Uttlesford see also Dunmow and Stansted & List of Customer Complaints 9.5.12 Freedom of Information
Request Reveals Serious Accident to a Toddler at Dunmow The file note has removed the names of members of the public involved,
but provides many other details. If the note is accurate in all respects, the
essentials of what happened are as follows.
Documents obtained from the District Council (UDC) under Freedom of Information tell the kind
of story long familiar on LCW – poor cleaning, slow repairs and questionable responses
to safety issues. The request was limited for the most part to November 2011 to
February 2012. Extracts from documents appear below. Blue text represents words used. Link
to full documents cited Held between LC and UDC. PFI = Private Finance Initiative, which means that
the consortium led by LC is responsible for all maintenance and repairs at Lord
Butler, which the consortium built. However,
issues at other sites that are not PFI are also discussed. Disabled change: Still issues at both
sites. Water temps at Great Dunmow fixed
but issues remain with the hatches in the ceiling. Basin temps fixed at Lord Butler but shower
remains an issue. Air condition units in gym (presumably
Great Dunmow – see below)
Discussions continue with Emcor (a provider of engineering
services to LC) as to the lifespan of the units. Dry side change A council officer “...had
received a number of complaints regarding how slippery the village change was
at Great Dunmow”. LC to take receipt of slip test kit ... when next available.” (But notice how nothing
appears to happen for at least nine weeks – see the next two PFI meetings
below.) Cleaning across the
contract is still an issue. No
timescales as yet for in-house bid, however, it was estimated that this would
be looked at within the next 3 months. (No hurry then!) PFI
Monthly Contract Liaison Meeting Held 14.12.11 Disabled change Water temperature at
Dunmow had now been fixed. There were still
outstanding issues with the showers at Lord Butler. Air condition units in gym Still
remains an issue. One a/c unit to be
moved from Mountfitchet Romeera to Great Dunmow to see if that assists. (Robbing
Peter to pay Paul?) Dry side change This was a health
and safety issue and needed looking at and resolving. (But no sign of it
being resolved by the next meeting – see below.) PFI
Monthly Contract Liaison Meeting Held 1.2.12 Air condition units in gym Still
remains an issue (from at least 23.11.11). One a/c unit to be moved from MR to GD to see if that assists, awaiting
costings from Emcor. Village change Would look at how
many incidents had occurred. (The
minutes suggest that nothing has happened to reduce the chance of slips since the
November meeting learned of a number of incidents
and the December meeting minutes recorded, “This was a health
and safety issue and needed looking at and resolving.”) Pool Temperatures A group of parents
had got together to complain about the temperature of the pools at Lord
Butler. KG had offered to meet the
mothers which they declined. JK said the
thermometer was calibrated on a monthly by an outside company. LC said that the temperature of the pool was
the same as Haverhill’s therefore could not understand the issue. (But seven days later –
see below – there is reason to suspect that LC’s thermometer is not reliable.) Contract cleaners
had not been good across the contract or at Maldon, this was being reviewed.
(With the same urgency that other issues are addressed?) Great Dunmow Leisure Centre Inspection Report 12.12.11
8.15 am
Main pool: Spectator area very bad.
Through clean of tiles badly marked, lots of rubbish under seat Ladies Dry side Drains – hair blocking water and
soap not going down Corridor: Fluff sports hall window
ledge Male toilets: Cubicles, urinals,
mirrors, sinks and taps need cleaning.
Floor by urinal needs cleaning/replacing Disabled toilet: Toilet bowl discoloured, sink/taps need
cleaning Gym: Water fountain very badly
marked, three pieces of equipment out.
No gym staff therefore people not using towels and leaving sweat marks when
finished with equipment, particularly in weight area. All plug holes need replacing
throughout the centre. The centre especially downstairs,
corridors and wet change is starting to look tired, worn out and unloved. When no one was using the swimming
pools I asked Emcor to check temperatures using their calibrated thermometer. Learner
28.8 Main 26.5 Then no more than 5 mins later I
asked the duty manager to check using centres thermometer- Learner 30.7 Main 28.9 The FOI requested copies of Quest reports. Quest is a quality assurance scheme
for leisure centres that involves a scheduled visit, checking of paperwork,
site inspection and a separate unannounced mystery visit. While the scheme is
far from perfect, the reports often bring issues to the attention of councils,
including health and safety matters. UDC stated, “The council does not get Quest documents we obtain a verbal
report from Leisure Connection...” To rely on a verbal report from a company that
already has an unfortunate track record is a slack approach to performance
management of the contract. The council should be pouring over the Quest
reports and taking LC to task for any failings revealed. PB Angry mums: pool is so
cold it turned our kids blue 26.1.12 Reproduced in full apart from photograph MORE than 100 angry mums have joined
a Facebook group petition to get a leisure centre to up the temperature of its
learner pool – which they say is so cold it turned their children blue. The group was set up by Catherine
Patmore after she and a number of other mums grew tired of Lord Butler Fitness
and Leisure Centre’s refusal to act on requests to make the pool warmer. She said: “I took my three-year-old
daughter to the pool and she was wearing a swimsuit and a wetsuit. But I had to
take her straight out because the water was so cold she started shivering. It has put her off swimming. I have
a younger daughter as well but I wouldn’t dream of taking her after my last
experience.” Mrs Patmore, of Landscape View,
added that many other parents had been forced to take their children to pools
in nearby Haverhill and Cambridge instead. But the mum-of-two said this wasn’t
an option for everybody. “A lot of mums cannot drive so it’s difficult to go
elsewhere – and why should we when we have a perfectly good pool on our
doorstep.” Nicky Agar, of Goddard Way, said her
five-year-old son was so cold during a swimming lesson that his lips turned
blue. “If we go swimming for ‘fun’ we now do so at Haverhill,” she said. And Karen Harding added: “My husband
and I took our children about three months ago. We had to get out in a record
five minutes after all four kids and I turned blue and couldn’t stop shivering.
It ruined a potentially great family day out as we were all so disappointed
that we didn’t enjoy ourselves. Our three little ones were in tears
and it took almost an hour for them to stop shaking. We will not be returning
until something is done.” A spokesman for the leisure centre
said: “The temperature of the learner pool is within industry standards and
industry recommendations. The temperature parameters of the pool are between
29-31.5°C – which is set in partnership with Uttlesford District Council. The learner pool is for people of
all ages – young and old – to learn to swim so it’s important that it’s not too
warm. We would welcome a face to face
discussion with the representatives from the group of local mothers.” Parkside Pool in Cambridge said the
temperature of its baby and learner pool was between 31.5 and 32°C, while
Abbeycroft leisure centre in Haverhill is kept at 30°C and Abbey Pools in
Cambridge between 31°C and 33°C. 17.3.10 UK’s First PFI Swimming Pool Was Closed for Months Due to Leaks The Lord Butler Leisure Centre in Saffron Waldon opened in December 2002. In 2006, The Head of Business Development at Leisure
Connection, described it as “performing
ahead of budget” (PFI Journal,
September). But her argument was no more watertight than the pool at Lord Butler. The following is extracted without deletions from a report prepared for a committee of Uttlesford District Council on 17 March 2009 by its Community Partnerships Manager. http://ggpweb.uttlesford.gov.uk/CMISWebPublic/Binary.ashx?Document=16379 On the 17 August 2009 the swimming pool at the Lord Butler
Fitness & Leisure Centre was closed due to the fact that it was losing
water. Investigations revealed a cracked pipe under the poolside and subsidence in the medium supporting the pipes buried along pool-side. Quotations were sought from specialist companies to undertake the repair work required and negotiations commenced with the Insurers to establish the level of financial cover relating to this type of work. Leisure Connection Ltd. has received 84 complaints about the
pool closure since 17 August 2009. With regard to a discount package, the Company stated that it
would suspend all of the Pure Water (swimming only) memberships and apply a 10%
discount to the other Active memberships.
Additionally, some of the Active members were identified as using the
pool very regularly and a greater discount was negotiated with them. The
balance that the Company needs to strike is to provide an appropriate level of
discount to satisfy the customers whilst ensuring that it continues to be
profitable. (For information, under the
PFI agreement there is the requirement for the Council to participate in a
small amount of profit share once a certain level of profit is achieved by
Leisure Connection Ltd.) At that stage it was not clear how long the repair work would
take so the Company did not indicate the length of time that the discounts
would be applied for. The current situation is that the repair work is nearing completion and it is still anticipated that the pool will be re-opening in mid March. On that basis, Leisure Connection Ltd. has confirmed that the Pure Water memberships will be suspended and a 10% discount will be applied, retrospectively, to all Active memberships from September 2009. On the 21 January representatives from Leisure Connection Ltd., and Linteum Uttlesford Ltd., met with some of the Members of this Committee to discuss the situation regarding the pool and the discount package. Members took the view that the general discount of 10% was insufficient. However, it is recognised that the Company has lost a considerable amount of income due to the pool closure and that not all of the Active memberships use the pool or only use it occasionally. Nice of the Councillors to recognise that the company has lost some of the profit it was expecting, but isn't the whole idea of PFI to hand over responsibilty. The business takes a risk and has an added incentive to get the design, build and maintenance right. The pool is now reopened.PB Tennis Courts Are
On the Line Reproduced
in Full http://www.saffronwalden-reporter.co.uk/content/saffron/news/story.aspx?brand=SAFOnline&category=NewsSaffron&tBrand=cambs24&tCategory=NewsSAF&itemid=WEED01%20Feb%202007%2014%3A38%3A51%3A763
Mrs Bradley said: "The aim is to resolve this matter as quickly as
possible but it is an expensive option and the work needs to be
undertaken by a specialist company.
A decision has been taken to try to resolve the matter in the longer
term and thereby minimise disruption to future customers.
Leisure Connection Ltd looks forward to welcoming Diana Gunton's tennis
sessions back at the centre once the work has been completed, as has
previously been agreed with her." Compare the above user description to this flannel from Uttlesford Council.
As with Quest, that LC could be short listed for recognition in facilities management raises questions about the nature of the awarding body, the level of scrutiny, and to what extent users are involved in the assessment. It would also seem the Council or some of its officers were keen to see LC get the award and share in the reflected glory. PB From the Council's Community And Leisure Committee Minutes for 7 June 2005 http://213.121.206.250/CMIS/Binary.ashx?Document=11340
How councillors would know if LC was doing a good job seems to depend largely on LC, according to an email received from Uttlesford Council on 1.11.05. The Leisure Officer wrote, "I need to make you aware of the fact that the Uttlesford Contract is a Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and not a standard client/contractor contract. Essentially, this means that it is a self-monitoring contract and that Leisure Connection Ltd., provide the District Council with all of the monitoring information." Copies of minutes of the regular PFI Liaison Meetings with LC and an analysis of complaints received and action take were sent. These suggest that in fact the council has actively monitored, not least on standards of cleaning. The minutes, received after a request under the Freedom of Information Act, revealed that some items were repeatedly carried over to future meeting. Thus portable steps to improve disabled access are mentioned in the minutes for 20.8.03 and then crop up in most of the following meetings until 21.9.05, the last set of minutes sent to me. (The glacial speed here might link to the dismay of local Disabled Access Group below.) An issue relating to asbestos was first raised on 21.6.04 and was still awaiting conclusion on 21.9.05. Part of the asbestos delay related to establishing who is responsible, the council or the tenant of the centre concerned. This is worryingly similar to the contractual wrangling that has plagued the UK rail system. Let's hope the consequences in Uttlesford are not fatal. What's
in a name? At a PFI Contract Liaison Meeting on 15 September
2004, "PJ
asked that any reference to “financial penalties” be withdrawn from press
statements and be replaced with “Contract conditions”.
PJ was unhappy with the negative comments in an article published by the
EC. GB confirmed that the reporter
had attended the C & L Committee
meeting and had taken comments out of context." So now you know, if you see
"contract conditions" in your local rag it means LC had to pay up for
its failings. Other Snippets From Contract Meetings Other items that appear in a summary of PFI Contract Liaison Meetings provided by the Council, mostly under under the heading "Issues For Consideration Arising From Monitoring Visits / Correspondence/Service Improvements or Changes", include: 20 April 2004
GB said that she had been very disappointed with the standard of cleaning at both LBF & LC
(Lord
Butler Fitness & Leisure Centre) and GDLC
((Great Dunmow Leisure Centre) during the last monitoring
visits, particularly with regard to the wetside changing rooms and
the condition of the wall tiles. SH
confirmed that she had attended the LBF & LC yesterday and had found the cleaning standard unsatisfactory.
PJ
said that he would be meeting with T to discuss the cleaning standard and would confirm to GB, via e-mail,
any change/agreements made. 5 MAY 2004 Deep Clean of Wetside – LBF & LC SH reported that the cleaning standards had improved greatly since her last visit. PJ
commented that the cleaning had been in line with the contract. However,
it was the standard of cleanliness that had been questioned. CF said that this was
very subjective. However, it
had been noted, outside this meeting, that customers had also commented that standards had
fallen. Both parties hoped
that this had been a short term problem and actions had been put in place to resolve it. 16 JUNE 2004 GB said that the blue wall tiles in the wet side showers at GBLC (Great Dunmow Leisure Centre?) needed cleaning. She emphasised the importance of monitoring the cleaning contractors. 25
AUGUST 2004 GB said that she was very anxious about customer comments in
both the user survey and the press. Councillors had requested a
pre-meeting with her on 7 September prior to C&L Committee to consider the matter especially regarding the cleaning at CF agreed that a cleaning schedule would be put up in the public hanging areas so customers were aware of the cleaning
timetable. 15
SEPTEMBER 2004 GB reported that in future a digital camera would be taken on
monitoring visits to record any issue of cleanliness, both in a
positive and negative way. Copies
of photos taken would be supplied to LC.
At the C & L Committee Meeting on 7 September Members agreed
the complaints & survey action plans and said that if
the plans had not been achieved by Jan 2005 the contract would
be
referred to. GB & PJ
would be meeting on a weekly basis to work through these issues. 9 DECEMBER
2004 GB said that the overall cleaning standard at three centres had improved. She was however very concerned at the large clumps of fluff in the group training room.
PJ said that the air ventilation units had been cleaned two weeks previous, and the floor would be
monitored on a daily basis. 22 JUNE 2005 From Minutes of the Uttlesford Area Access Group General Meeting 6.9.04 http://www.uttlesford.gov.uk/community+info/access+in+Uttlesford/uttlesford+access/minutesoftheuttlesfordareaaccessgroup060904.doc Lord Butler Leisure Centre Brian, Doug and Joy had seen the response
from Leisure Connection to the report that had been submitted further to our
visit. All three had been
disappointed in the response. Brian
outlined his comments to the Group which tied in with both Doug and Joy’s
thoughts. · The covering comments regarding that the action points would only be carried out if the DDA specifically requires it to be so. · Disappointment that the IFI programme has not been actively pursued. · Heavy doors issue should be addressed, regardless of whether they complied with Building Regulations at the time. Best advice is being given by experts, why is it not accepted? · Training is inadequate, no special care is being taken for those with visual impairments with regard to emergency evacuation and similar issues · Information available to people with disabilities regarding the services provided is somewhat hit and miss. The hoist is not always advertised as being available. ·
Lack of consultation with users, hence regular reviews are
required These are just a sample of the points raised. Peter listened to the comments made and felt that it was a waste of time to carry out any further visits to the other centres if Leisure Connection were not prepared to take into account our comments. Peter felt that the operator was taking a soft option when free advice had been made available, delivered by those with an experience of disability and that it was a great shame after alerting them to areas of concern they didn’t appear to be taking on board the issues and working to improve things. Also Brian had been very disappointed for some time that no one within Uttlesford District Council had taken the responsibility of pursuing the IFI project with Leisure Connection when most of the work had been done for them. This was a socially inclusive scheme which would benefit both users and operators with shared costs. The publicity and research on demographics would also provide opportunities that the operator and UDC could exploit. Cllrs Bowker and Bayley would be more than happy to raise this issue at a higher level within the authority if the Group so wished. Our concerns could also be addressed via Cllr Morson, Diane Burridge, Leisure Connection and Linteum. In this way an official response could be gained with regard to the IFI project. The Access Group has pointed out our interpretation of the DDA and has asked the views of users and users with disabilities. The points have been highlighted and therefore should anyone take them to task, there would be no excuse for ignorance. From Minutes of the Uttlesford Area Access Group 7.2.05 www.uttlesford.gov.uk/community+info/access+in+uttlesford/uttlesford+access/uttlesfordareaaccessgroup070205.pdf At the February 2005 meeting of the Access Group the disappointment continued to be expressed. “2.6 Inclusive Fitness Initiative… It was obvious that the Public Finance Initiative funding arrangement was a problem. There was a long contractual lead in time with the 30 year lease operated by the Council. The Group felt extremely frustrated by the inaction of those concerned, i.e. the contract manager and the operators. Interest had been shown after the initial presentation but this had dissipated… Peter informed the Group that he had been contacted by the Audit Commission who were reviewing the services of Uttlesford District Council. During the conversation, Peter had expressed his disappointment in Leisure Connection and ultimately the Council, in not bringing the facilities linked with IFI into the community. Funding was available along with demographic research relating to the number of disabled people within the community and where they are based. It seemed disappointing when other authorities would be taking advantage of such a facility. Money could be here now as the presentation had been made in November 2003.” From Audit Commission Report "Uttlesford District Council Leisure & Cultural Services" May 2003 http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/Products/BVIR/B5C59A20-94DA-11d7-B2EE-0060085F8572/UttlesfordLeisureCulturalServices.pdf 7 We found that although the Council has clear corporate objectives, Leisure and Cultural Strategy as well as service plans and individual work plans, there are no links between these key documents. There is no clear vision or ambition for the service and a lack of focus on priorities. The Council does not know what it wants to achieve from its investment in leisure, even though it has entered into a significant long term commitment through a Private Finance Initiative project and continues to provide resources for a range of leisure and cultural activities.
8 The overall quality of cultural activities is generally good but current sports provision is only fair. Leisure opportunities are limited and not targeted to areas of greatest need. The availability of external funding is driving planning and programming rather than strategic choices based on local need.
9 The Council has no pricing or programming policies to address exclusion and there is no marketing policy. The Council does not know who uses its services and who does not, or why. Despite having friendly, capable and professional staff, the Council lacks a focus on users.
10 The Council’s performance compared with similar districts varies from service to service with good satisfaction rates for the museum and the TIC, but poor satisfaction rates for leisure facilities. The prospects for overall service improvement are uncertain because although some local people will benefit from better leisure facilities through the PFI project, there are many barriers, outlined in the report, which are likely to prevent the service as a whole improving.
12 There is a lack of vision and ambition for the service and without a clear understanding of what the Council wants to achieve from leisure and culture, it is not possible to say whether it is improving what matters most to local people.
13 The Council has missed an opportunity to thoroughly review its leisure and cultural services, by setting a cost cutting agenda from the start, carrying out consultation with staff in an intimidatory manner, and overlooking other stakeholders’ views. This has led to a lack of ownership of the improvement plan from staff and senior officers and members, and also by external partners.
14 Within the Council there is a poor understanding of how to improve services generally. Corporate capacity is limited and there is weak performance management. Prioritisation is poor and resources are not focused on priority areas.
15 There is evidence that some relationships between officers and Councillors are tense and strained and there is a lack of trust in the political process.
|
|
|