Vale Farm Latest

Vale Farm May - June 2004

See also Escalated Complaints & April & May 2004

Despite the meeting on July 22nd familiar complaints continue. The pool floor had much rubbish first thing on the mornings of July 31, August 7 and 9. On August 2 and 9 lockers were not clean. No sight yet of the action plan from the meeting or the smaller Customer Forum held a week earlier. On two occasions reception staff could not readily find the recently started Customer Feedback Diary but others have already added comments about cold showers and how changing rooms doors being left open had encouraged a man to dawdle by the women's changing rooms.

On July 22nd there was a meeting at Vale Farm arranged by Brent Council. Attending were 25 early morning swimmers and senior managers from LC. There will be no minutes but an action plan from LC is awaited. In short, much dissatisfaction was expressed by swimmers though it was accepted there had been some recent improvements. The showers in the women's changing rooms have not improved even though the men's are much better. PB

I have received a letter dated 16.6.04 from John Beaumont about his Vale Farm Membership.

"Last month I changed my yearly peak swimming ticket to a yearly peak gym and swimming ticket. My temporary membership card expired yesterday, but my card is still not being recognized by Vale Farm's computer database..." John understands that the problem is due to LC head office not updating the database.

"This is not the first time I have had problems with my membership card this year. I renewed my swimming ticket in January to expire March '05 but yet again Vale Farm's computer database stated my card had expired, yet again head office had not updated Vale Farm's database."

Update 28.06.04 John has copied to a letter to LC at their head office. see Membership

From: Paul Burns To: Christine Coppack Cc: Rez Cameron
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004
Subject: RE: Vale Farm

Dear Christine, thank you for your email of June 14 in reply to my email of June 8. I am inserting comments beneath your paragraphs and I have added numbers for easier reference.

Damaged lane rope - A temporary cover was used to address one end & new ratchet fitted until replacements ropes could be installed. Lane ropes now replaced.

On June 8 I reported to you, “One of the ropes has a number of longer, more dangerous strands at the deep end.” When Rez was inspecting on Thursday of last week this end was still an exposed. It appears that even after alerting your staff to this hazard at the deep end no temporary measure not taken. Thank you for the new ropes. These unfortunately have there own problems. The limited number of floats on them makes then less visible. One rope has floats bunched at the deep end and this is dangerous for people doing backstroke as the fist red disc if less than one metre from the end of the pool. Swimmers expect the first red to be at least four metres from the end of the pool. I reported this hazard to an attendant this morning.

Duty Manger not available before you left the site - I am sorry but the DM was busy elsewhere in the building, but the lifeguard passed on your comments.

I don’t have a problem with a DM being required elsewhere except when I suspect that this is linked to chronic understaffing.

Injury to swimmer - The incident not reported to staff. The injury would have been treated & a thorough investigation made.

As your lifeguard heard, the man said he had not reported, as he expected nothing to happen if he did. The main issue is the failure of staff either to notice or deal with a hazard that was there at least three weeks. Lane ropes are frequently removed and replaced and the fault should have been obvious. Dealing with casualties is not safety management.

One lane rope missing for early morning Sunday swimmers - Thank you for the information. Comment noted & procedures changed.

Your response might suggest this is a one-off. I have lost count of the number of times over four years I have reported the failure to set up lanes before the pool opens and when requested delays in getting them set up as not enough staff were available.

Water Quality - On investigation I believe the water was a little cloudy for a few days as can happen in pool management from time to time, but water testing continued to be carried out as per procedures & remained well within acceptable parameters until the situation was addressed. You do not mention the cause or likely cause of this problem. I think “a little cloudy” is understating it.

Contract cleaner not starting until 6.15am on the 8th June - Maintenance Manager, Paul O'Brian, who arrives on site at 5.30am was on annual leave. Day and dates of when access would not be available before 6 - 6.15am were given to the contract cleaning company due to one DM having to rely on public transport, but in this case the cleaning company failed to communicate to their staff. I am sorry that cleaning was taking place during your visit, this may happen from time to time but please be assured thorough cleaning will take place.

You seem to suggest that it is acceptable for cleaning to start 30 to 15 minutes before opening time because a member of staff takes leave. Rather than have your customers again face dirty conditions would it not be better to pay for your Duty Manager to take a taxi? It is not good practice for cleaning to take place while customers are present.

Late Opening, Bank Holiday Monday - Please accept my apologies, late notice of sickness was received & cover DM arrived late at site. Late opening is totally unacceptable & disciplinary procedures have been implemented.

The need for disciplinary procedures is puzzling if sickness was the reason.

Pool vacuum - As you correctly state the staff have been instructed to put the vacuum in on a daily basis. In the last few weeks I understand there has been a couple of occasions when the evening DM has made the decision not to place the vac in as they felt the pool was in a clean condition. On one occasion the following morning you noticed some hair in the pool, which you kindly pointed out to the staff who I believe dealt with it immediately.

Firstly, you gave an assurance that the pool would be vacuumed every night. Secondly, it is not possible to inspect the pool without getting into it, even when the water is clear. On several occasions while swimming I have given items to Rez that he could not see from the side. On June 7 I gave the Duty Manager a piece of chewing gum and a half a pair of goggles from the pool and told him there was other debris.

I would like to point out that we have put these procedures in place to ensure that a high level of cleanliness is maintained, which goes over and above normal pool management as there is no legal requirement for any pool to use a vacuum let alone the frequency. Due to the high customer usage at Vale Farm & the desire for good conditions I have reiterated my instruction for daily use. I would appreciate your continued comments, good and bad, to further help me in my management of standards.

I have used many other public pools and I cannot accept that Vale Farm approaches what you call “normal pool management”. Many of the pools I have used are outdoor yet none had anything like the level of litter found at Vale Farm over four years. Sadly there are no legal standards. The next best thing are The Pool Water Treatment Advisory Group Guidelines. Does Vale Farm follow all of the relevant guidelines?

Whilst I am happy to continue to respond to your e-mails I would much rather meet with yourself to discuss any issues with regard to your experiences at Vale Farm. I would be pleased to work with a regular user, such as yourself, to help us improve our service & meet the needs of the community.

Sue Harper of Brent Council has a long-standing invitation to meet with me and other early morning swimmers. Perhaps you and Sue could attend together? I think it desirable that the Council is represented at such a meeting. I am willing to help, as I have in the past, to publicise such a meeting.

From: Paul Burns Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2004 8:50 AM
To: Christine Coppack Cc: Rez Cameron
Subject: Vale Farm - Continuing Hazard, Pool not Vacuumed and Cleaner Denied Access

Dear Christine, thank you for your reply to my last email a week ago. You wrote then that, "The new incidents you mention will need to be investigated. I will come back to you ASAP with a full response." I look forward to receiving that response.

One of the incidents was swimming lane ropes with exposed, sharp strands of wire that had already cut someone. I checked the ropes today. All three ropes had exposed strands at the shallow end, though these were all shorter than the worst reported last week. One of the ropes has a number of longer, more dangerous strands at the deep end. The discs suspended from the wire cannot be relied on to protect swimmers from these strands as the discs can be moved up to 30 cm along the wire, leaving the strands very exposed.

I understand that it may take some time to take delivery of new lane ropes. However, I am concerned that not even temporary protective covering has been placed over any strand ends that cannot be removed. I am also concerned that despite advising you of this over a week ago and mentioning someone who had been cut by a strand, the hazard remains.

This morning the floor and several lockers were filthy. I asked the cleaner who was working in the wetside changing rooms about this. He apologised and explained that while he had turned up at Vale Farm to begin cleaning at 5am, no one has turned up to let him in until 6.15am. I asked if this had happened before and he said it had, last week.

On 17.5.04 you emailed me that, "We have now instructed the staff at Vale Farm to vacuum [the pool floor] every night, & to continue to spot check at regular intervals." This followed years of complaints about debris in the pool. Both today and two days ago, Sunday, the pool had not been vacuumed. On Sunday morning I was the second person into the pool. After my first length I showed the lifeguard a clump of hair found on the floor. This morning there was much debris. On both occasions I reported the matter to the Duty Manager as I left.

It seems that yet again Leisure Connection assurances to make good at Vale Farm are worthless.

From: Paul Burns To: Christine Coppack Cc: Rez Cameron
Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 9:11 AM Subject: Vale Farm - Further Issues

Dear Christine, Things have improved with regards to rubbish in the pool. This might have been my first plaster-free week at Vale Farm in five years. There are further issues I wish to report, including one relating safety.

John Costa, one of the regular early morning swimmers, told me today that Vale Farm opened 20 minutes late yesterday (Monday).

Last Friday lockers had not been cleaned or not all cleaned properly. One had a ticket from the day before and others had smears. I made Rez and his new colleague, Derek, aware of this as they were at Vale Farm on a monitoring visit. I also pointed out to them how one of the lane ropes was again slack, making for lane widths that changed.

On Sunday I started swimming at about 8.25am. One of the lane ropes was missing but was put up some minutes after I had pointed this out to the lifeguard. You will know that swimming lanes not being set up when swimmers arrive has been one of the issues Vale Farm swimmers have often complained about.

On Sunday as I was finishing swimming I chatted with a man I had not spoken to before. He showed me a scar on his hand and told me that about a three or four weeks ago he had cut it on a steel wire at the end of the lane rope at Vale Farm. I looked at the ropes and found that there was one end with sharp, splayed steel fibres protruding. These strands could easily be brushed against or grabbed and if done with some force would slash or puncture. Incidentally, this was not the rope that had just been put in place.

I asked the lifeguard to call the Duty Manager to show him the hazard. The duty manager was not available so I showed the lifeguard and asked the man who had been cut to show her the scar. The man also told the lifeguard that he had not bothered to report the accident, as he felt nothing came of complaints at Vale Farm.

On my way out I asked to see the Duty Manger and waited. As there was no sign of the Duty Manager after some minutes I asked reception to be sure to pass on that there steel ropes had ends that could cut.

I was therefore surprised today, Tuesday, to find that there was still a steel rope end with fibres that could be touched. The fibres today were more out of the way than on Sunday and not as long but still present an unnecessary and unacceptable hazard.

I am also concerned that for at least three weeks, since the man cut his hand on the rope, the problem has continued. Three unsatisfactory explanations might account for this. Either none of the staff setting out the ropes noticed the hazard, or they noticed it and did not report it, or they reported it and no action was taken.

I ask the Council to investigate further. In many pools the ends of lane ropes have covers. Could these be provided at Vale Farm as well as better maintenance of rope ends?

Finally, the pool water has been cloudy for a week now. It was worst on Monday and Tuesday of last week. I saw it for myself on the Monday and some early morning swimmers used the learner pool where the water was clear. One couple told me that when they came on Tuesday morning the main pool looked and tasted so bad they left after four lengths.