Vale Farm 2006

20 October 2006

The Council said the new contract with LC, which started in September, would be better but users have their doubts. There have been at least three late openings, one of them delaying the swimmers who were prepared to wait for over 30 minutes. Even then the pool could only open because the Duty Manager acted as lifeguard. This works for the swimmers but what if there was an incident elsewhere on site?

Problems with showers have continued. These were meant to be fixed in February after five years of complaints. The men's wetside showers have often been excessively hot. These are push button with no means for users to vary the temperature. At other times they have taken over 15 minutes to deliver any warm water. The men's disability shower does have a control dial but water pressure and temperature fluctuate uncomfortably. I can jump out the  water when it suddenly goes scalding but would people with certain disabilities be able to do so?

In the men's wetside changing room there are only four cubicles, one of which is larger, presumably to assist people with disabilities. At least twice in the past the bench in this larger cubicle has become loose and eventually fallen off. About two months ago this happened again and was removed. It  reappeared this week only after I wrote to a councillor about it. LC's excuse was that  "The bench in question was removed whilst awaiting parts." 

 I  looked at the repaired bench yesterday. It was loose so that it could be rocked in such a way that will probably break it again in the near future. While the solid wall had a  bracket for the bench  the connection to the partition wall used a piece of old timber. This was not the quality of repair one might hope for from a major company, especially after such a long wait. After writing to the councillor, a chair was provided till the bench was refitted. While better than nothing, the chair was of limited use as there is only one hook inside the cubicle.

And the garden referred to below? Shortly after the 8 June piece appeared the area was strimmed. This removed the weeds above ground level and damaged some of the relatively few plantings. It is now a display of lower growing weeds, often festooned with litter. At one end the bushes are encroaching onto one of the parking spaces.  

8 June 2006

For many years there was a strip of dense bushes with some trees between the car park and the pool hall. I pointed out that the bushes were so overgrown that it was difficult  to use the adjacent spaces without parking over the line between bays. All that was needed was a trim and some regular cutting back. Instead, early in 2005 I think, all the bushes were cut down.

When I complained about this vandalism an LC  manager wrote on 6.5.06 saying, "Please accept my apologies for the mature bushes being removed from the main flowerbed outside Vale Farm Sports Centre. Unfortunately, when we recently removed all the old undergrowth the remaining plants were in a poor & ragged state and well past their best. Working with the Parks department it was considered better to remove. We are in the process of replacing plants & improving the look of the area."

I dispute that the radical cut back was needed. The new planting was  meager and it was only through good luck that the shrubs survived . In September 2005 I emailed Brent Council saying, "some new planting took place at the start of the summer. Fortunately the plants seem to have survived the late planting in an area without irrigation. However, it will take many years for the plants to provide the kind of cover that was destroyed. The area is often littered and blackberry is well established."  

You can see in the accompanying photo the neglect that has happened since. Not only blackberry is strangling the new plantings but also thistles, nettles, and cooch grass. And the area is often littered. A wildlife garden was not what was intended and even if it were, a better range of plants was called for. 

The men's' wetside changing room is cleaned to a reasonable standard most mornings but not on Saturdays as far as I can tell. Unfortunately the cleaning is usually still going on after swimmers arrive, including trailing and running hoses and cleaning agents being used. For some weeks a very noisy water jet was also being used while customers were changing. 

On 13.5.06 I emailed LC pointing out, yet again, the hazards of their cleaning practices. "Given that a number of early morning swimmers are elderly it is especially important to avoid trip hazards, especially in the changing rooms or on route to the pools. If people use glasses, they are not likely to have these after changing.2 I asked that  hoses and electrical leads would not be used while customers are in the changing areas but this assurance has not been given.

The floors are hard and for older people a fall can mean a fractured hip and a complete loss of quality of life. I am interested to learn of any leisure centre users who have had accidents due to trips over items placed their by the management. PB

8 March 2006

Showers have improved but are still not entirely reliable. It can take a long time for hot water to come through first thing in the morning. Especially with the recent very cold weather this does not encourage swimmers to bathe before entering the pool. The water pressure varies and there can be sudden short drops in temperature. Since the "repairs were completed over a week ago " critical comments have been added to the customer feedback diary about both the men's and women's wetside showers. 

On the plus side, when the men's showers were vandalised a few days ago the repairs were quickly completed. However, with all its experience of managing leisure centres LC might have been expected to know that, regrettably, vandals will strike and design needs to build in features to reduce opportunities for them. The design of the refurbishment at Vale Farm created opportunities for yobs. The shower pipes are not just external but allow a hand to get behind them. There was not much to prevent even a young boy bending the pipes or even pulling them off the wall. Similarly, the lowering of the ceiling meant that panels could be dislodged and damaged by children standing on the benches. 

26 February 2006   World record for delayed plumbing repairs?      Complaints that don't count

The wetside showers at Vale Farm this morning were freezing cold. While the pool temperature is back to normal and sink taps have hot water, the showers are still not fixed despite a sign, still up today, saying they would be fixed on Friday February 24th. These showers have not been reliable since they were installed by LC in 2000 as part of their contract to refurbish Vale Farm. This was the same refurbishment that installed  bog standard white melamine / chipboard  sink units unsuited to a  wetside changing room so perhaps the plumbing fittings  were similarly unfit for purpose. At any rate, the building contractor  for the refurbishment was bankrupt by July 2002. 

I am not sure when I made my first complaint about the showers but by May 2001 I had escalated my concerns to a councillor, saying, "The men's wet side showers (and others possibly) are often uncomfortably hot. As well as being inconvenient this must also be a huge waste of energy. " 

I emailed a council officer in January 2002 noting that "there have been problems with the showers again". Another email to a councillor in June 2002 reported "Finally, showers in the men's changing rooms were hardly working yesterday. On other occasions they have been too hot or too cold." Needless to say, lots of other users were complaining as well. Following a meeting with users in July 2002  the then Manager of Vale Farm noted. "The showers are currently verging on useless. The plumbing in the men’s shower area leaks from every joint, and often there is not sufficient pressure to allow the showers to work at all." 

From the same manager in July 2002 came this reply to another complaint about showers. With regards to the shower what's wrong with them I can't be sure to be honest. We have had to different plumbing companies look at them and both have came up with different solutions. One is that the building company that installed the shower have somehow managed to create a dog leg in the pipe work somewhere in the system air is managing to get in. Hence why they lose all pressure and start to flow slowly. Although the other company say that is to do with an actuator valve that maybe faulty. I plan to action one of the solutions or consult one last company to make sure. From what I have been told the builder that refurbished  the changing rooms went under so I can't even chase them for a solution. I have been told that to fix one would solve the problem of the temperature and the pressure, although as you may well understand there's no point in putting the square peg in the round hole if its not going to fix the problem long term."

There was a meeting on 21 July 2004 of users, council officers and LC representatives. The notes written up by a Council person include: 

"Showers – Problems with temperature fluctuation within the shower areas. Action  The site management team to monitor the temperatures on a daily basis, to check fluctuations.  Maintenance Team to check the temperatures to investigate whether there is any proactive means of improving temperature variations."

In July 2004 Brent Council printed results of a survey of leisure users from October 2003. http://snipurl.com/my8d  The most popular suggestions for improvements included  improve the changing rooms, shower facilities, cleanliness and staff attitude. The council added , "actions are being taken to make improvements" and specified  "capital works to improve the showers at Charteris and Vale Farm Sports Centres".

It seems that Brent Council has accepted that the refurbishment undertaken by LC in 2000 was unsatisfactory as a report from the Director of Environment on 12.4.05 said. "Initial reports indicate that there will need to be some large ‘one off improvements’ for example to refurbish the wet side changing accommodation..." http://www.brent.gov.uk/commins.nsf/a0f5d6677254169780256fe10058fa88/a7279d961564066b80256fdb005b6b82 

Two months later the council recorded (see below) showers were still an issue at Vale Farm and that LC was slow to repair and maintain. 

I had a letter published on 2.2.06 in the Wembley Observer complaining that the showers were still a problem after three weeks closure for maintenance over Xmas. I also pointed out that Vale Farm prices had been increased again, after only nine months. At the time I wrote the letter LC were saying they would be fixed by the end of January. On February 10th they announced swimmers could use the pool a half price due to the continuing problems with the showers. 

This morning the receptionist could not say what the problems were and, as usual, there are no updates saying why the continuing delay. In fact, some recent statements have been quite misleading as they imply that the problems are recent and not an issue over five years. All we know is that he plumbers are coming back on Monday.

To add to the misery of users, this morning there was a very cold, strong northerly wind and the main doors of Vale Farm were wide open. The changing rooms are draughty at the best of times but feel much colder when these automatic doors fail, a not unusual occurrence. 

1 February 2006

A year ago in response to a Freedom of Information request Brent Council said that they had not produced any formal reports for senior managers or councillors in connection with the performance of Leisure Connection. A year on and still there are no formal reports despite the fact that LC has a dodgy record and is being considered for a new contract at Vale Farm. At least there is now an analysis of customer complaints from April to November 2005. This shows a total of 62 complaints. It is not clear if this list includes complaints made in the customer diary or on customer feedback cards. I will seek clarification and update here. 

Update  A council officer has written, "The summary does not include comments made in the feedback / communication diary".  How convenient for  embarrassed councillors, officers and LC! While for some items there may be some debate as to is it a complaint, for many other comments it is quite clearly a complaint. It would be a simple matter for a council officer and an LC manager to go thought the diary once a month and agree what are the complaints. In how many other LC centres does this sort of feedback weasel its way out of complaint statistics? 

The FOI request did yield a copy of the minutes of "Annual Meeting - Leisure Connection and LB Brent" held on 24.6.05.  Under "Overall Improvement" is:

 "LBB and LC recognise that cleaning at Vale Farm has improved but there needs to be greater consistency in standards and LC will continue to concentrate their efforts in this area." The list of improvements is offset by "Areas Highlighted as still needing Improvement". The full list reads:

The showers are indeed ongoing and, no buts, a major source of customer dissatisfaction. An action from a meeting between the council, LC and early morning swimmers in July 2004 was, "The site management team to monitor the temperatures on a daily basis, to check fluctuations.  Maintenance Team to check the temperatures to investigate whether there is any proactive means of improving temperature variations." 

Over a year later users were told the centre would be closed for three weeks over Christmas for maintenance work. Despite the closure the showers are still often far too hot or freezing cold and this year's feedback diary hissing with complaints about this. Users were told showers would be fixed at the end of January and now, for reasons not explained to us, the work will be at the end of February. 

While cleaning has improved for early morning swimmers there are still issues. The cleaning is not done at night. Therefore the already cold and often draughty changing rooms are further chilled by the floor being wet. And of course the wet increases the chances of the locker floors being stained by wet and possibly muddy soles. There are still complaints about unacceptable levels of dirt later in the day as the cleaners are not full time. Other staff are meant to take an interest in cleaning but don't always. Another Action from the July 2004 meeting was "Employment of additional full time cleaner." 

Last November at least two people signed statements about lifeguards not constantly monitoring the pool. As of last week the reply from Brent Council's Health & Safety as to what was happening with these was, "The issue of lifeguarding at Vale Farm is still current and I am therefore unable to provide you with any further information at this time."  I

11 October 2005 

On  October 3rd I reported two further incidents at Vale Farm to the Health & Safety Executive. On both occasions a sole life guard failed to watch the pool for extended periods while cleaning. The Healthy and Safety Inspector wrote to me on October 10th.

"Thank you for your email with reference to concerns regarding lifeguard duties at the above centre. Further to my letter dated 16th June 2005 and during my visit to the centre on 4th October 2005, it has been noted that the centres' procedures are designed around the Health and Safety Executive guidance publication; HSG179, Managing Health and Safety in Swimming Pools, which for the purposes of maintaining user safety are adequate at this time.

However, it would appear that these procedures have not been fully adhered to and in order to satisfy the duty of ensuring the health, safety and welfare of employees and other users of the premises; an improvement notice has been served upon Leisure Connections Ltd. I shall be revisiting the premises after 3rd November 2005 to inspect the remedial action regarding lifeguard supervision and associated documentation."

For the last few weeks shower temperatures in the men's wetside changing rooms have been a comfortable temperature on the six or so occasions I have used the pool. Cleaning inside the this area, at least for early morning swimmers has been good. The pool is noticeably more free of litter though I did notice this morning rubbish around the pool including  a used  sticking plaster near the entrance to the changing rooms. PB

29 August 2005

This morning, for the second time this month that I know of, there was a delay in opening the centre due to a duty manager not turning up. After the  non-opening on August 6th John Beaumont complained by email. The Duty Manager emailed back making his excuses and saying "...I will speak to Ben (centre manager) to ensure that a backup plan is in place for such incidents that may occur in the future." 

As it was a bank holiday today the centre was scheduled to open at 8 am. Dozens of  people accumulated until one of the staff found a way into the building and led customers in through another door. However there were further delays while waiting for the lights in the changing rooms to be switched on. For those who turned up by 8 am the total delay was over twenty minutes. 

Today the floor around the pool was littered, including two used sticking plasters about five and ten meters from the lifeguard's chair. The plasters were there when I arrived and when I left the pool at about 8.45.  There was more rubbish in the pool. Again there were used sticking plasters, bits of tissue and what appeared to be several pieces of chewing gum. I have reported failure to clean in and around the pool several times over the last few months. 

The customer feedback book has had several recent comments about either no equipment or poorly maintained gym equipment. I have written several comments in the book about the men's wetside showers being too hot and someone has commented that the temperature was a reasonable temperature when tested some time later. No one has responded to my observation that some users are standing on the shower pipes in order to access a thermostatic valve for the showers in the roof above. This is clearly not safe and may damage the pipes. It is also further evidence that the shower temperatures are often not acceptable. One effect of uncomfortable temperatures that I have pointed out is that people avoid showering before entering the pool. For many years showering was entirely optional at Vale Farm and it was only after a meeting with users and the council last year that any real attempt to make showering mandatory was started.

Several months ago Leisure Connection put up signs saying it was going to investigate the showers, after many complaints about them being too hot or too cold. As far as I am aware no customers have been told about the result of these investigations. 

For some time the shower for the disabled has been in a poor state. The shower fitting is broken so needs to be hand held. The shower hose has lost part of its spiral binding so it will be an easy target for any vandal. 

I have pointed out on several occasions that the usually solitary lifeguard has not constantly watched the pool. One reason for this is additional duties. These include checking for tickets, recording in a folder the "headcount", and sluicing the sides of the pool. With others I have witnessed lifeguards walking so they cannot see all of the pool while sluicing. I have reported this to the Health & Safety Executive (see below). HSE referred the matter to Brent Council Environmental Services, the department that is supposed to manage the contracts at Vale Farm. The Brent Health & Safety Inspector wrote to me; 

"As a result of the findings of our visit in response to your contact, we do not consider it appropriate to implement enforcement action..."   Her letter also claimed that cleaning and tidying duties are undertaken while a relief guard undertakes pool monitoring. This will come as a surprise to early morning swimmers who are used to seeing only one lifeguard apart from handover. There was no second lifeguard present at the times when I reported lack of constant monitoring. 

Re the May entry about the vandalised bushes, some new planting took place at the start of the summer. Fortunately the plants seem to have survived the late planting in an area without irrigation.  However, it will take many years for the plants to provide the kind of cover that was destroyed. The area is often littered and blackberry is well established.  PB

28 May 2005

The standard of cleaning in the wetside men's changing rooms has improved since the hiring of a new cleaner.  

The floor of the pool has generally been more free of litter. One exception was yesterday morning when clearly the pool had not been vacuumed. Water has been very cloudy on a number of occasions and somewhat cloudy a lot recently. There has been no response to requests for an explanation other than being told that the chemical parameters are not being breached.

Yesterday  at opening time the men's wetside shower was so hot as to prevent people using it. While happening less often there are still problems with the shower temperatures. 

On Thursday 26 May early morning swimmers were not able to use  the pool for about 15 minutes due to the late arrival of the lifeguard. 

There was a different type of lifeguard trouble on Monday 23rd. At one end of the pool is an exit. Many of the older swimmers prefer to keep the doors of this exit closed to make for a more comfortable temperature. The early morning lifeguard was asked if he would close the doors and refused. One of the swimmers went to reception and the lifeguard was told to close the doors. This was done with a show of temper. When one of the older women swimmers asked what the problem was the lifeguard swore at her using the f word. 

This month I sent a letter to the Health & Safety Executive about incidents were lifeguards have failed to monitor the pool. All of the examples listed had another witness. As well as watching over two pools the usual single lifeguard has to collect tickets, do a headcount and enter results into a folder, and at times wash down the side of the pool. These duties seem to be the cause of lifeguards taking their eyes of the pool or turning their backs on  the major part of it for many seconds.

Some time ago  I pointed out that the bushes at one side of the car park needed trimming to enable to parking space to be used. Several months ago almost all of the bushes were cut down. Thus an attractive  leafy area and home to wildlife was raised. For a long time the branches were left and when they were finally removed I hoped there would at least be some new planting.  Nothing has been done and now the area is dominated by blackberry and rubbish. 

I do not who is responsible - Brent, LC or a contractor hired by one them - but the result is crass vandalism of a mature set of bushes.

PB