---

Minutes of the Annual General Meeting held on Tuesday 25^th June 2024

Members

Mrs K Creese took the chair, all committee members were present with a further 36 society members present.

Minutes

Minutes of the previous annual general meeting held on 23^rd^ May 2023 were confirmed and signed, proposed by Mr M Cort and seconded by Mrs J Bradshaw.

Matters Arising

None

Chairman’s Report

Good evening,

Before we begin, I must inform you that this meeting will be audio-recorded for monitoring purposes. Please save any questions you may have until I have finished the report.

Please can I ask everyone to stand for one minute of silence in memory of members and friends who passed away during the last year.

Aside from the routine day-to-day maintenance of the properties, we have completed significant roofing work across several properties this year. The work included re-roofing six properties and replacing fascia and gutters in several other properties. We have experienced problems with some roofing contractors during the work, and we thank tenants for their patience while these essential improvements were carried out.

Two major property renovations were completed. These properties have already been re-let, and we hope the new tenants will be very happy on the estate. We currently have two empty properties, one of which we hope to re-let very soon.

In contrast, I must report two property repossessions that took place this financial year with a heavy heart. The committee do not make these decisions lightly and believes these actions were in the society's and its members' best interest.

It is important that all tenants and shareholders inform the office of any changes to their contact details, such as phone numbers and addresses, so that they are kept updated.

All repairs must be in writing (paper or email) and go through the office. If we do not receive the repair request in writing, no repairs will be carried out to your property. Please do not contact Committee Members, Simon, the maintenance man, or any other contractors carrying out repair work on the estate for any problems you may be experiencing. Please call the EMERGENCY NUMBER if it is outside of office hours. The emergency phone is always held by a committee member on call who will do their utmost to solve the problem as soon as possible.

When the maintenance man or contractors need access to properties, it is essential that they can do so, as a lot of time is wasted making constant calls, writing and calling around. Please make sure someone is at the property when access is required, or if you are going to be unavailable, please arrange with family or friend to have a key or leave a key with the secretary at the office.

Contractors will always let the office know if they cannot gain access to properties, even if an appointment has been made before repair work. Contractors are hired in good faith to carry out the repairs. If tenants make appointments with contractors and no one is in, it wastes contractors' time and estate funds.

If work has been carried out at your property and something is wrong or you are unhappy, please do not stop the contractor in the middle of a job; contact the office in the first instance to report the problem.

We have seen an increase in repair requests for minor jobs, such as changing lightbulbs, unblocking toilets and sinks, and call-outs to boilers when no fault has been present. The cost of these small jobs adds up. Can tenants please be mindful of this before contacting the office? We hope a rent increase will not be necessary, but we will have to look at this again later in the year.

We are still getting tenants knocking on the doors of Committee members and Rachel, the secretary's home. This has got to stop; it is not fair. As previously mentioned, everything has to go through the office or the emergency phone when out of hours.

It has come to our attention that Rachel, our secretary, has received quite a bit of verbal abuse and bad language from tenants lately. This is not acceptable, and it has to stop. Anchor Tenants operate a nil tolerance policy to abuse towards anyone. I might add that Rachel carries out decisions and instructions made by the committee, so it is out of order to shout and swear at her when she is doing her job very efficiently. Rachel always tries to help tenants but doesn't deserve this sort of treatment while doing her job. Any tenant becoming abusive to Rachel in the future, committee members or contract workers will be written to.

The committee acknowledges the ongoing concerns regarding garden maintenance and thanks the many residents who take the time to maintain their gardens. However, due to government legislation, our hands are tied in some respects. We want to remind all tenants that the gardens form part of their property and should be kept tidy, i.e., lawns mowed, and hedges cut back.

Arbitrators could be used for neighbourly disputes if necessary. As Anchor Tenants do not get involved with neighbourly disputes, we would send any such matter straight to the Arbitrators to resolve. Arbitrators are outsiders and not residents of the estate.

We are still working on securing our boundaries to the council allotments. The next phase of work will be carried out as soon as funds allow.

We are still holding coffee mornings every Tuesday in the hall at 10.30. There, you can find a selection of books and jigsaws that you can swap or borrow or just come and have a natter and catch up with neighbours and friends. The coffee mornings are being supported, and our numbers are increasing, but it would be lovely to see a few more people coming and joining us.

Attending our meetings shows support, and I thank you for coming this evening.

This concluded the chairman's report.

Questions relating to Chairman’s report

A shareholder stated that they thought it was unacceptable that the secretary be subjected to abuse and think the committee should take stronger action than writing a letter. The Chair replied that the committee will write to shareholders and consider further action if the abuse continued.

Auditor’s Report

Mr Smith began his report by saying that once again, they had audited the accounts according to the requirements of the Co-operative and Community Benefits Act 2014 and, in his opinion, comply with the appropriate legislation and give an accurate, fair view of the society's affairs as of 31^st^ January 2024 and of the profit/ loss, a loss on this occasion, for the year then ended.

The auditor tested the transactions, processes and systems to ensure that the accounts were free from error as far as they could. The tests are designed to show anything untoward, and happily, there is nothing to report, and everything is exactly as it should be. In terms of what the accounts disclose, the society has made a loss this year of approximately £30,000 or thereabouts before a tax adjustment. The tax refund from 2 years ago of around £6000 has reduced the loss this year.

The reasons for the loss were reflected in the Chairman's statement due to refurbishment work. An extra £50,000 compared to the year before was spent on property maintenance, improvements and refurbishment. In addition to that, there was a one-off cost that was again reflected in the Chairman's report with two properties repossessed, which showed legal costs were £5000 more than the year before.

Despite the loss, the society's balance sheet remains in a satisfactory position, demonstrating sound financial standing. The overall liquidity, or cash reserves once all liabilities have been paid, has reduced by about £20000 on the previous year. However, the balance sheet remains robust. After discussion with the committee, it has been agreed that the society should be more cautious in spending to build on the reserves and keep repairs to the bare necessities going forward until those reserves have been replenished.

Mr I Pawson proposed accepting the accounts as a true record, seconded by Mr M Osborne.

A shareholder queried the figure of £70,150 for land and property freehold and asked how the figure be so low. Mr Smith confirmed that the figure was the original cost to build the properties and not the market value. If the figures were brought up to market value, we would have to depreciate them over a life expectancy of 50 years; then, we would return to a figure lower than the cost to build, which serves no purpose. The shareholder asked how this would affect us when it comes to insuring the properties. Mr Smith replied that the figure shown on the balance sheet as cost represents the original cost of building the estate 100 or more years ago. Cost is precisely that, and it has no relevance for building insurance. Insurance companies use an average rebuild cost per square foot based on applying the RICS scale costs to an average property size based on the nature of the house and the original materials used in the building.

Another shareholder asked about the amount spent on gardening compared to last year. The main reason was the cost of removing large conifers around the estate. The figure also included general gardening around the estate and the hall gardens.

Another shareholder queried the creditors' amounts falling due within one year and asked the auditor to explain. Mr Smith replied that it is basically the timing of invoices. A plumbing invoice and roofing invoice were paid just after 31st January.

The Chair asked for the election of auditors for the forthcoming year, and a shareholder replied that they were not happy as it had taken over four months to audit the accounts, whereas they are supposed to be completed for an Annual General Meeting to be held at the end of March. Mrs Benning replied that previously, Annual General Meetings had been held in June, and another shareholder added that they had been held in May in the past.

The Chair asked members to bear in mind what the shareholder had said and asked for a show of hands for those in favour of re-electing Cunnington & Co. This was proposed by Mr C. Newcombe and seconded by Mrs J Taylor, the majority in favour, motion carried.

Arbitrators

Not required at this time.

Remuneration of Committee

It was agreed that members fees will remain the same as in the previous year at £2.50 per week.

General Business

A shareholder reported that they had experienced problems with re-roofing work at their property and were concerned that building regulations were required. The Chair replied that the committee would review the records and the tenant's concerns.

The same shareholder added that they felt it important that the committee obtain contractor method statements before any significant work on the properties and stressed their potential value. The Chair clarified that method statements are not a legal requirement, but the committee would consider the concerns and discuss the matter further. Another shareholder asked what a method statement was.

The same shareholder then enquired about plastering work needed at their property. The Chair replied that the committee would discuss the work required at their meeting following the AGM.

A shareholder said she was satisfied with the committee's work and thanked them. The shareholder who had asked the original question agreed that the committee did a difficult job. They felt they had tried to pass on their experience to the committee, but their advice had been ignored.

The Chair replied that the committee employs contractors and has to be guided by their opinions as they are professionals. The shareholder suggested that the committee be more thorough when carrying out significant work in the future. Mrs Benning added that the committee reviews many details before contractors are 4employed to ensure their reliability, but the committee cannot foresee problems until they commence the work.

The shareholder then spoke again about the problems they had experienced with re-roofing work and the contractors who had carried it out. Mrs Osborne added that, after a meeting with the tenant about the job, that particular contractor was laid off and replaced with other roofers. Mr Hollis stated that any outstanding work would be completed in September.

Another shareholder stated that they did not think people realise what a hard job committee members have and added that they are all tenants, the same as everyone else. The shareholder who asked the original question replied that they did not say the committee was not doing a good job and that they had previously suggested to the committee that they ask tenants who are tradespeople for advice and information. The Chair replied that the committee felt this would be time-consuming.

The shareholder then spoke about previous problems with their roof from 20 years ago. The Chair replied that professional advice had been taken at the time. The shareholder added that the building owner is responsible for building regulations, and that is yours. A few shareholders replied that all shareholders were the owners of the properties. The Chair stated that the shareholder's comments had been noted.

The Chair answered the previous question on method statements and stated that they are steps for how jobs are carried out. The shareholder asked if this is a new requirement, and committee members replied no, that it is not and that it is not a legal requirement. The shareholder continued to praise the maintenance contractor.

A shareholder stated that they had learned of a data protection breach. They continued that some things were general knowledge, and the committee knew what they were discussing. Another shareholder asked for the information to be shared with everyone. The Chair asked the shareholder if they had any proof of their allegations.

The shareholder explained that a relative was at the top of the housing list, and before they knew they would get an offer, another tenant had approached them for a house exchange. The other shareholder replied that it was their son and continued that the shareholder's relative had made it public knowledge, which the original shareholder denied. A heated exchange occurred between the two shareholders, and they were asked to calm down. Mr. Hollis asked again for proof of the suggested data breach. The shareholder replied that there was proof, but they did not have it, to which the other shareholder replied that if there was no evidence, then why were they raising this? The original shareholder added that the relative was not allowed to attend the meeting, and the Chair asked why. The Chair called on Mrs Bagnall, who was with the relative during a social evening at the hall when they mentioned that they were at the top of the housing list with other shareholders present. Mrs Bagnall stated that this is a small community, and when things are overheard, they get spread around so quickly and that things like this are said with no malice involved. The shareholder was concerned that other tenants' business could be discussed.

The shareholder who had asked about the house exchange asked to speak. They stated they had previously asked Mrs Creese about the house-swapping process.

They said they knew where the shareholder's relative lived and talked to their parent, who supplied a telephone number. The original shareholder then went into personal details about their relative, and the Chair stated that the committee was unable to discuss the matter further in the meeting.

Mrs Osborne explained how housing allocation works: When somebody gets to the top of the housing list, a property becomes vacant, which is how it's done for everyone.

Everybody needs to know the procedure and the procedure the committee has followed. A credit check on the prospective tenant is carried out, and if things are not quite right, a guarantor is requested. She continued that the committee has all the shareholders to look after, would not let a house to an individual who cannot afford it and works in everybody's best interests. A discussion took place about the costs of the recently renovated property and how much it would cost to run it.

The Chair then stopped the discussion as matters were being discussed without the shareholder. This concluded the business of the meeting, and the Chair thanked members for their attendance before declaring the meeting closed at 7.40 pm.

These minutes are the official record of what happened, not a verbatim account.

---