Islington Gazette reported that Homeowners have declared victory after Islington council announced it will not contest a ruling that it blew £1million overpaying on repair work more
Category: Service Charges
From: Dr Brian Potter ILA
To: Catherine West (catherine.west@islington.gov.uk), james.murray@islington.gov.uk, paul.convery@islingtonlabour.org.uk, richard.greening@islington.gov.uk, richard.watts@islington.gov.uk
Dear Catherine.
Since the ILA’s last proposal to raise cash for Islington (99 year Lease Extensions) appears to have drawn so much attention (including from other borough’s!) we hope that you will also consider another of our schemes, which although not as lucrative as the first, will potentially raise a great deal of much needed cash, very quickly.
Very briefly…
A/ In Islington’s leases, Leaseholders only own the glass, not the window frames!
B/ A major source of problems has been due to window repairs/replacement for which contractorsgrossly over charge. (Most windows have under gone extensive work through the Decent Homes Project already)
C/ So..When contacting leaseholders re a 99 year lease Extension…also offer to sell them their windows…at a discount…as a one off offer…in the same time frame as the lease extension?
Back ground…
Formally, to buy your windows through HFI you were required to seek planning permission and alicense…all of which cost money and involved administrative costs to the order of approximately £1000-2000 per property.
The ILA has finally convinced HFI that both the planning permission and license were an unnecessary cash burden, which prevented leaseholders from buying their windows via a “Deed of Variation”. However, as a result of years of negotiations with HFI, leaseholders can now purchase the DOV within a couple of weeks, at a total cost of £380. (I purchased mine last month).
If this sum was reduced to £180 in a one off promotion, I am sure that the majority of Islington’s leaseholders would be happy to take part.
Peripheral advantages to this scheme…
1/ Many more leaseholders would be inclined to use the small local builders…thereby generating bothcash and employment in the borough, and reduce both the council’s responsibility and contractual work load!
2/ The large contracts currently being allocated cost the borough a fortune, and are totally un-manageable and impossible to monitor…and, invariably uses sub-contracted labour from…who knows where?
3/ If the leaseholders are satisfied with this arrangement they will have no need to challenge the billing at law (LVT), so saving the borough a great deal of cash during the course of the year in defending issues related to cost and quality of works by employing very expensive external firms of solicitors. See Tremlett Grove…!!!
Legal safe guards…
In order to ensure that the leaseholders comply with council requirements in regard to conservation areas etc…Caveats can be included, if and when required…
Possible income of…non-ring fenced cash…
Math…11,000 x £180 = £??????????
Brian.
For those of you unable to obtain last weeks Islington Gazette dated 6 September 2012.
Please click here IslingtonGazetteLetters06.09.12
The Islington Gazette – Thursday 6 September 2012 , Page 18 – Letters
1) Letter of the week – ‘Legalised money laundering’ by Council
By Dr Brian Potter, Islington Leaseholders Association/
Federation of Islington Tenants Association
2) Leaseholders – A silence that is far from golden
By Kay Newsom, Islington Leaseholders Association member
3) Democracy – Champions must not be chumps
By Richard Rosser Highbury New Park. N5
Send your letters to islingtongazette.letters@archant.co.uk
Islington Gazette reports calls for investigation into Islington Coucil “…Islington council had a vested interest in overcharging by contractors …… The message being sent out to contractors by Islington council is ” if you get caught overcharging, don’t worry we will pay the legal cost with public money to defend your actions…..”
Full Islington Gazette articles here
A legitimate arrangement between the council and building firm Kier, which ran from 2000 to 2010, saw each party receive £12.1million of taxpayers’ money over the ten-year period.
The council confirm that the share they received will be spent on building new homes, but many leaseholders, who are charged for repair work, feel they are entitled to some kind of rebate because they believe they paid their share of the full estimate, not the actual cost.
Full Islington Gazette article articles here
This is a precis of the ruling earlier this year by the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal regarding work that took pace on the Tremlett Grove Estate. The case featured on the Dispatches programme broadcast on Monday 20th August 2012.
It is written by a layperson, not a lawyer, and should not be relied upon for legal use or to encourage you to take legal action. It is written for your information.
If you wish to dispute your bill in any courts or at the LVT, the ILA strongly suggest you should always seek legal advice from lawyers experienced in UK leasehold contracts. You can find the original decision at the Lands Tribunal website.
Summary of Tremlett Grove findings
The actual costs involved are detailed in Appendix 1 on page 27 of the actual LVT ruling
From The Islington Gazette 16.08.2012
Days before a TV expose about leaseholder overcharging featuring Islington Council, a group of Islington Residents hope that their battle is at an end after the council was refused permission to appeal a ruling that it blew £1 million on housing improvements.
Mondays edition of investigative channel 4 show Dispatches features the Tremlett Grove Estate in Archway which was the subject of a leaseholder valuation tribunal ( LVT) in April. It found that the council paid over the odds for work on two blocks.
The ruling meant the council will have to refund around £16000 to each of the 14 leaseholders affected. more council lose appeal again
Dispatches TV pgm c4 -Monday 20 August 8pm – The truth about leaseholds
(set your video recorders)
Thursday, 17th November 2011 from newsontheblock.com
In a landmark case that will undoubtedly be a gamechanger for the property management industry, the Upper Tribunal has decided that managing agents must consider the financial impact of major works on lessees and whether to phase works so they become more affordable. More
Upper Tribunal Decision
LVT Decision link
To find out when the next works are happening to your (ex-hfi – not partners) property – Please see the Capital Programme Update – Quarter 4 (which is on Pages 35 to 67 of the Consultative Panels Central Reports May 2012)
Inspection of Accounts
Audit Commission Act 1998, sections 15 – 16
The Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2011 Regulations 9, 10, 21 and 22
Each year the Council’s accounts are audited and any person interested has the opportunity to inspect and make copies of the accounts and all books, deeds, contracts, bills, vouchers and receipts relating to them. (A charge may be made for excessive copies.)
The accounts for the year ending 31 March 2012 and documents will be available at the Council Offices, 7 Newington Barrow Way, London N7 7EP between 9.30am and 4.30pm on Mondays to Fridays from on Monday 25 June 2012 until on Friday 20 July 2012.
If you wish to inspect any documents please apply first to Mohammed Sajid, Chief Accountant, at the above address or call 0207 527 2574 or email Mohammed.Sajid@islington.gov.uk so that arrangements can be made.
From 10.00am on 25 July 2011 until the conclusion of the audit process, a local government elector for the area of the Council, or his/her representative,may:
– ask the auditor questions about the accounts. Please contact the District Auditor, Mr Philip Johnstone, at the Audit Commission, 1st Floor Millbank Tower, Millbank, London, SW1P 4HQ to make arrangements to ask any questions.
– object to the Council’s accounts asking that the auditor issue a report in the public interest (under section 8 of the Audit Commission Act 1998) and/or apply to the court for a declaration that an item in the accounts is contrary to law (under section 17 of the Audit Commission Act 1998). Written notice of a proposed objection and the grounds on which it is made must be sent to the auditor at the address given above and copied to me at the following address:
Finance Department,
Floor 2, Council Offices,
7 Newington Barrow Way,
London N7 7EP
Mike Curtis
Remember, it’s ‘how much’ was spent – not why. Also, bills paid, invoices, deeds and CONTRACTS can be requested for examination & copy. Good opportunity for anybody especially faced with major works bills to get hold of the relevant contract + bills and do some maths !
One could also ask the simple question, please provide all Bills paid and relevant invoices regarding property at ………… then one could compare with Annual Service Charges.