Islington Leaseholders AssociationCouncil meet to ban Partners Resident Forum?
The ILA voted at their AGM to totally boycott the Councils new Residents’ Improvement Taskforce and therefore its scrutiny panel) process…as it is un-democratic and un-representative of leaseholders in the borough.
It look like Islington Council are now trying to do away with one of the few remaining structures of the pre-Residents’ Improvement Taskforce system, that is the unpaid volunteer “Partners Resident Forum” (which improves service for Partners Leaseholders & Tenants) because the PRF shows some independence of Council.
The Council is starting this process by imposing new rules and regulations for spurious reasons on the forum, without providing any evidence for its alleged issues to, or allowing any democratic debate by the forum.
These undemocratic changes may be formalised without involving the Forum, at the following council meeting this Thursday 13th March, Town Hall committee room 4 @ 6pm.
Please attend, bring friends,they do not have to be in Partners properties, just those whom object to these changes not coming to the Forum 1st, or the undemocratic way the council is trying to rush this through, without informing Partners tenants & Leaseholders!
Residents’ Improvement Taskforce arrangement update report Download
Update:14.03.14 – Thanks to everyone that attended, The Council are rescheduling any decision for the moment. We will need to wait to see what happens in the future.
[1]
Islington Gazette,
Thurs, Feb 27, 2014
Council housing
Why not withhold PFI payments?
“[It] seems to be a pretty unsatisfactory contract,” “We’ll see what our options
are,” “We need a plan of management” and “We want to be transparent whenever
possible” (!) Cllrs Richard Watts and James Murray (housing) were speaking
about the council’s PFI (private finance initiative) housing-management
contract with Partners at a recent angry town hall meeting with council
leaseholders.
The council isn’t only an estates’ landlord. The PFI is the two-part contract under
which the majority of the borough’s 6,500 street properties are managed – many would say mismanaged. It doesn’t expire until 2033, by which time it will have cost the general taxpayer upwards of £720 million – some estimate about £1billion, allowing for interest payments incurred over its lifetime.
Bad enough? Now for the alleged sting in this nasty scorpion’s tail: “There’s ‘an eight-digit financial penalty for ending that contract.”
So here we have it – “We wouldn’t sign that kind of contract now,” but it’s too expensive to cancel. Who, one wonders, is advising the council? This is money paid by all Islington taxpayers, not only residents of the council’s freeholds. As for political will, where were the dissident voices when Gordon Brown was pushing PFI?
Ironically, the question to which Cllrs Watts and Murray gave the above answers wasn’t about the lifecycle of the contract – though searching questions need to be asked about that – but the suspension, on grounds of breach of contract, of the monthly payments by which Partners receives its guaranteed PFI monies.
Since Cllr Watts agreed that it’s “pretty clear” that work carried out by United House,
“particularly in the first round” of the contract, was “not good enough” – there was, “frankly, some pretty shocking work” (he should see some second-round examples) – why is the council refusing to consider withholding such payments?
As the questioner asked, how can a contractor (Partners) “fail to deliver with such impunity?”
If, as was stressed at the meeting, Islington wants to be a “responsible landlord”, the politicians will have to go further than this.
Meg Howarth,
Ellington Street, N7
‘£30k maintenance charge drained my life savings’ says 88-year-old leaseholder
Published: 13 September, 2013 by PETER GRUNER and SERINA SANDHU from Islington Tribune
HOUSING activists are launching a campaign to force Islington Council to pay back most of the £30,000 in maintenance fees which drained the life savings of an 88-year-old leaseholder.
They will claim that widowed pensioner Joan Leonard was not properly consulted some eight years ago, nor did she give her approval of work done on the tower block Emberton Court, on the Brunswick estate, Clerkenwell.
The move follows plans for more work on the estate for which Mrs Leonard will be asked to contribute another £8,000.
Retired tailor Mrs Leonard, who has lived on the fifth floor of the estate for more than 60 years, said: “I paid the money for four new windows and two doors. They also replaced a perfectly good boiler.
“But I got a shock when I got the bill. Now they want more money for things like CCTV and repairs. Well, I don’t have it.”
Two of the borough’s most formidable campaigners, Dr Brian Potter, chairman of Islington Leaseholders Association, and student barrister Patricia Napier will take on the case.
The work on the estate was carried out by the now-defunct housing management organisation Homes for Islington in 2008-09.
Dr Potter said: “This is a woman who was forced to spend her entire life-savings on work which probably wasn’t needed. She came to us because she’s being asked to spend more money.”
He added: “We hope of course that rather than a long, protracted tribunal or court case the council will agree to a refund.”
Ms Napier said: “£30,000 is a huge amount of money. I hope to get a great proportion of it back. Mrs Leonard is obviously not a wealthy woman and it appears she was not aware of her rights at the time the work was done.
“The council will have to prove that the work was necessary.”
Councillor James Murray, executive member for housing, said that if any leaseholders have difficulty making the payment a member of the housing team can help them by discussing options.
Islington Council ( PFI) managing agent for street properties “Partners” have recently said that they will only obtain Listed Building Consents (LBC)/ planning permissions on works that they have done on properties in conservation areas or that are listed buildings IF the matter is brought to the attention of Partners directly by the resident concerned.
Islingtons Planning Conservation department on the other hand says that ” that unauthorised works carried out to listed buildings is a criminal offence. As such persons with a material interest in the property may be liable to prosecution”
Leaseholder may also find that they have an issue if they ever wish to sell their properties, and they need to obtains the the LBC’s to give to potential buyers. Trying to get consents from Partners in 2 or 10 year after works have been done may be tricky.
The ILA can’t give advice, so this shouldn’t be taken as such, but If your a leaseholder in a Conservation Area or Listed building you may want to check with the Islington Council conservation section of the Planning Department. whether the Major Works that Partners have done on your property should have had or require LBC., and if so bring it directly to Partners attention.
Please also let the ILA know if the Councils planning department confirm that council’s agents ( e.g. Partners,[the former] HFI etc) or Housing Property Services have done works to your property without getting the appropriate consents. contact
You can download a pdf of the ILA spring 2012 newsletter here ILA newsletter Spring 12 Final