Category Archives: Developers/ Development

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jun 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Inequality

Comments

1 Comment

“Tories did not build new social housing over fears it would ‘create Labour voters’ says Nick Clegg”

Owl has blogged this before but it needs saying again:

“Social housing was not built under the Conservative-led coalition because of fears it would ‘create Labour voters’, according to Nick Clegg.

The former deputy prime minister claimed the theory prevented government officials from building homes.

‘It would have been in a Quad meeting, so either Cameron or Osborne,’ Nick Clegg told the Guardian.

‘One of them – I honestly can’t remember whom – looked genuinely nonplussed and said: “I don’t understand why you keep going on about the need for more social housing – it just creates Labour voters.”

‘They genuinely saw housing as a petri dish for voters. It was unbelievable.’

The comments were revealed ahead of the release of Mr Clegg’s 2016 book ‘Politics Between the Extremes’.

Yet the seemingly cold attitude to some of the poorest in Britain have been shared by many in light of the Grenfell Tower fire.

The West London complex was social housing and more than 50 are now confirmed to have died in the fire.

It had recently been refurbished by a private subcontractor on behalf of the Conservative-headed local council.

That decision has been harshly criticised as it was revealed that the new fittings could have been fire-proofed for just £5,000 more.

Grenfell Tower had been built in 1974, but the building of social housing has slowed in the decades since.

More than a million people are on housing waiting lists across the country but many have accused the government of being slow to respond to the housing ‘crisis‘.”

Tories did not build new social housing over fears it would ‘create Labour voters’ says Nick Clegg

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jun 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Planning System

Grenfell Tower: an architect’s view on the (avoidable) tragedy

“Building control departments in councils have been left toothless and eviscerated while the authority of fire officers and architects has been weakened in favour of profit. Look where that has got us.

I am an architect in private practice with considerable experience in the design and delivery of a range of buildings in London, including high-rise residential buildings. The terrible Grenfell Tower fire in North Kensington was entirely avoidable.

It was not an act of God, but the tragic outcome of a growing void in the responsibility, expertise and single oversight of large construction projects. This has largely come about due to the breaking up of what I would call the triple safety lock around project delivery.

The first is:

building control, ensuring that increasingly complex building regulations are properly implemented. Building control departments in many local authorities have been eviscerated. They are invariably under-resourced with no teeth. Often a subset of planning departments, they lack the authority to carry out what is arguably the most important part of a local authority’s remit – to ensure the safety of its residents.

Furthermore this function has been partly privatised, with a range of companies competing for the business. It is often those companies with a reputation for gaining “easy” approvals that increasingly dominate the market, further undercutting the council building control.

The morale among many council building control officers is extremely low. I completed a small complex project in an inner London borough last year. The council building control officer I worked with was excellent, but told me that he could not cope with his workload, and was unhappy with the way the department was run. He has since left the council.

Second:

Fire officers play a crucial role in ensuring that all fire regulations are met, and devising a fire strategy for a project. Building control acts as a conduit to local fire departments to assess that all fire regulations have been met, as well as bringing their own experience to bear.

In early 2007 I was working on a large refurbishment project in the West End. We were informed by the fire officer who was reviewing the project with us that in the near future fire officers would no longer play an active role.

A new form of self-certification was to be introduced, with the onus on the developer/owner to ensure a project met all fire regulations. This took no cognisance of the fact that different buildings could have very different fire requirements. The fire officer looked me straight in the eyes and told me that in his opinion this was a recipe for disaster.

The third part of the triple lock:

Is to ensure that all materials used in a building are fit for purpose – obviously particularly important in the case of fire safety. In the past, architects have specified construction materials and have then been in a position to ensure that the specified materials were used. This is increasingly not the case as performance specifications enable alternative materials to be used, often selected by the developer, contractor or sub-contractors.

With architects now seldom having the authority to insist on specific products being used, there is a tendency to go for cheaper materials, without necessarily understanding the impact or potential knock-on effect.

Public safety should not be privatised. Putting a monetary value on human lives is unacceptable. The triple lock should be recognised and strengthened.

Bring back building control to its rightful place in local authorities, working independently of the planning function and the private sector. Bring back fire officers working closely with council building control to scrutinise proposals and carry out proper inspections on all projects. Bring back the specification of materials to a single point of responsibility under the architect or engineer responsible for the specification of materials, working with the building control officer and fire officer.

Allow the experts to do what they know best without interference from politicians or those who tend to take shortcuts or the cheapest option. Look where that has got us.

Deon Lombard has a private architecture practice.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

15 Jun 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development

Comments

1 Comment

Privatisation and austerity: the dreadful human cost

“The company responsible for managing Grenfell Tower had been reviewing fire safety procedures after previous incidents, it has emerged.

Kensington & Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation (KCTMO) was paid £11m by the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea to manage social housing in 2016.

KCTMO’s Adair Tower, also in north Kensington, had previously suffered a fire – the result of arson – and some residents suffered from smoke inhalation and had to be rehoused.

The London fire brigade issued an “enforcement notice” telling KCTMO to install “self-closing devices” on the front doors of flats in Adair Tower and the nearby Hazlewood Tower, built to the same design.

KCTMO, named this year among the top 100 not-for-profit firms to work for by the Sunday Times, has offered its “sincere and heartfelt condolences” to anyone affected by the fire. “It is too early to speculate what caused the fire and contributed to its spread,” the company added. “We will cooperate fully with all the relevant authorities in order to ascertain the cause of this tragedy.”

KCTMO contracted the £10m refurbishment of Grenfell to a private construction firm, Rydon, which in turn subcontracted some of the work, in an illustration of the rewards on offer to private firms from social housing projects.

One of the other firms in the chain of companies involved in the refurbishment appears to have removed a description of the project from its website.

Rydon landed an £8.6m contract to “upgrade” the Grenfell Tower, including adding the external cladding that is being investigated as a potential factor in the fire’s rapid spread.

It boasts a string of contracts for the NHS, local councils and the Ministry of Defence, while its maintenance division, which led the refurbishment of the Grenfell Tower, maintains 22,000 properties and has nearly £450m of contracts on its order book.

The company made a pre-tax profit of £14.3m last year on revenues of £271m and paid investors a dividend of £2m, the largest slice of which went to Rydon’s chief executive and largest shareholder, Robert Bond, 61.

The company’s highest paid director, usually the chief executive, also earned a salary of £424,000 in 2016, a pay rise from £392,000 the year before.

“We are shocked to hear of the devastating fire at Grenfell Tower and our immediate thoughts are with those that have been affected by the incident, their families, relatives and friends,” the company said.

It insisted its work “met all required building control, fire regulation and health and safety standards”.

“We will cooperate with the relevant authorities and emergency services and fully support their inquiries into the causes of this fire at the appropriate time.

“Given the ongoing nature of the incident and the tragic events overnight, it would be inappropriate for us to speculate or comment further at this stage.”

After Rydon won the contract to refurbish Grenfell, it commissioned the ventilation specialist Witt UK to work on the project, it emerged on Wednesday.

Witt UK, based in Halifax, West Yorkshire, previously had a page on its website that boasted of work by one of its subsidiaries, PSB UK, on Grenfell Tower.

A version of the page was still available in Google’s historic “cached” data, in which the company explained that ventilation systems would protect residents from smoke in the event of a fire.

A description of the project read: “The lobby smoke ventilation system has been designed to provide the existing stairwell with protection from the ingress of smoke from a fire within a dwelling by means of a mechanical extract system.”

Witt UK is owned by the German family business Witt & Sohn, run by Dr Henrik Witt, 62, and Karsten Witt, 58.

A person who answered the UK company’s telephone said it had been advised not to comment.

According to the removed page of the Witt website, it handed over the “prestigious project” to a Birmingham-based building service engineering company called JS Wright & Co.

A spokesperson for JS Wright & Co said: “We are shocked by the catastrophic fire at Grenfell Tower in London and our thoughts are with the families, relatives and friends of all those affected by this tragic incident.

“JS Wright carried out a contract with Rydon Maintenance last year to provide Grenfell Tower with improved building services.

“Rydon Maintenance was in the process of refurbishing the building for Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation on behalf of the council.

“Like everyone else at this stage, we are unaware of the causes of this fire but we will co-operate fully with all inquiries and investigations into this incident.”

Rydon also contracted another firm, Harley Facades, to provide the cladding that is being examined as a possible factor in the blaze.

Harley’s website reveals it was paid £2.6m for the Grenfell Tower work.

Grenfell Tower has been managed by KCTMO since 1996, when it took over responsibility from the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea.

KCTMO documents reveal it put its fire safety policy under review last year, ordering changes including speeding up the installation of self-closing doors, tackling hoarding and dealing with clutter in communal areas.

According to board minutes for November 2016, KCTMO admitted it needed to adopt “a more proactive approach to the installation of self-closing devices to flat entrance doors across the stock”.

The company said it would increase the frequency of fire risk assessment reviews, install fire action notices in the entrance lobbies of all blocks and undertake “further work to address the issue of storage and charging of mobility scooters within communal areas”.

The latest accounts filed by KCTMO with Companies House show that “key management personnel”, led by the chief executive, Robert Black, shared £760,000 in salaries for managing properties in the borough.

The accounts did not reveal the names of the recipients, but the company lists four people under “senior management”.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/14/towers-managers-were-reviewing-safety-after-fire-at-another-block

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 Jun 2017

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development

East Devon house prices rise 8.3% in one year – by far the largest increase in Devon

“House prices in Exeter are rising twice as fast in Plymouth, new official figures published today show.

Property prices nationally rose 5.7 per cent for the year to April, the Land Registry’s latest data showed on Tuesday, making the average home worth £236,519.

Experts says the market has defied the Brexit slowdown and bounced back.

Devon saw a lower overall rise of 4.2 per cent over the 12-month period, leaving a home in the county valued on average at £243,072.

The biggest increase was east Devon, where an 8.3 per cent rise took prices to £271,141.

A fraction behind was the city of Exeter, where homes soared by 8.2 per cent compared to 4.1 per cent in Plymouth.

Exeter’s average home is now almost worth a quarter of a million, at £249,571, up from £230,680 in April 2016, the House Price Index said.”

http://www.devonlive.com/devon-house-price-rises-defy-brexit-what-is-your-home-worth-now/story-30388290-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

9 Jun 2017

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Planning System

“CPRE: Give councils cash to build homes and stop developers playing the system”

Difficult times as the recent housing minister Brandon Lewis (author of a book on how to win marginal seats) yesterday lost his marginal seat.

“The next government must give councils cash to build homes and stop developers using the planning system to get out of building affordable homes, a rural charity has said.

A report from the Campaign To Protect Rural England said homebuilders are using ‘viability assessments’ to force through developments with minimal affordable housing.

This way developers can increase their profits, the CPRE pointed out. The organisation said developers are “gaming” the planning system, which allows them to draw up an assessment to show a development is no longer financially viable with the number of required affordable homes.

Local authorities grant planning permission to applications on the condition that a certain number of affordable homes are built but these can be overturned by a viability assessment study.

Many councils’ targets of achieving 35 to 40% affordable homes per development are being routinely missed because of this, the report out on Tuesday stated.

Paul Miner, planning campaign manager at CPRE: “If we don’t change things this will just get worse.

“The next government must reduce the power of these viability studies, stop highly profitable developers gaming the system and give councils the hard cash to start building houses again.”

Miner said you have to “look at those developers who continually use shady tactics to renege on promises to build affordable homes and new community infrastructure”.

“These are often the promises that win them permission in the first place.”

This is affecting the number of homes built in rural areas, the CPRE said.

In 2011-12, 35% of homes built were affordable in rural areas. This has dropped to just 16% in 2015/16 – a year in which Department for Communities and Local Government figures show councils built only 1,890 homes across the country.

CPRE’s research also shows that five of the 15 most unaffordable districts outside London have met their most recent lowest affordable housing target.

Andrew Whitaker, planning director at the Home Builders Federation, said: “The private sector currently provides around 40% of all affordable homes built in this country via cross subsidy from private sales.

“Local authorities should ensure they do not set unrealistic affordable housing targets which prevent developments from coming forward at all.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/06/cpre-give-councils-cash-build-homes-and-stop-developers-playing-system

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

3 Jun 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Taylor Wimpey

Another Taylor Wimpey new-build horror story

“Denise De Souza, 30, was seven months pregnant when she went to get a mug out of her kitchen cupboard in Dartford, Kent, before it fell on top of her and landed it on the floor. …”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4555608/Distraught-wife-feared-daughter-brain-damage.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

1 Jun 2017

Posted under

Developers/ Development, EDDC, Flooding, Planning System

“Nine tenths of England’s floodplains not fit for purpose, study finds”

With EDDC allowing building on flood plains all over the district – a timely warning:

“Only a tenth of England’s extensive floodplains are now fit for purpose – 90% no longer function properly – with the shortfall putting an increasing number of homes and businesses at risk of flooding, according to a new report.

Floods are more likely due to climate change and will claim higher economic costs unless action is taken to halt the damage to floodplains and restore some of their functions, warned the authors of the 12-month study – the first to paint a comprehensive view of England’s floodplains and their capabilities.

“We have ignored our floodplains,” said George Heritage of Salford University, co-author of the study the Changing Face of Floodplains, published by Co-Op Insurance on Thursday. “The changes to them mean water [from heavy rainfall] can flow much faster downstream, and can flow at the same speed as the water in the rivers.”

This accelerated flow has led to sudden and unstoppable deluges in recent years. For instance, Storm Desmond in 2015 affected more than 6,000 homes as rivers and streams burst their banks and spread water over floodplains. As these natural floodplains had been altered by man-made features, they no longer had the ability to store water, leading to rapid flows into urban areas which led to the devastation.

Storm Desmond caused more than £500m in damages, and misery for families excluded from their homes sometimes for months. The UK’s flooding bills are on the rise, with scientists warning of rocketing numbers of cloudbursts and periods of sudden and intense rainfall as climate change takes effect.

Floodplains act as natural “sponges”, soaking up excess water in their vegetation, forming natural buffers that hold back or divert rushing water after rain, and providing areas where rivers can breach their banks and wetlands can be replenished.

Intensive agriculture, increasing urbanisation, poor management of rivers and the draining of wetlands have left the vast majority of these natural features – many previously preserved for centuries by communities who understood their value – unable to fulfil these valuable functions, with some close to collapse.

Building on floodplains has been singled out for years as a key problem, but perhaps surprisingly was found to contribute only about a tenth of the damage in the study. Far greater is intensive farming, which has created artificially “smooth” and uniform landscapes, with hedgerows removed, large areas given over to single crops, wetlands drained and woods and grassland diminished. Farming accounts for nearly two-thirds of the loss of functioning floodplains, according to the study.

Natural floodplains cover about 5% of England, from upland areas and tablelands to low-lying marshes, such as the Somerset levels and the East Anglian fens. Once they were used for grazing for parts of the year, or left uncultivated. However, the exploitation of such areas accelerated in the middle of the last century, when wetlands were drained, hedgerows grubbed up and small farms gave way to bigger farming enterprises.

Today, the report found, 90% of England’s floodplains no longer function properly, with 65% modified by agriculture “meaning they’re now man-made, smoother surfaces”; 9% lost to urban and suburban building developments; 4% are now occupied by open water and 6% by semi-natural woodland and rough grassland; and only 0.5% is now natural or semi-natural wetland.

“It would be almost impossible to return the altered areas to their original state,” noted Heritage. “But it is possible to work with farmers to introduce features that would allow them to function better. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/jun/01/englands-90-floodplains-not-fit-for-purpose-study-finds?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

30 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Clinton Devon Estates, Developers/ Development

Time running out to tell Clinton Devon Estates what you think about them

The survey is here:
https://www.research.net/r/CDECommunity

And, for information, here are the questions the survey asks – perhaps you have questions you would like them to answer that don’t appear on this rather arbitrary list:

“Clinton Devon Estates Survey, time is running out to take this survey. They’d love your views.

“We look to listen carefully to our staff, customers and those in our community. How we engage with you and what you think about our approach to sustainability is important to us and we want to get it right. Your feedback to this survey will play an important part in helping us develop our future communications.”

“Please click on the button below to start the survey. It will take around 3 minutes to complete.”

https://www.research.net/r/CDECommunity

“Everyone who takes part in the survey will be entered into a prize draw with a chance of winning one of three £100 high street gift vouchers. The prize draw will take place on the 7th of June and the winners will be notified on the 9th of June 2017.”

1. Which of the following do you associate with Clinton Devon Estates?
Residential properties;
Venison;
Forestry and timber;
Equestrian events;
Wildlife conservation and management projects;
Commercial properties;
Farms and land;
Other (please specify)

2. To what extent do you agree with the following?
Clinton Devon Estates puts responsible stewardship and sustainable development at the heart of everything they do?
Disagree strongly; Disagree slightly; Neither agree/nor disagree; Agree slightly; Agree strongly

3. Clinton Devon Estates understands and conserves the wildlife it manages
Disagree strongly; Disagree slightly; Neither agree/nor disagree; Agree slightly; Agree strongly

4. Clinton Devon Estates contributes to the local economy
Disagree strongly; Disagree slightly; Neither agree/nor disagree; Agree slightly; Agree strongly

5. Clinton Devon Estates supports the local community
Disagree strongly; Disagree slightly; Neither agree/nor disagree; Agree slightly; Agree strongly

6. If you disagree strongly or slightly with any of these statements, please tell us why………………………

7. To what extent do you agree with the following?
Clinton Devon Estates takes the views of its staff and the local community into account when making decisions.
Disagree strongly; Disagree slightly; Neither agree/nor disagree; Agree slightly; Agree strongly

8. Clinton Devon Estates communicates the reasons for its decisions and actions to its staff and the local community.
Disagree strongly; Disagree slightly; Neither agree/nor disagree; Agree slightly; Agree strongly

9. Clinton Devon Estates is transparent and open about the decisions it makes as a business
Disagree strongly; Disagree slightly; Neither agree/nor disagree; Agree slightly; Agree strongly

10. If you disagree slightly or strongly with any of these statements, please explain why…………………

11. Clinton Devon Estates is considering using the sentence: “We pledge to do today what is right for tomorrow” to help communicate their commitment to sustainability and making decisions that will have a positive impact on future generations.
In this context – How would you describe the word “pledge”?
Traditional; Meaningful; Irrelevant; Old-fashioned; Powerful; Meaningless; Don’t know what it means
Other (please specify)

12. What does the word “pledge” mean to you?……………………………………………..

13. Again thinking about the meaning of the words : “We pledge to do today what is right for tomorrow” in relation to Clinton Devon Estates commitment to sustainability – Do you prefer the word “promise” to the word “pledge” ?
Yes; No; Don’t know

14. Why do you say that? ………………………………………………

15. How credible do you think “We pledge to do today what is right for tomorrow” is as a statement from Clinton Devon Estates?
Not at all credible; Not very credible; Neither; Quite credible; Very credible

16. Why do you say that?………………………………………………….

17. If you’d like to be entered into the prize draw to win one of three £100 high street gift vouchers, please complete your contact details below: Thank you and good luck with the prize draw.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

26 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Budleigh Salterton, Clinton Devon Estates, Developers/ Development

Clinton Devon Estates wants to know what you think of them!

Owl says: perhaps someone could ask why they want to pinch part of the Budleigh Hospital Hub garden to build 2 houses. And how sustainable their AONB developments really are.

“Clinton Devon Estates

Let us know your thoughts.

How we engage with you and what you think about our approach to sustainability is important to us and we want to get it right.

Your feedback to this survey will play an important part in helping us develop our future communications. Take part and be in with a chance of winning one of three £100 high street gift vouchers.

Click here to complete our short survey

https://www.research.net/r/CDECommunity

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

24 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, General Election, Lobbying

Comments

2 Comments

Billionaires and developers rush to fill Tory election coffers

“The Conservatives received a huge boost in donations in the three months before Theresa May called a surprise general election, according to figures published by the Electoral Commission.

The party received £5.46m from January to March this year, more than twice the £2.65m given to Labour.

By the time the prime minister called the election on 18 April, the Tories had received £1.85m more in donations during the first quarter of the year than it had in the last three months of 2016.

The biggest individual donation came from the Conservative party treasurer, Michael Davis, who gave the party £317,000. The South African-born former mining executive is overseeing the party’s fundraising efforts, which have targeted wealthy businesspeople and city figures.

Last week, it emerged that the Conservatives had raised £1.5m more than Labour in the first week of the general election campaign, receiving more than £4.1m while Labour raised just over £2.7m.

The Conservatives are expected to get close to the £19m maximum they are permitted to spend during an election campaign. Labour is expecting to spend less than the Tories, amid a drive for donations from its 500,000 members. …

Other major donations to the Conservatives include £55,000 from the Rigby Group, which owns exclusive hotels including Bovey Castle in Devon, where the Olympic diver Tom Daley recently celebrated his wedding.

A company called Anglesource, run by the billionaire Arora brothers, also gave £50,000.

A property firm owned by a Palestinian-born businessman has given £65,000 to the Conservatives this year. CC Property UK is owned by Said Khoury, a billionaire who also owns CCC, the largest construction firm in the Middle East.

Other major donations came from Leopold Noe, the property developer, who gave the Conservatives £130,000. The hedge-fund manager John Armitage gave £125,000.

JS Bloor (Services), linked to the property tycoon John Bloor, gave £120,000. JS Bloor and Armitage also made donations in the first week of the election campaign, which are subject to different reporting rules.

According to the Electoral Commission, the Tory party also has a credit facility of £5,554,000, while Labour has access to borrowing £113,000.”

Labour received £1.96m from trade unions, including £657,702 from Unite. Public funds are also listed for each party, which predominantly boost the totals for opposition parties. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/23/tories-5m-donations-boost-before-may-called-snap-general-election

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

24 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Environment (local), Planning System, Public Open Space

Comments

1 Comment

Cranbrook “country park” to go to public inquiry

Basically, developers want to skimp, and EDDC has no other way open to attempt to thwart their stinginess.

Don’t hold your breath for a good result in the current political and developer-led situation.

http://www.devonlive.com/public-inquiry-to-be-held-of-plans-for-countryside-park-in-cranbrook/story-30348970-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

16 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Planning System

New estate in Bristol could be (should be?) demolished

“Developers UKS Group were given permission to build 13 three-bed houses and one two-bed house off the A38 in Highridge, Bristol. But locals say they have actually built 13 four-beds and one three-bed.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4510530/Bristol-s-new-multi-million-estate-demolished.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

13 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Taylor Wimpey

Beware Taylor Wimpey leasehold compensation offers

“Taylor Wimpey last month offered £130m to buyers trapped in new-build homes with spiralling ground rent contracts. It was a move initially greeted with glee by victims of the leasehold scandal. But as details have emerged, some householders say they will still be left paying “frankly obscene” charges.

Jo Darbyshire bought her four-bed home in Bolton in 2010 from Taylor Wimpey without realising the full implications of the 999-year leasehold contract, which allowed the freeholder to double the £295 ground rent every 10 years. Only when a neighbour’s house sale fell through – because a mortgage company rejected the ground rent clause – did Darbyshire discover her home had been rendered potentially unsaleable.

When she inquired about buying the freehold, things went from bad to worse. Without her knowledge, Taylor Wimpey had sold the freehold to Adriatic Land at a price understood to be £7,375 for each of the 24 homes on the estate. Neighbours who have since tried to buy the freehold say they have been met with demands of £45,000-£50,000 – a huge amount compared to the £200,000 that some of the smaller homes on the estate currently fetch.

The ground rent company also demands £100 from householders who request a quote to buy the freehold. They also require that any householder wanting to make alterations – such as building a small extension – also pay a fee. “A neighbour wanted to build a small extension and was quoted £3,000 before a brick was laid,” says Darbyshire.

But Taylor Wimpey’s compensation offer has left her deeply frustrated. It offered a “deed of variation … specifically incorporating materially less expensive ground rent review terms”. It is understood the deal will involve the ground rent rising in line with inflation rather than doubling every decade.

Darbyshire says it still leaves her in the clutches of a ground rent company and what she alleges are its “exorbitant charges”. In an open letter to Taylor Wimpey chief executive, Peter Redfern, Darbyshire says: “You seem to believe the only wrongdoing is the introduction of doubling ground rents. The real scandal is the onward sale of ALL freeholds … to investment companies, and the consequences to us … Did you know that, once the freeholds were sold on, that Adriatic would introduce exorbitant charges for alterations and increase the cost of buying the freehold significantly?”

Darbyshire says Taylor Wimpey should be offering homebuyers the chance to buy the freehold at the price originally offered when the estate was built. Her letter adds: “The only acceptable way forwards is for you to reinstate me to the position I would have been in had your sales people, and the solicitor you recommend I use, informed me fully at the point of sale, when I would have purchased my freehold for £5,900.”

Darbyshire is not alone. Sean Greenwood, who Guardian Money featured last November when we first revealed the extent of the ground rent scandal, says the construction giant should refund the £101,000 cost of the apartment his wife bought in Gornal on the edge of Dudley. We highlighted how one apartment had received a “nil valuation” from a mortgage company because of the doubling ground rents.

Greenwood has also written to Redfern, saying: “My wife would still like a full refund. Unfortunately, your most recent offer to change the ground rent review to RPI is unacceptable. We are worried our freeholder maintains the position of power in all negotiations relating to our freehold.

“We are also not willing to wait for the time period it will take to complete the change in the deed. We have been trying to sell for over a year and a combination of the doubling ground rent lease and the collapse of the wall in our car park has meant we cannot sell.”

More than 4,000 people have joined a Facebook group, the National Leasehold Campaign, to protest over ground rent issues and excessive charges, with complaints directed not just at Taylor Wimpey but at other major developers, including Persimmon and Bellway.

Last week, Nationwide told the construction giants it would no longer offer mortgages on new-build properties with short leases or, crucially, where the ground rent is more than 0.1% of the value of the home.

In a statement, Redfern said: “This is about doing what we think is right. We recognise the concerns and difficulties that some of our customers have faced as a result of their doubling leases and we are sorry for the worry this has caused. Although we are under no legal obligation to take action, we want to help our customers.

“We are working hard with the freeholders to convert our customers’ doubling leases to ones that are significantly less expensive … and which resolve concerns around how easy it is to sell or get a mortgage. Taylor Wimpey will cover the cost of converting the leases.

“These leases were put in place between 2007 and 2011 at a time when economic conditions were very different. We stopped using them on sites commenced after 2011.”

The company makes clear that the £130m should not be viewed as compensation, as the sale of the leases was legal, and that it has not been obliged to take action. It suggests that the aim of its Ground Rent Review Assistance Scheme is to address saleability and mortgageability rather than pay compensation.”

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/may/13/taylor-wimpey-compensation-leasehold-scandal-victims

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

11 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Environment (local)

4,000 home planning application goes to judicial review because of air pollution effect

“A campaign group has gained permission to take a controversial planning decision in Canterbury to judicial review.

Sustainable Ways Integral to Canterbury’s Health (Switch) has objected to the 4,000 homes Mountfield Park development, which also includes 70,000 square metres of employment space, two schools and a reserve site for the Kent & Canterbury Hospital, together with a 1,000 spaces park and ride site.
Switch has argued that the application by developer Corinthian Land should on air pollution grounds have been rejected, or called in by Communities Secretary Sajid Javid.

Campaigners said they sought to raise £25,000 but would be represented by Robert McCracken QC for “a cut-rate price because he cares about Canterbury”.

Switch said Canterbury had been in breach of air quality laws since 2010 and that 100 people a year died in the city due to air pollution, which would be worsened by the development adding some 28,000 extra vehicular journeys daily.

A Canterbury City Council statement said: “It is disappointing that the judicial review application challenging the secretary of state’s decision not to call the Mountfield Park planning approval in has been allowed to proceed.

“Any involvement we now have in this process will mean spending taxpayers’ cash, which we would far rather spend on services for residents.”

It said Mountfield Park was “crucial to the delivery of our local plan and our vision for providing the homes and jobs for people who want to live and work here”, and had been the subject of extensive consultation.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=31107%3Acampaigners-granted-judicial-review-over-permission-for-4000-home-scheme&catid=63&Itemid=31

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 May 2017

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Taylor Wimpey

Children injured in new- build homes due to dangerous and shoddy workmanship

“Children have been injured in shoddily built new homes, we can reveal.

The youngsters have suffered electric shocks and breathing problems, while one was even crushed by a radiator, after moving in to properties that had not been constructed properly.

The revelations are the latest uncovered by the Daily Mail as part of an investigation into the dire state of many of Britain’s new-build homes.
We have previously reported on leaks, water-logged gardens, missing windows, badly fitted doors, broken toilets and gaps in the guttering.

Many homebuyers have scrimped and saved for years to get on the property ladder.

Today we can reveal that poor workmanship by builders – some of whom are cutting corners in a rush to meet construction targets – is raising safety concerns.

Kate and Kevin Fever, from Tiverton, Devon, saved for years to buy a bigger home for their four children. When they moved to their new £265,000, four-bedroom property in December 2015, there were snagging issues with the downstairs flooring and drainage in the garden. These were fixed within a few weeks.

But, seven months later, a heavy double radiator fell off the wall as their eldest daughter Gemma, then aged ten, walked across the kitchen. Kate, 32, a student midwife, says: ‘When I rushed over and pulled off her sock, I expected just a graze, but it was a bloodbath. I grabbed a tea towel to wrap around her foot and we went straight to A&E.’ Gemma, now 11, needed stitches and a cast on her leg for a ruptured Achilles tendon. Kate and Kevin, 40, reported the incident to their builder Taylor Wimpey.

They claim the firm admitted wrong fixings were used on a number of radiators, which meant they weren’t secured properly to the walls.

The radiators were repaired and the firm contacted other customers they thought could be affected. Gemma also received toys, a £50 Toys R Us gift card and £150.

A spokeswoman for the builder says: ‘Taylor Wimpey has apologised to the Fever family for the distress caused. The health and safety of our customers and their families is our number one priority.’

Paul and Lisa Holland, from Leyland, Lancashire, also bought a four-bedroom property from Taylor Wimpey, which they have lived in since 2010. In November last year, Lisa, 43, and youngest son Kyle, 11, suffered electric shocks after touching a lightswitch.

Paul, 45, an HGV driver, says: ‘It happened when we changed the bulb to an energy saver. The bulb started flashing. My son went to the switch, but he jumped back crying. My wife then tried it and jumped back after also suffering a shock.’ When Paul’s brother tested the plastic switch with a volt meter he found live current leaking. The switch had to be replaced, along with the light. ‘My wife and son are very, very lucky they did not each suffer more serious shocks,’ says Paul.

A Taylor Wimpey spokesman says: ‘The vast majority of our customers tell us they are very satisfied with the quality of their home. ‘However, we recognise that we do sometimes get things wrong, and in those cases we are committed to putting them right as quickly as possible.’

Figures show a staggering 98 per cent of new-build buyers report problems to their builders, according to a new home survey by the National House Building Council and the Home Builders Federation.

After years of saving, Colin and Jessica Nickless bought their first home in September 2015. But since moving into the three-bedroom, terraced new-build in Rainham, near London, the couple and their two children have been plagued by damp and mould. Ellie, five, and Freddie, three, have both been in hospital with breathing difficulties and chest infections.

The couple particularly worry about Ellie as she suffers from cystic fibrosis, which makes her vulnerable to respiratory infections. Colin, 41, a full-time carer for Ellie, says: ‘Our new-build home is making us all ill.
‘We’ve had problems with leaking pipes, damp carpets, water dripping through electrical sockets and light fittings, waste pipes not being connected properly and pouring filthy water into my son’s bedroom.’

A spokeswoman for Circle Housing refused to comment on the case due to an ongoing legal claim.

Philip Waller, a retired construction manager who runs advice website brand-newhomes.co.uk, says: ‘When children are being injured by defective new homes, the Government simply cannot stand on the sidelines.'”

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-4489582/Our-new-build-homes-children-E.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

9 May 2017

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development

New build housing figures pathetic

“House building under the Tories has fallen to its lowest peacetime levels since the 1920s, Huff Post UK reveals today.

An analysis of house building going back more than a century shows the most recent years of Conservative rule has seen the lowest average house build rate since Stanley Baldwin was in Downing Street in 1923.

According to figures compiled by the House of Commons Library, an average of 127,000 homes a year have been built in England and Wales since the Tories took office in 2010.

This is the lowest level since Baldwin’s first stint as Prime Minister in 1923, when just 86,000 homes were built. …

… Alongside the figures, Labour also released a dossier of broken election pledges from the Tories’ 2015 manifesto. This included the promise to “build 200,000 Starter Homes” by 2020.

The target was dropped from the Government’s flagship Housing white paper published in February.

The manifesto also pledged to build “more affordable housing”, but the number of affordable homes built last year fell to the lowest level in 24 years.” …”

https://t.co/cCMtgN15Bo

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

6 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Bovis, Developers/ Development

Nationwide refuses to grant mortgages on new leasehold houses and flats in ground rent scandal

“Overnight, Nationwide building society has made hundreds, and possibly thousands, of new-build flats and houses almost unsaleable – and they should be roundly applauded for doing so.

In a surprise intervention into the scandal of leasehold flats and houses sold with spiralling ground rents, the society said that from this Thursday it will stop lending against any new-build leasehold flat or house where the ground rent is more than 0.1% of the value of the property. It will also refuse loans on new flats with lease lengths of less than 125 years or new houses with less than 250 years. Developers will now be forced, if other lenders adopt the same policy, to slash the absurd ground rents or find that they simply can’t get any buyers.

Take, for example, Berkeley’s 60-acre development south of Reading called Kennet Island. Prices for the remaining leasehold flats start at £249,950, but when we rang the sales office it told us the ground rent was £350 and would increase with RPI. That’s more than 0.1% of the value of the property – which means buyers won’t now qualify for a Nationwide mortgage. Either Berkeley cuts the ground rent or finds that buyers will melt away, unable to find a loan.

Coming so soon after Taylor Wimpey said it had set aside £130m to compensate buyers caught in the ground rent trap, it’s another small victory in the battle against leasehold abuse.

Robert Stevens of Nationwide said: “As a mutual building society that looks to protect its members, we have decided to make changes to the way we value new-build properties on a leasehold basis. We are doing this to address the practice of using leasehold tenure where this is unnecessary, particularly for new-build houses, and to ensure that onerous leasehold terms, including ground rents, are properly considered and controlled in order to safeguard our mortgage members.

“Nationwide is taking a proactive, leading position on this issue to address a significant risk facing our members and to challenge what we believe to be poor practice in the new-build market.”

The society is one of the biggest lenders in the UK, and hopefully this will now set a benchmark for other providers to follow.

Remember, we are not talking about service charges here. When leaseholders pay a service charge, at least they get something in return – such as the maintenance of the common parts of the building. When leaseholders pay a ground rent they receive absolutely nothing in return. It is little more than a medieval tax and should have been outlawed decades if not centuries ago. An ugly industry has built up among financiers who snap up leaseholds with ground rents, because in an era of a 0.25% base rate a stream of income guaranteed to go up by RPI – or double every 10 years in some cases – is an extremely valuable commodity.

The big developers reassure unsuspecting young buyers that the 999-year lease is “almost the same as freehold”, but then they sell it on, typically for 15-20 times the ground rent. It’s a lovely little earner for the developers but spells misery for the flat dwellers.

It’s great that Nationwide has set a new benchmark, but we need to go further. There is no reason why a ground rent should be any more than a peppercorn – say £5 a year. That would kill off this grubby trade overnight. Developers who trapped buyers in ground rents that double every 10 years should be forced to buy them out in the way that Taylor Wimpey has agreed to compensate its buyers.

Amazingly, giant builders such as Persimmon are still knocking out new-build estates where houses are being sold as leasehold, for which there can be no justification. Meanwhile, apartments should only be sold on a commonhold, not leasehold, basis. The legal structure is already in place – it just needs political will to force it on the developers.”

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/may/06/nationwide-housebuilders-leasehold-new-builds

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

3 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Colyton, Councillor Helen Parr, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Local Plan, Planning System, Seaton/ Colyford / Colyton, Transparency, Voting

Comments

2 Comments

Express and Echo names EDDC Vice-Chair Helen Parr as councillor under police investigation at Colyton

Councillor Parr is standing for the DCC Seaton and Colyton seat at elections tomorrow.

“The vice-chairman of East Devon District Council is under investigation over an allegation she influenced plans to develop her area while failing to declare an interest.

Councillor Helen Parr will be speaking to police officers on a voluntary basis, the Express & Echo understands.

The investigation into the councillor for Coly Valley regards late changes to the East Devon Villages plan made after she was among those who spoke at the meeting of the East Devon District Council strategic planning committee on February 20.

Cllr Parr is a director of a company which owns land next to the former Ceramtec factory site in Colyton. The factory was due to be slated for housing until Cllr Parr spoke at the planning meeting and it was decided to recommend that it remains for employment.

She told the committee: “The main concern and why people are not at all happy about what is proposed in the document is that the built up area boundary line now has suddenly, after the consultation, gone out round the built section of the Ceramtec site.

“It is a very large site and will accommodate, if it went only to houses, about 80 houses. It would be a large development for Colyton which nobody, until now, had any inkling of, in that the built-up area boundary excluded this site.

“There is concern because the bottom line for Colyton is that we lost 80 jobs when this factory closed and we would like to retained as much as possible for employment land.

“I would ask the committee to agree or to propose that the wording should make it clear that on the preamble to the plan that on page 20 it includes words that show that this is protected as an employment site and it should be retained for employment use.”

The East Devon Alliance – a group of independent district councillors – has raised concerns about Cllr Parr’s conduct with Devon & Cornwall Police.

Members say she should have declared and interest and not spoken on the issue.

Cllr Parr and her husband are directors of J & FJ Baker & Company Limited, which owns land at Turlings Farm, next to the Ceramtec site.

East Devon Alliance Councillor Cathy Gardner, at last week’s East Devon District Council meeting, revealed that there was an ongoing police investigation into the council’s handling of the matter.

A spokesperson for Devon & Cornwall Police said it could not confirm or deny the scope of the police investigation. Cllr Parr was asked for comment, but said that due to purdah – rules brought in before an election – she could not say anything.

Last year J & FJ Baker & Company Limited bought land on the south side of Turlings Farm which connects the Ceramtec site to the farm that the Parrs own. They paid £1 for the strip of property.

Cllr Gardner said at last week’s meeting of East Devon District Council: “It may be proven that undue influence has distorted the content of the plan. If that does turn out to be the case, do you agree that it is the responsibility of this council to rectify the result of this influence – in order to ensure the residents of Colyton are not adversely affected and to do so before the plan goes to the (Planning) Inspector?”

In response, Cllr Paul Diviani, the council’s leader, said: “In terms of the village plan, I can’t see a reason why we should be inclined to second guess what an inspector or other authority or otherwise is going to do and in that respect I will reserve judgement as to when we actually do take action.”

An East Devon Alliance source told the Echo: “She is the vice-chairman of the council and has been the chairman of the planning committee for years, so she knows what she is doing, so we have got to pursue this.”

An East Devon District Council spokesman said: “Only the three statutory officers at the council together with one other officer were aware that there was a police investigation prior to the meeting of council on Wednesday and these officers have kept the matter confidential.

“Given that there is an active police investigation, and the sensitivities around purdah for both the county and General Election, it would be wholly inappropriate for the council to comment on the investigation at this time. The council also cannot comment on how Cllr Gardner became aware of the police investigation, and the chief executive and monitoring officer were surprised that she raised this matter at a public meeting.

“The process that has been followed for the village plan and the representations made/considered by officers and reported to the strategic planning committee, can be found on the East Devon District Council website.”

The East Devon Villages Plan – a blueprint for development in the area – is currently out for consultation”.

REPRODUCEABLE IMAGES:

UNFORTUNATELY SOME IMAGES IN THIS ARTICLE ARE NOT REPRODUCEABLE HERE – SEE LINK TO FULL ARTICLE AT END OF THIS POST WHICH IS REPEATED VERBATIM FROM THE DEVON-LIVE WEBSITE. FOR FULL STORY AND ALL EVIDENTIAL IMAGES SEE:

http://www.devonlive.com/east-devon-council-vice-chairman-to-speak-to-police-over-plan-changes/story-30310460-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Planning System

“Planning chief faces prison for illegal changes to home”

“A senior Conservative councillor is facing jail for illegally altering her grade II listed 14th-century cottage that was featured on the Channel 4 show Double Your House for Half the Money.

The £830,000 property was held up as a good example of how to renovate an old house. But Barby Dashwood-Morris, 70, had failed to get planning permission from Wealden district council, despite serving as chairwoman of the planning committee.

At Brighton magistrates’ court she admitted six of 22 charges of executing the demolition or alteration of a building affecting its listed character, including removing a barley twist banister and rail and replacing them with a glass panel and new handrail. Some of the alterations to the cottage in the East Sussex village of Hellingly were alleged to have been carried out while she was chairwoman of the committee. The alterations came to light when prospective buyers ordered a survey.

Dashwood-Morris said on the TV show it was “an example of how to turn an ancient Sussex hall into a home that meets all the comforts of modern living”.

She was bailed until a hearing later this month.”

Source: The Times (paywall)

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 May 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local)

Comments

1 Comment

NHS Property is planning to sell hospital sites to private sector health firms

Noted by Claire Wright via Twitter:

“Plans to release NHS-owned land and buildings for commercial use could be further delayed, after the future of a report into the UK’s health system was thrown into doubt.

The Department of Health was due to report its findings into public health in July, but there are now concerns it could be delayed amid wrangling around the June’s General Election.

The project, known internally as Phoenix, is set to overhaul the way in which healthcare services are procured and run.

The new report was set to review the system, and a proposal to split the country into six regions so that buildings could be run more centrally. The Government wants to raise £5bn from the sale of public land by 2020.

This was expected to result in an acceleration of the release of land and buildings to the open market as more surplus stock was identified across the estate. This could have been snapped up by developers wanting to build much-needed homes, or bought by the private sector to be improved and then leased to local health services.

At present, buildings are run and leased to service providers by LIFT Partnerships, which bring together local public health bodies and private sector providers, working with NHS Property Services.

But property professionals have warned that the election could cause further delays to the implementation of the new system.

One developer, who did not wish to be named, said the report was also supposed to clarify the way the estate would be managed in the future.

“This could have also paved the way for private healthcare companies to acquire property to provide better local services,” he said. “These things take long enough as they are without further delays.”

Another warned that any new administration could seek to slow the sale of land or property under pressure from local opposition.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/05/01/nhs-property-strategy-could-delayed-election-developers-warn/amp/