car park.

We did: We asked residents whether they would be in favour of a parking permit scheme. The estate would be inspected daily by a third party to check that all vehicles were displaying a permit. The consultation did not yield enough responses for us to put the parking permit scheme in place. Instead, we used the opportunity to remind customers to park their vehicles considerately and responsibly, in accordance with their tenancy agreements.


December 2021

You said: Accent received a petition from customers, campaigning for improvements to the upkeep of the scheme.

We did: We visited the estate to speak with customers who were unhappy face-to-face. We used this opportunity to make sure that all customers were aware of what their service charges pay for and what standard of service they should expect from our grounds maintenance contractor. We identified that moss on the paths needed to be removed and treated, two beds needed to be weeded and a shrub needed trimming. We will consult with customers in the coming year about whether they would be happy to pay an additional charge for an enhanced service and improvements to the way the scheme is landscaped.

August 2020

You said: In 2020, we took the decision to close communal lounges in all schemes across the country. The aim was to minimise contact between residents and to reduce the risk of coronavirus spreading. As the country began to emerge from lockdown, some residents wanted the communal lounges to reopen.

We did: We consulted with residents to determine whether they would be in favour of reopening the communal lounge and what safety measures they would like to see in place if the communal lounge were to reopen.

 

February 2021

You said: Residents were unhappy with the grounds maintenance service and some were unclear about the standard of service they should expect.

We did: We visited the estate to assess the performance of the grounds maintenance contractor. Where services had fallen short of the specification, we brought to this to their attention. Any shortcomings were quickly addressed. We worked with contractors to develop an 'action plan' to improve the appearance of the estate. Where improvement works were outside of the contract, we sought quotes and consulted with customers to find out whether they would be happy to pay for them. We agreed to cover the cost of minor works such as gritting and snow clearance so that residents can benefit from a safe and attractive living environment.


July 2021

You said: Residents raised concerns about the misuse of the communal car park.

We did: We asked residents whether they would be in favour of a parking permit scheme. The estate would be inspected daily by a third party to check that all vehicles were displaying a permit. The consultation did not yield enough responses for us to put the parking permit scheme in place. Instead, we used the opportunity to remind customers to park their vehicles considerately and responsibly, in accordance with their tenancy agreements.


December 2021

You said: Accent received a petition from customers, campaigning for improvements to the upkeep of the scheme.

We did: We visited the estate to speak with customers who were unhappy face-to-face. We used this opportunity to make sure that all customers were aware of what their service charges pay for and what standard of service they should expect from our grounds maintenance contractor. We identified that moss on the paths needed to be removed and treated, two beds needed to be weeded and a shrub needed trimming. We will consult with customers in the coming year about whether they would be happy to pay an additional charge for an enhanced service and improvements to the way the scheme is landscaped.

Google translate Google translate
click to choose
Colour contrast Contrast
default
high
Font size Text size
down
default
up
svg_logocutout svgsvgsvgsvgsvgsvgsvgsvgsvgsvg