For months, Wandsworth Council has downplayed the significance of its C3 rating from the Regulator of Social Housing. But at Wednesday’s Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the reality caught up.
Councillors and residents pressed housing officers and Cabinet Member for Housing Ayden Dikerdem on what went wrong. They got few answers and little urgency. What emerged instead was a picture of a housing department that appears comfortable ignoring problems until forced to act, then scrambling for fixes while making excuses.
Warnings ignored, inspections delayed
The committee heard that the council relied for years on a “sampling” approach to stock condition surveys, checking only a small proportion of homes and using the results to generalise across the borough. The Regulator’s report was clear: this approach was no longer good enough.
When questioned directly, officers admitted that the Regulator had raised concerns before — but only “intimated” them. No formal change was made until the downgrade arrived.
Councillor Angela Graham asked, “Were we asleep at the wheel?” Officers did not deny it.
In his remarks, the elected official ultimately in charge, Cllr Dikerdem, acknowledged the regulator’s findings but described the C3 rating as “based on whether you can evidence things, not necessarily whether the things are being done.” He added: “There is not a set process for being regraded — it’s at their discretion.”
The implication, repeated several times, was that the council had already begun making improvements and was being marked down for poor documentation rather than poor service.
But councillors weren’t convinced. Nor were residents.
No timeline, no urgency
There is still no published timeline for when Wandsworth expects to be regraded or meet the standards required. A new five-year stock survey programme is only now being commissioned. The internal “tracker” meant to monitor improvements is not public, and no deadlines were given for clearing backlogs or reassessing risk.
One representative pointed out that the council had effectively waited for a regulatory inspection before acting — a charge that officers did not directly rebut.
Leaseholders locked out of safety work
Despite sharing buildings, corridors, and fire systems with council tenants, leaseholders have been excluded from many of the council’s new focus groups and consultations on repairs and safety.
When questioned about this, officers said leaseholders had been invited to a separate complaints session, but they gave no clear reason why leaseholders were not involved in shaping core housing policies — particularly those affecting shared safety infrastructure.
Representatives from the Borough Residents’ Forum warned that the council risks treating leaseholders as an afterthought, despite their equal vulnerability in mixed-tenure estates.
Perhaps most strikingly, the council admitted it still has no plans to implement Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) for vulnerable residents. Officers said they were waiting for further guidance from the government — despite recent fires and gas explosions that suggest Wandsworth urgently needs its own internal protocols.
One member pointed to the Burke Close fire, in which leaseholders were left to evacuate on their own, without alarms, marshals, or communication. When asked why the council had taken no responsibility, officers noted the three properties that had burned were leasehold. The gas company is responsible for the gas; the electricity company for the electricity; leaseholders for their homes; and another contractor for asbestos removal; despite being a council property and council land, it claims no responsibility.
That simply wasn’t good enough for Cllr Ravi Govindia. “You’re the freeholder. Safeguarding is your job,” he said.
The incident, which left three homes burned out and dozens evacuated to temporary accommodation, has come to symbolise what many see as a deeper pattern: a council that deflects responsibility when it matters most.
Complaints and excuses
The Council received 329 housing complaints last year — only 71% were answered on time. The Housing Ombudsman issued 25 findings against Wandsworth, with 108 orders for action. Yet when these figures were discussed, there was little self-reflection.
One resident said the Council only responds when forced — and even then, too slowly.
Even now, with the C3 rating in place, the meeting ended with no firm commitments, no public deadlines, and few reassurances.
A culture of impunity?
What the committee exposed was not just administrative failure, but a deeper pattern of passivity and impunity.
Whether it’s safety inspections, leaseholder engagement, or emergency planning, the same behaviours repeat: problems are spotted, concerns are raised, but nothing happens — until the situation becomes unignorable.
Cllr Dikerdem may not have caused these failings, but his refusal to fully acknowledge their seriousness or outline a path forward only compounds the problem.
Wandsworth’s C3 isn’t just a technical rating. It’s a mirror held up to a housing service that has too often prioritised paperwork and process over people and responsibility.
