Decision

Previous regulatory judgement: Chelmer Housing Partnership Limited (28 July 2021)

Updated 13 December 2023

Applies to England

© Crown copyright 2023

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/regulatory-judgement-chelmer-housing-partnership-limited/current-regulatory-judgement-chelmer-housing-partnership-limited-28-july-2021

RSH Narrative Regulatory Judgement

  • Provider: Chelmer Housing Partnership Limited
  • Regulatory code: L4331
  • Publication date: 28 July 2021
  • Governance grade: G1
  • Viability grade: V2
  • Reason for publication: Viability regrade
  • Regulatory route: In Depth Assessment

This regulatory judgement regrades the regulator’s assessment of Chelmer Housing Partnership Limited’s (CHP) financial viability from V1 to V2 and confirms its existing G1 grade for governance.

Based on evidence gained from an In Depth Assessment (IDA), the regulator has assurance that CHP continues to comply with the financial viability elements of the Governance and Financial Viability Standard and that its financial plans are consistent with, and support, its financial strategy. CHP has an adequately funded business plan, sufficient security and is forecast to continue to meet its financial covenants.

CHP has, however, material risks that it needs to manage. It is forecasting increased levels of expenditure on stock investment to improve energy efficiency and building safety. In addition, CHP is increasing the scale of its housing development and investing in a new operating model to deliver efficiencies. These factors put pressure on CHP’s interest cover performance.

The regulator’s assessment of CHP’s compliance with the governance elements of the Governance and Financial Viability Standard remains unchanged. Based on the evidence gained from the IDA, the regulator has assurance that CHP’s governance arrangements enable it to adequately control the organisation and to continue meeting its objectives.

Other providers included in the judgement

None

About the provider

Origins

CHP is a community benefit society and the registered parent of the group. It provides mostly general needs and shared ownership homes, with a small number of supported and non-social housing properties.

Registered Entities

CHP is the only registered entity in the group.

Unregistered Entities

There are three unregistered entities in the group:

  • Myriad Homes Limited develops homes for open market sale
  • Myriad Housing Limited undertakes design and build services for the group
  • Myriad Capital plc is the group’s bond treasury vehicle

Geographic Spread and Scale

CHP owns and manages around 10,500 units, operating within 13 local authorities in the South East.

Staffing and Turnover

CHP’s turnover for the year ended 31 March 2021 was £67.6m [footnote 1]. It employs the full time equivalent of 315 staff.

Development

CHP plans to develop around 1,190 new, mainly general needs, homes between 2022 and 2024.

About our judgements

Key to Grades

Governance:

  • G1 (Compliant): The provider meets our governance requirements
  • G2 (Compliant): The provider meets our governance requirements but needs to improve some aspects of its governance arrangements to support continued compliance
  • G3 (Non-compliant): The provider does not meet our governance requirements. There are issues of serious regulatory concern and in agreement with us the provider is working to improve its position.
  • G4 (Non-compliant): The provider does not meet our governance requirements. There are issues of serious regulatory concern and the provider is subject to regulatory intervention or enforcement action.

Viability:

  • V1 (Compliant): The provider meets our viability requirements and has the financial capacity to deal with a wide range of adverse scenarios.
  • V2 (Compliant): The provider meets our viability requirements. It has the financial capacity to deal with a reasonable range of adverse scenarios but needs to manage material risks to ensure continued compliance.
  • V3 (Non-compliant): The provider does not meet our viability requirements. There are issues of serious regulatory concern and, in agreement with us, the provider is working to improve its position.
  • V4 (Non-compliant): The provider does not meet our viability requirements. There are issues of serious regulatory concern and the provider is subject to regulatory intervention or enforcement action.

Definitions of Regulatory Processes

In Depth Assessment (IDA): An IDA is a bespoke assessment of a provider’s viability and governance, including its approach to value for money. It involves on-site work and considers in detail a provider’s ability to meet its financial obligations and the effectiveness of its governance structures and processes.

Stability Checks: Based primarily on information supplied through regulatory returns, a Stability Check is an annual review of a provider’s financial position and its latest business plan. The review is focused on determining if there is evidence to indicate a provider’s current judgements merit reconsideration.

Reactive Engagement: Reactive engagement is unplanned work which is triggered by new information or a developing situation which may have implications for a provider’s current regulatory judgement.

Stability Checks and Reactive Engagement: In some cases, we will publish narrative regulatory judgements which combine evidence gained from both Stability Checks and Reactive Engagement.

For further details about these processes, please see ‘Regulating the Standards’.

  1. Unaudited figure ↩

Back to top