Post 18 | New Reporting Procedure

We have decided to share with you a new reporting procedure to replace the one promoted back in August.

The new procedure is….

In the ‘To’ field email the following people/ authorities.

Community@rhul.ac.uk

environmentalhealth@runnymede.gov.uk

contactcentre@surrey.police.uk

safer.runnymede@runnymede.gov.uk

In the ‘cc’ field add Andrea and also your friend and mine Cllr. Nick Prescott.

cllr.andrea.berardi@runnymede.gov.uk

cllr.nick.prescot@runnymede.gov.uk

Please then supply the information as before….

Date & time of the ASB

The source – where has it come from / where did it take place

The nature – what has occurred

The impact – what impact has it had on you and/ or your family

Supply evidence (if possible) – photos / video / audio recording

Provide your name and address

So why the change? There are a few reasons….

We are still agreed that RHUL should be primarily responsible for the behaviour of their students and not the already hard-pressed local authorities. But the action taken by RHUL remains ineffective and we are now aware of a couple of households this academic year where ASB continues despite RHUL’s invention. (Today RHUL still remains reluctant to enforce their conduct policy and subsequently there is no deterrent for the small minority to change their behaviour.) By making these agencies aware, it is felt that the likelihood of repeat offence is diminished and the victim has an increased chance of a resolution.

RHUL and the other agencies listed have a Memorandum Of Understanding (MOU) set up between themselves. The purpose of a MOU is for the parties involved to share data in order to manage a problem. It would appear that the MOU devised here is not working and that reporting data is just a tick box exercise with no actual understanding or subsequent decisive action taking place. If we now report complaints to all agencies it will help them understand the extent of the problem. As an added benefit, RHUL and its supporters will no longer be able to choose which parts of the evidence to promote when defending the student ASB issue.

RHUL’s promoted (and I use the word loosely) procedure to register a complaint is convoluted. For most, it is off putting and difficult to navigate with many asking themselves if they are sending their complaint to the right place. By adding all the agencies to the ‘To’ field this problem is overcome. The agencies can then decide if it pertains to their department or not. Yes, you may get an email back saying that your complaint is not relevant to their agency but for the ones that it is, they are duty bound to record it and dispense action as required. And as discussed, we understand it is inefficient for the agencies all to manage one complaint but we feel that the onus  is on them to get a grip of the reporting procedure they promote and their MOU. Until they do so, in order to make reporting easy for you and me, this is the best solution we have come up with.

Cllr. Nick Prescott and the other Conservatives recently distributed their newsletter ‘Intouch’ that I have shared below. **See media** In the area highlighted, it appears that the claim made by Cllr. Nick Prescott could be misleading. Here, he touches upon the Neighbourhood Plan, and from this large document he focuses on the adhesion between ‘Town & Gown’ and a lack of ability to tackle the HMO issue practically….

As previously discussed, an Article 4 Direction, requires anyone who wants to convert a residential house into an HMO to gain planning permission (which could be granted of course) whereas, at the moment, the owner of the property does not to apply for planning permission as the conversion to an HMO is classed as ‘permitted development’. To hear this in action in Bristol, a city with a big student population, you should listen to this Radio 4 ‘PM’ link from 38 min 45 sec minutes. Here you will hear a local estate agent explain how the new licence (The Article 4 Direction) along with other factors, has led to landlords leaving the rental market. So we would argue that this is anecdotal evidence that an Article 4 Direction can be used as a tool to stop the proliferation of HMOs here in Egham & Englefield Green. (The whole piece, that starts before this time stamp, is of interest and well worth a listen.)

Last week I sent Cllr. Nick Prescott an email asking the following question, ‘What evidence does the council have that projects a reduction in HMO.’ He failed to answer that in his reply. So I asked the question again at the Councillors’ Surgery held Saturday gone. There, he said he was unaware of the statement in his newsletter and would look into it. We think it is important he explains the source as it has been promoted and before it becomes gospel. Personally though, I think Cllr. Prescott seems more concerned with protecting the interests of HMO landlords than the interest of local residents and therefore, in my eyes, is not fit for office.

In the coming weeks, please be prepared for the Englefield Green Neighbourhood Plan to omit the Article 4 Direction requested by some residents. For the reasons above, we think it would be beneficial for him and us to hear from student ASB victims firsthand.

Best wishes,

A Gnat