Housebuilder Barratt Developments has seen revenues soar above pre-pandemic levels after it sold more homes at higher prices amid a booming property market.

Camilla Canocchi www.thisismoney.co.uk 

Revenues for the full-year to the end of June came in at £4.8billion, which is a 40 per cent increase compared to 2020 and also 1 per cent higher than 2019.

Pre-tax profits at the FTSE 100 company also rose 65 per cent to £812.2million compared to last year, although they remain some 11 per cent below 2019 levels. 

Boss David Thomas said there was a ‘very strong demand for houses across the country’ 

The surge in profit and revenue comes as house prices leapt this year thanks to a mix of rising demand, stamp duty holiday and low mortgage rates, 

Barratt saw the average selling price for private homes soar to around £325,000, from £310,600 in 2020 and £312,00 in 2019. 

The most recent Nationwide house price index reported the average house price across the UK had risen 11 per cent to £248,857 in the year to August.

Barratt completed the sale of some 17,243 homes, which is an increase of 37 per cent from 2020 but still around 3 per cent below 2019.

And it said it plans to increase the number of home sales in the current fiscal year to pre-pandemic levels wholly owned completions allaying concerns about a cooling housing market.

The group is targeting between 17,000 and 17,250 sales in the current financial year, with an additional 750 joint-venture completions, which would take the total above the 17,856 home sales completed in 2019.

Chief executive David Thomas said there was a ‘very strong demand for houses across the country’, leaving the company on on track to hit its long-term target of 20,000 a year. 

Forward sales – a key housing metric for homes to be delivered and paid for at a later date – as of the end of August stood at £3.94billion, against £3.71billion in 2020 and £3billion in 2019.

However, it also said it was seeing build costs rise, currently by between 4 per cent and 5 per cent, with materials more expensive due to wider industry supply issues, as well as skilled labour shortages pushing worker wages higher amid a booming sector.

Annual results confirmed a £81.5million bill for cladding safety works in the wake of the Grenfell Tower disaster, taking its total hit so far since 2017 to £184.2million. 

The group unveiled a final dividend payout of 21.9p a share, bringing the full-year payout to 29.4p, up from 29.1p in 2019, with the group halting dividends last year due to the pandemic. 

Barratt shares were down 2.9 per cent to 721p at 1pm. 

Nationwide said the average house price has risen close to the £250,000 mark, but that remains considerably below Barratt’s average sales price

Nicholas Hyett, an equity analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, said the fall in shares is probably down to a lack of detail about shareholder returns.

‘All the signs in Barratt’s results are that the housing market remains robust,’ he said. 

‘Despite the progress the market seems disappointed with the results, and we suspect that’s down to limited detail about additional shareholder returns. The group exited the last financial year with over £1.3bn in net cash. 

‘A good portion of that is earmarked for helping the group reach 20,000 completions a year, but with land purchases already approaching that level that still leaves some surplus.

‘Still, with a dividend yield north of 5 per cent, profits back on track and end markets that look robust despite the recent housing boom, Barratt’s weathered the storm well, coming out of the pandemic with solid foundations on which to build.’

A village in North Devon has lost its affordable housing due to a council mistake.

Alex Davis www.devonlive.com 

Planning permission for Lower Broad Park, in West Down, Ilfracombe, was approved in January 2016 and was intended to provide five affordable homes for local people. Despite this, residents were told last year that this requirement would no longer be fulfilled.

Stewart Bryant, former landowner of what is now Lower Broad Park, has lived in West Down, Ilfracombe all his life and grew up himself in council housing provided by the village. Stewart read a speech to the Planning Committee in 2016 highlighting his intention to provide five affordable homes where local people could grow the community, resulting in the addition of a Section 106 requirement to the application.

The Section 106 attached to the planning permission created the legal requirement of five affordable homes within the new development, which could only be rented to tenants with an existing tie to the village. In addition, the application promised financial contributions to the community to be used to make improvements to the village hall, local primary school and community field.

In November 2017, Acorn Developments submitted applications for a drainage ditch, followed by an application to amend design and layout in August 2018.When signing off these amendments, North Devon District Council failed to carry over the Section 106 requirement across to the new application, due to oversight by an officer.

Stewart says the council’s lack of monitoring throughout the development has left his vision for the site in tatters.

He said: “The processes North Devon District have in place are not fit for purpose. With the Section 106 agreement, they should have monitored the site but they didn’t. They let this drift by.”

“This is such a lovely, working community here and that Section 106 was really valuable to this community. This was our own opportunity to get some affordable housing for local people and to have that torn away from us on the 11th hour was a huge blow to everyone.”

“We all make mistakes but I feel the council should stand up and make it public that they made a mistake. I doubt we’ll get another opportunity to provide new homes here for the next 30 years and I think they are now trying to sweep this under the carpet.”

The properties first appeared on Devon Home Choice in September 2019. After being told they would be moved in by Christmas, prospective local tenants were put on hold until Spring 2020, before being told a change of tenure removed the social housing requirement.

Many of these prospective tenants had already moved out of their homes and were on standby in temporary holiday accommodation.

According to the report, the council did not become aware of the error until March 2020, when Acorn Homes contacted them to state that acting on legal advice, they believed the site was no longer bound to S106 restrictions.

North Devon District Council and Acorn Homes have now agreed that one affordable house will now be sold and a payment of £106,500 is to be made for community projects.

In a report to the Planning Committee on December 9 2020, former Head of Place Michael Tichford stated: “A deed of variation should have been produced to modify the S106 agreement so that it related to the consent as amended by the subsequent applications. Unfortunately, this was not done, due to an oversight.”

Despite acknowledgement for the error, Stewart claimed many of the emails sent by residents and the Parish Council have been ignored.

A spokesperson for North Devon Council said: “It is confirmed that an error was made in relation to application 60385 which was an application for the erection of 17 dwellings on land adjacent to Pearldean, West Down, now known as Lower Broad Park.

“The error was that the terms of a section 106 agreement negotiated in relation to an earlier application on the site were not carried forward to this application. Subsequently, the developer, Acorn Homes, also argued that the level of benefits secured via the agreement could not be achieved through the development.

“North Devon Council (NDC) and Acorn Homes did not agree on the legal effect of the error but a compromise was reached whereby some of the benefits that had previously been agreed would still be provided. In particular, one unit of affordable housing and financial contributions totally £106,500 were to be provided.

“Those contributions are secured under a further section 106 agreement which is binding on the land and are to be paid towards community facilities and education. Whilst the triggers for making the payments have now been reached, payments have not yet been made by Acorn Homes and the council is currently corresponding with the developers to secure those contributions.

“The original error was unprecedented and is very much regretted by the council. That error has been acknowledged by NDC in its dealings with the Parish Council and with affected local residents and the council will continue in its efforts to secure the benefits described”.

Mark Thomas, Managing Director of Acorn Developments, said: “We have contributions to make and we are aware of those.

“The scheme has lost money, so it has been more challenging to make those payments, but we are looking to make a payment on September 31, followed by a final payment on October 31.”

According to Cllr David Worden, Leader of North Devon Council, 117 affordable homes have been delivered during the pandemic, with 636 affordable homes awaiting completion since May.

Within his statement, Cllr Worden said the housing crisis in North Devon “needs a joined up approach from local and national government to resolve these issues and will need honesty and commitment from all those involved.”

Stewart said the council’s handling of the development at West Down shouldn’t be repeated elsewhere in North Devon if it wants to discuss housing as their highest priority.

He said: “There’s a lack of affordable housing in the area and this is one example where the process has failed. The council are talking about creating affordable housing in North Devon, but the way that these developments are being managed needs to change.

“The affordable homes aspect of the development has been finished and empty for at least 18 months. At that time, it was a disgrace. Five homes empty and not occupied with the housing crisis in North Devon.”

“I think their approach has been incredibly rude, especially to our parish council. Our parish council are very passionate about the village but throughout this whole situation they have just been ignored and shut out.

“This is something that will affect our village for years and years to come.”

There are four levels of DBS check. They reveal what criminal records may be held on central police records and for enhanced checks, local records as well. Lower levels report “unspent” convictions, higher levels “spent” convictions as well:

• Basic DBS
• Standard DBS
• Enhanced DBS
• Enhanced DBS with barring list

Which are we going for?

The interesting question is whether or when DBS checks would have prevented either of the “rotten apples” cases highlighted by Owl.. Remember you are innocent until found guilty.

As has been pointed out in a recent comment, DBS checks are not without flaws and may provide a false sense of security.

The introduction of blanket DBS checks for councillors just by virtue of being a councillor, rather than on the basis  of their access to vulnerable groups, is something Owl believes should be considered nationally, not introduced by councils piecemeal.

Owl notes the Tory commitment to promoting openness and transparency. Maybe councillors’ declaration of interests would benefit from being given greater scrutiny?

Clearing the way forward – East Devon’s Conservative Group calls for mandatory DBS checks for councillors

Councillor Phil Twiss exmouth.nub.news 

Following the sentencing of a former member of East Devon District Council (EDDC) after being found guilty of despicable sexual crimes against children, the Conservative Group of councillors on EDDC are calling for Disclosure and Barring (DBS) checks for all existing councillors.

The Conservative Group wants every prospective candidate and all existing councillors to undergo the checks which show any criminal convictions now, with the enhanced version required if an individual is expected to work with vulnerable people, including children, being demonstrated as necessary during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The move would improve safety and protection whilst promoting openness and transparency. Previous calls by the Conservative Group to introduce such a measure have been ignored by other groups within the council.

Cllr Colin Brown, Leader of the Conservative Group, said: “We are shocked and appalled by the horrendous crimes that have come to light and our thoughts are with the victims.

“We must do everything we can to protect the public and we are calling for DBS checks to be carried out on every existing councillor and future candidates.

“I would like to see this initiative implemented as a prerequisite for standing and serving as a councillor and we plan to introduce the measure for anyone wanting to join the Conservative Group.

“We are calling on every councillor and the current leadership of the council to back our call and introduce the checks as soon as possible.

“It may not currently be a legal requirement, but it is unquestionably the right thing to do and if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.”

This one is a lot smaller than “Boardmasters” but Covid-19 is still likely to have a good time. So much for “enhanced response” – Owl

Latest rates of cases of Covid-19 in Devon and Cornwall show small decreases. The rates remain high when viewed in a national context.

www.bbc.co.uk

The figures show the number of coronavirus cases per 100,000 people in the seven days up to and including 29 August, with the previous week’s numbers in brackets.

The breakdown of the figures by local authority area is:

• Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly – 485 (down from 509)
• Plymouth – 497 (down from 521)
• Exeter – 360 (down from 380)
• Mid Devon – 403 (down from 448)
• East Devon – 380 (down from 385)
• Torbay – 419 (down from 446)
• Teignbridge – 407 (down from 420)
• South Hams – 420 (up from 409)
• West Devon – 374 (down from 387)
• North Devon – 376 (down from 385)
• Torridge – 375 (down from 397)

For comparison, the figure for England is 301.

There were 11 deaths in Devon and 6 in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly

goodlawproject.org 

“Unimaginable resources” were thrown at Test and Trace. Yet it “cannot point to a measurable difference to the progress of the pandemic”. That’s what the Conservative-majority Public Accounts Committee found. There was a measurable difference, though, for the owners of the biggest of the pandemic contract winners, Innova. The LA Times reported that they flashed “an Innova bank statement with a $175-million balance as proof of funds”.  They also went on “a corporate and personal luxury buying spree”, including several Gulfstream jets and luxury houses.

Things are no better when one turns to PPE procurement. The Government’s own Counter Fraud Function         “assessed a high risk of fraud in the procurement of PPE”. 

You might think this is cause for the Government’s Anti-Corruption Champion, John Penrose MP, to take a look. His role, after all, is to “scrutinise and challenge the performance of departments and agencies”. And the sums involved are no laughing matter. Together, the Test and Trace and PPE programmes cost a staggering £50bn – about the size of the whole annual defence budget.

But rather than chasing corruption, he seems to spend his time besmirching those who do. A follower of Good Law Project has shared with us an extraordinary letter he received from John Penrose, which contains a number of out-and-out falsehoods. 

The letter says: 

• “Since the start of the pandemic [Good Law Project] have brought scores of legal cases against the Government and, so far, they’ve failed to make almost all of them stand up in court.” 

That’s just not true. At the time of writing, we have had only two substantive court decisions and have won both of them. And, of the 14 cases we have issued since the start of 2020, the Court has granted permission in 11 at the first time of asking. Official statistics (beginning in 2010) show that this happens in only 17% of all judicial reviews. Good Law Project’s success rate is 78%.

It also says:

• “In both cases, the judge said that their broader allegations of dishonesty or actual corruption (i.e. anything more than failing to follow the bureaucratic process precisely enough) weren’t proven.”

That is also false. In none of the decided cases did we allege dishonesty or corruption. So, his statement that judges dismissed our allegations of dishonesty or actual corruption is a pure and false figment of his imagination.

Is Penrose indifferent to the truth of what he says? Or is our notional anti-corruption champion telling out-and-out lies to try and smear those doing the job he should be doing?

Penrose goes on to say:

“I should probably add that a couple of their cases are against appointments at NHS Test & Trace, where my wife worked as a senior volunteer.”

That’s not entirely frank either. 

The truth is that the person in charge of the programme that delivered unimaginable wealth to Innova’s owners but made no measurable difference to the progress of the pandemic is Baroness Dido Harding. And John Penrose is her husband. Yep, you read it right: he’s charged with scrutinising whether there was corruption in the programme headed up by his own wife. It’s laughable – but it’s no laughing matter.

In fact, Good Law Project is bringing a judicial review – for which a court has granted us permission – of the decision to put Harding to lead the £37bn Test and Trace fiasco. 

What does all of this add up to? 

We wouldn’t normally respond to baseless slurs from a Parliamentarian. But what makes Penrose’s letter significant is that the anti-corruption champion has a responsibility to “engage with external stakeholders, including… civil society organisations”.

There is likely to be – the Government itself has acknowledged – fraud in pandemic procurement. And despite being a small not-for-profit without the powers of a law enforcement agency, Good Law Project has uncovered two highly suspicious cases involving contracts worth hundreds of millions of pounds: one involving Priti Patel and another involving vast contracts awarded to a jeweller based in Florida.

Penrose’s letter tells the truth about his role. He’s not an anti-corruption champion – he’s a man speaking falsehoods to try and stop those working to uncover it. 

---

It is only with your support that we can continue to hold Government to account. If you would like to make a donation, you can do so here.