Latest developer housebuilding scam: cost of converting a house lease to freehold

“When Clare Budgen bought her first house in Ellesmere Port in 2009 for £155,000 the last thing on her mind was the lease. Taylor Wimpey, the developer, arranged the lease on a 999-year basis, so what could the then 22-year-old possibly have had to worry about?

But just seven years later, when she looked into buying the freehold (to enable her to sell the home more easily in the future) she was astonished to find that, first, Taylor Wimpey had sold her freehold to another company, E&J Estates, and, second, it wanted £32,000.

Paula Richmond is in a similar boat. In 2015, she bought a four-bed house built by Taylor Wimpey in 2011 for £122,000, thinking she had bagged a bargain. Again, the original lease was for 999 years and with 995 more years to go, it was the least of her concerns. At the time, she understood that buying the freehold would cost no more than £2,000-£3,000. But, like Clare, she has found that her lease has been sold to E&J Estates by Taylor Wimpey and has been told by surveyors that she will have to pay up to £40,000 for the freehold – one-third of the house’s value. Paula can’t afford it and says “the house is almost unsaleable”, with solicitors warning potential buyers to stay away.

AdvertisementHide
Like thousands of others in England and Wales, buyers like Paula and Clare (not their real names) have been trapped by a controversial trend among developers to sell homes as leasehold when they previously would have been freehold. The buyers are given reassuringly long 999-year leases – usually it is leases of less than 60 years on flats that are a worry – but later find that buying the freehold is prohibitively expensive.

One surveyor Guardian Money spoke to in Manchester said a client had just been forced to pay £38,000 to buy the freehold on their recently built home, despite its long lease.

The trap for unsuspecting buyers comes from the escalation in ground rent in the small print of long leases. Initially, it looks affordable. The developer gives the buyer a 999-year lease, with the ground rent set, in Paula’s case, at £295 a year. The contract says the ground rent will double every 10 years. This may look innocuous – after all, most people move every seven to 10 years. But to the company that buys the freehold, the income is valuable….

…Campaigners say issues around ­leasehold properties will be top of the agenda for an all-party parliamentary group on leasehold and commonhold next month. It has attracted 43 MPs and lords, and is chaired by Labour MP Jim Fitzpatrick and Tory Sir Peter ­Bottomley. Members include Sir Keir Starmer, Emma Reynolds and Barry Gardiner.

Sebastian O’Kelly of support group Leasehold Knowledge Partnership says: “It is disgraceful that plc ­housebuilders are building leasehold houses that ­ordinarily – and until recently – would have had freehold title. This is an ­erosion of the wealth of ordinary people at the expense of the rich.

“Young people, after years of paying rent, finally buy a home and then find they are still, in fact, tenants – which is what a leaseholder is – with all the ­vulnerability that that implies.”

He adds: “The housebuilders are evasive over this issue and it beggars belief that the ­outrageous ground rent multiples come from household-name builders. There is no attempt to justify the adoption of leasehold tenure for these houses, which are not complex communal sites such as blocks of flats.

MP Justin Madders is calling for a ban on leasehold for estates of houses. “It is clear this system is being abused to drive huge profits at ordinary ­homeowners’ expense. There is no need for there to be leasehold properties, particularly those on an estate where the properties are mainly detached houses.

“They need to be banned – it may be a convenient way for developers to get extra profit from their building work, but once they get in the hands of these private equity companies the profit motive overrides any considerations that there are real people living in their homes, who are being asked to stump up eye-watering sums.”

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/oct/29/new-builds-house-buyers-leasehold-property-trap

FWS Carter and Greendale Business Park – trees, who cares?

East Devon District Council has moved to prevent more trees being felled at a business park near Woodbury Salterton.

“A tree preservation order has been made after concerns were raised about trees being removed at Greendale Business Park, off the A3052.

It comes as owner FWS Carter & Sons Ltd is set to appeal against the council’s refusal of planning permission for an extended compound, warehouse and office building on the eastern edge of the site.

Groundworks on the scheme, including the removal of some trees, started in March last year, before a planning application was submitted in November.

Planning consent was refused by East Devon District Council in July this year.

Earlier this month, the council confirmed a tree preservation order to safeguard the remaining trees on the eastern side of the business park.

The trees were planted some years ago to provide screening to mitigate the impact of the industrial estate on the surrounding rural area.

Councillor Geoff Jung, the local ward member on the district council, claims between 300 and 450 trees have been removed – but the developer says only 50 have been cleared.

Georgina Turner, owner of the nearby Brooklands Caravan Park, which overlooks the site, said: “It’s affecting my house as well as my livelihood.

“When we bought this place 18 months ago, the holiday park was protected from the industrial estate by this thick band of trees, so you couldn’t hear it or see it.

“Since they removed the trees, people coming here on holiday have commented on the noise. It has put some people off. People want to go on holiday somewhere peaceful and quiet.

“Even if they were to replant the trees, it will take another 15 years for them to grow, so it’s not going to be an immediate solution.”

Councillor Jung said: “These trees were specifically planted to act as a semi natural screen to help shield the industrial area from the open countryside and local residential properties.

“We will have to start again and await further planting and years of continual growth to replicate what has been ripped out.”

The planning officer’s report notes that works have been ongoing on the site, where a concrete compound and light commercial unit have been constructed.

FWS Carter & Sons has said around 30 jobs are associated with the new development.

Director Alec Carter said: “Greendale Business Park is a major employment site in East Devon, supporting over 1,300 jobs and contributing well over £16 million to the local economy each year.

“The planning application in question was submitted in November 2015 with a target date for determination in February 2016. The application was not considered until eight months after it was lodged.

“The refusal of the application was surprising given that the majority of the site in question had previously been granted planning consent for a large 1,661 square metre office building.

“The business occupying the site employs 30 people and is predominantly using the area for open storage. A small 120 square metre warehouse is also on the site.

“A planning appeal is being lodged with the Planning Inspectorate against the refusal of the planning application. Two detailed planning applications are also being re-submitted to East Devon District Council.

“Around 50 young trees were removed to accommodate the business site and a number have been replanted on the boundary of the proposed development. The trees were not covered by a Tree Protection Order and their removal is not in breach of Forestry Commission regulations, who were notified at the time.”

The developer has agreed to repay part of a grant from the Forestry Commission which was used to fund the original planting.

It added that over the last 15 years, around 23,000 trees covering 21 hectares have been planted around Greendale Business Park.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/council-order-to-halt-removal-of-trees-at-east-devon-business-park/story-29844134-detail/story.html

“Come and meet Sir Hugo Swire MP on 29th Oct and Speak Up for the climate”

From Christian Aid – Ottery St Mary

“Dear friends,

Here are two important items of news that we thought you might like to know about concerning Ottery – an informal talk with Sir Hugo Swire at the next Community Market (29th October) and the latest update from campaigners regarding the proposed mineral extraction at Straitgate:

Informal conversation with Sir Hugo Swire MP, 11am on Sat 29th October in

The Institute, Yonder St, Ottery St Mary

Do you feel passionate about protecting all that we love from climate change? Do you want to see our elected MP Sir Hugo Swire take action on this issue? If your answer is yes, please come to an informal conversation with Sir Hugo Swire MP over a cup of tea/coffee and the WI’s fabulous cakes at
11am on Saturday 29th October in The Institute, Yonder St, Ottery – and visit Ottery’s dynamic Community Market at the same time. All are welcome!

The conversation with Sir Hugo has been organised by Christian Aid and is supported by the local branch of the Women’s Institute, Ottery St Mary United Reformed Church, and Sustainable Ottery. It is part of the national Speak Up for the Climate week of action promoted by The Climate Coalition:

http://www.theclimatecoalition.org

Officially the national week of action finished last Saturday with nearly 300 events taking place with local MPs all over the UK. Prime Minister Theresa May and Chancellor Philip Hammond were among the MPs who participated in local constituency events. A very constructive meeting was
also held with Ben Bradshaw MP in Exeter. In Ottery we thought it would be good to wait till our monthly Community Market (organised by the United Reformed Church) which typifies Ottery’s community spirit, our support for local produce and crafts, and our commitment to more sustainable shopping and living.

There is no strict agenda for this event. Christian Aid will briefly kick things off and ask Sir Hugo to press his government to draw up a national plan for reducing carbon emissions (in line with the Climate Change Act) –
as this is what The Climate Coalition has been calling for throughout the week of action nationally. After that, we will all be free to share with Sir Hugo our personal reasons for taking climate change seriously – and what we would like him to do about it, both locally and nationally. Some of us will be moved by the impact of climate change on the world’s poorest communities.

Others may want to talk about the impact on bees and other wildlife, our coastline, our farming, or our health. Some of us may be worried about floods in Ottery; others may be excited about the opportunities to scale up renewable energy or to promote cycling and cleaner transport. Whatever
climate change means for you, come and share it with your local MP on 29th October.

This is the start of a conversation with Sir Hugo which we hope will be ongoing over the coming years. And by the way, no technical knowledge of climate change science is required! If you know you can come, please contact
Helen Collinson:

helen.hcollinson90.freeserve.co.uk

(mob 0790 394 7782)

and please mention to her any issues or questions broadly related to climate change which you’d particularly like to raise with Sir Hugo. Alternatively, feel free to just turn up on the day!”

Barratt Homes London boss arrested

“The London boss of housebuilding giant Barratt Developments has been arrested after an investigation into alleged misconduct in the process for awarding contracts.

Alastair Baird, regional managing director for the London region, and one other former Barratt London employee were arrested this morning, the firm said.

It has suspended Mr Baird following the arrest.

Mr Baird joined Barratt as a site manager in 1987 and was promoted to London managing director in 2011 – a division employing more than 650 staff.

He is given a glowing review on the company’s website which praises him for being a ‘dynamic leader with an enviable reputation’ and ‘superb relationships with key public and private sector stakeholders’.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3851340/London-boss-housebuilders-Barratt-Developments-arrested-probe-awarding-contracts.html

Community Voice on Planning Conference report

“Community Voice on Planning (CoVoP) held its first conference in Leeds on Saturday 15th October – with the conference title being “NIMBY – reality or slur”. I attended – not to find out if I am one, but to explore the background as to why e.g. media, so immediately, and regularly, calls on those concerned with current planning matters to defend themselves against being NIMBYs.

The conference had a diverse content, which explored fully the mess that is the current planning system, and the very poor outcomes generated by planning law that is simply not fit for purpose.

An opening letter was read from Clive Betts MP, chair of the Communities and Local Government Committee. This committee has nothing to do with government, but acts as scrutineer of the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) re policies, administration and spending. One of their recent calls has been for Gavin Barwell MP (new Housing and Planning Minister) to respond the the DCLG-commissioned Local Planning Expert Group’s recommendations on planning. This includes a statement that Leeds’ and Bradford’s Core Strategy housing targets are more than 500 houses per year over-provisioned.

Andrew Wood from CPRE presented some complex ideas about greenbelt use for housing and seemed to be suggesting a deal-based planning arrangement where housing needs were met by very selective use of greenbelt sites where fully assessed and sustainable use and requirement had been carried out. He developed the idea that greenbelt is one of the last planning policy tools that local authorities have to control patterns of development, but stated the obvious threats to existing greenbelt boundaries.

Jenny Unsworth from Congleton asked the question “Does the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF) work?” Through a well presented summary of planning milestones, leading towards the position in her own area, Jenny demonstrated that planning reality in Congleton is the same in Leeds and Bradford – and very much anywhere else in England. Her key point was that the workings of the NPPF and Localism were at opposite ends of the planning spectrum. She also reminded us that excessive and undelivered housing numbers were resulting in 5-year land supply failure, leading to local authority plans being automatically out of date. It therefore followed that planning had become an ad hoc system defined by appeals, rather than a plan-led one, as sought by the NPPF. No surprises to find her answer to the question to be “No”.

Julie Mabberly, Chair of CoVoP, and planning activist in Oxforshire, ridiculed the extraordinary basis for setting housing numbers that is the Objectively Assessed Housing Needs system. She described the system as from the pages of “Alice in Wonderland” and demonstrated through various slides that a finger-in-the-air figure for housing need became inflated (and totally un-achievable) through a series of speculative additions to housing need, that also included double-counting. Her summary was that OBJECTIVE housing needs assessment was anything but that.

Dr Quentin Bradley, from Leeds Beckett University set out the controlling influence of developers, and in particular the significance of land price and hoarding of land, in respect of affordable housing provision. Dr Bradley suggested that the current structure of both the land and housing markets contribute to a shortage of housing being built, and the affordable housing build ratio that comes out of that. He argued that with the present structure in place, building more homes alone will not solve the crisis.

Dr Hugh Ellis from the Town and Country Planning Association set out the significant role planning has played in the formation of the nation’s built housing since the Association’s formation some 120 years ago. In particular Dr Ellis considered the outcomes of the planning of garden cities in comparison to the broken system that is currently in place.

A pleniary session concluded the conference, introduced by WARD chair, Dr. David Ingham. He referred to the stimulation given to the WARD group in respect of the old order, from DCLG, based on the adoption by Bradford of its flawed Core Strategy, some of the policies of which have been written by the very Inspector who declared it sound. Dr Ingham also called for more MP input at Westminster to change planning law, and thanked in particular, Greg Mulholland MP, for his long support to WARD over the last 7 years of campaigning and for his work in Parliament to change planning law.

The panel of 3 MPs, which also included Paul Sherriff MP and Jason McCartney MP, showed their understanding of a broken planning system and their attendance at this conference, with Greg Mulholland, is proof of that.

My view from this remains unchanged, and that is before I went into the conference I was sure the current planning system is not fit for purpose. I came out with more evidence that that is exactly the case. With an appeal-led planning system for the largest housing sites now in place, the NPPF has totally failed to deliver the housing that is needed, or of the right type and in the right places. The result of this is the great threat to the precious greenbelt. If protecting that makes me a NIMBY then I am proud to stand up and be labelled as that.

Martin Hughes, Treasurer of WARD, Chair of Yorkshire Greenspace Alliance”

http://wardyorkshire.org/latest-news/ward-attends-leeds-covop-conference

“South West Growth Summit”

This Friday … Exeter University … usual suspects … best place to do business … opportunities … vision … spin … more spin … puff … more puff … and:

After the summit, the aim is to develop a South West Growth Charter, backing Local Enterprise Partnerships with a strong business voice to complement the work being done by local government leaders. This will be presented to government ahead of the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement next month, where he will set out the government’s economic plans.”

Ah, yes … now Owl gets the idea! A re-brand for our LEP to make it look more democratic … good luck with that one.

Blots on the landscape …

Another BBC Devon Live post:

“An application to redevelop a former hotel site near Ilfracombe was refused by North Devon Council because of concerns about the impact on the local area, the authority has confirmed.

Developers had applied to demolish the former Lee Bay Hotel and build 20 homes, a cafe and toilet block, and create an open space.

Members of the planning committee voted last Wednesday against recommendations for approval. The council said it was because the “benefits of redeveloping the site did not outweigh the impact of the proposed new development on the character of the area and landscape”.

Just imagine, instead of a hotel you had Sidford Fields industrial estate, Ilfracombe!

Renting now outstripping buying homes

“The property rental market is booming at the expense of the sales market, making it look as if house-buying will be outstripped for the first time in eight decades next year, as home-buyers face a continued struggle to find properties they can afford.

Activity in the sales market has cooled since June’s Brexit vote and a lack of property for sale combined with rising prices are set to lead to more new lets than purchases, the UK’s largest estate agency chain, Countrywide, said.

Johnny Morris, research director at Countrywide, said: “As some would-be buyers and sellers sit on their hands, Brexit-induced uncertainty has continued to boost the rental market … September saw record activity, with increasing numbers of lets agreed and tenants choosing to renew their contracts. On current trends 2017 could be the first time since the 1930s that more homes are let than sold.”

Separate reports suggest that affording a new home is becoming increasingly difficult for would-be buyers, with asking prices rising since the summer and borrowers having to find bigger deposits than in 2015.”

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/17/property-rentals-to-outstrip-sales-for-first-time-since-1930s

When is a village not a village?

When it has 10,000 houses – it’s a TOWN!

Garden villages scheme gets cash boost

An extra £1m has been put behind the garden villages programme, taking the total government funding on offer to £7m.

Housing minister Gavin Barwell urged councils to apply for the money as “we want to ensure everyone has an affordable place to live and that means we’ve got to build more homes”.

The scheme assists the development of new villages of between 1,500 and 10,000 homes planned around green spaces.

It already supports developments planned at Bicester, Didcot, Basingstoke, a site near to Braintree, Essex, and the former RAF Deensthorpe airfield near Corby, Northamptonshire.

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/10/garden-villages-scheme-gets-cash-boost

Neighbourhood planners beware – developers are out to get you

A bit legalese but VERY IMPORTANT for those currently putting together Neighbourhood Plans.

Developers have won a High Court challenge over a district council’s decision to make a neighbourhood plan.

In Stonegate Homes Ltd & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Horsham District Council [2016] EWHC 2512 Horsham took the decision to make the Henfield Neighbourhood Plan on 27 April 2016. This followed a referendum earlier in the month where the plan was passed with a vote of 94.3% of the voters.

The claimants were developers who were promoting a 72-dwelling site on the western side of Henfield. They have appealed Horsham’s refusal of their planning application for that site in November 2014; the decision is with the Communities Secretary for determination.

The claimants issued a claim under section 61N of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) (the 1990 Act) over Horsham’s making of the neighbourhood plan. They put forward three grounds, which were that:

The defendant council had failed to lawfully assess reasonable alternatives to the spatial strategy as established by the neighbourhood plan and, in particular, the alternative of permitting development on the western edge of Henfield;

The defendant had failed to consider any alternatives to the Built-Up Area Boundary (BUAB) as established in the neighbourhood plan and had failed to act rationally in the selection of the BUAB;

The defendant and/or the examining inspector failed to give any or adequate reasons as to why the neighbourhood plan met EU obligations.

The council as the defendant submitted in response:

(i) That the challenge was limited in scope by section 38A(4) and section 38A(6) of the 2004 Act to a consideration of whether the making of the neighbourhood development order would breach or would otherwise be incompatible with any EU obligation or any of the Convention rights;

(ii) Even if the scope of challenge was not so limited the option of developing land to the west of Henfield and that of including the “Barratt site” within the BUAB of Henfield had been adequately dealt with by the examiner and the defendant in a proportionate way and the reasons that had been advanced were adequate.

However, Mrs Justice Patterson found for the claimants across a number of grounds:

The plan was quashed on four grounds:

It is incumbent upon the makers of the plan, the Independent Examiner and the making authority when certifying in its opinion that the plan was compliant with EU law to employ reasoning that is sound in the public law (Wednesbury) sense.

The maker of the plan is obliged to undertake an objective assessment of the policies of the plan when discharging the above duty.

That alternatives need to be accurately presented in order for the SA/SEA of a plan to comply with European law.

All key policies of the plan need to be assessed against reasonable alternatives to have a EU law compliant SA/SEA.

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28646%3Aboundaries-of-the-soft-touch-approach&catid=63&Itemid=31

Source: http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28643%3Adevelopers-win-high-court-battle-over-neighbourhood-plan&catid=63&Itemid=31

Whatever happened to … Skypark?

Readers will recall when EDDC got so panicky about vast swathes of undeveloped land at Skypark, on the edge of Cranbrook, that it created the seemingly batty idea to relocate its headquarters ther – 10-25 miles away from its voters and practically in the lap of Exeter City Council.

That was fairly quickly knocked on the head (but not without tens of thousands of our pounds being wasted – Owl wonders how much the mostly- vacant site is still costing us).

So far, there seem to be only two businesses at EDDC’s flagship Skypark – DHL couriers and an ambulance call centre.

In July of this year, St Modwyn put in a planning application for reserved matters on the site, including construction of an office block.

The planning application is:

16/1462/MRES
The erection of an office block, landscaping, car parking and associated access and infrastructure (Reserved Matters application in pursuance of outline planning permission ref: 06/3300/MOUT)

Skypark Clyst Honiton Exeter EX5 2D

Planning application describes:

… creche, 150 bed hotel, cafes, leisure and conference facilities, relocated football ground, clubhouse and facilities, strategic open space (including flood attenuation) …

It was originally submitted in July 2016, and further information was submitted 21 September 2016.

Does anyone recall a hotel, conference centre and football pitch in the original plans? Whose pitch is being relocated?

Here is a paper trail:
https://planning.eastdevon.gov.uk/online-applications/simpleSearchResults.do?action=firstPage

Surely such a big change, especially after ten years (2006 – 06/3300/MOUT) should merit a new planning application?

Landowners know best what’s good for the community

Sidford Fields: landowner says is should be built in the AONB because it will be good for the community.

Sidford cycle route by the river or inland in the AONB: landowner seems reluctant to engage with the community in talks.

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/riverside_route_could_be_revisited_for_sidford_sidbury_link_1_4726831

A tale of two AONBs

A gas-fired power station has been proposed for the East Devon village of Hawkchurch on the East Devon- West Dorset border NEAR an AONB (Area of outstanding Natural Beauty) in Dorset. It was not put out to consultation to the local community.

West Dorset MP Oliver Letwin says of it:

This development will have an impact on the West Dorset AONB.

“I do not believe it is appropriate, or in line with national planning policy, for industrial installations to be located in ways that have such impact on landscape of national importance. I hope, therefore, that this application will be refused.”

Councillor tries to extend consultation period on ‘power station’

In East Devon, an industrial site is being planned WITHIN the AONB at Sidford – after it had been agreed that it would not be allowed in the Local Plan but slipped in because officers did not offer up evidence to a Planning Inspector to remove it.

The local MP, Hugo Swire, has said …

… absolutely nothing at all.

How to kill a town

This is about Totnes, but could be any town, anywhere:

“There are three easy ways to destroy a town.

First – relax the planning laws so that developers can build what they want, where they want.

Two – build huge amounts of houses all at once, all over the fields surrounding the town; infill any green space inside; make sure the houses obscure everyone else; make sure they are all unaffordable to local people, but attractive to second home owners and buy to let investors; make sure you don’t provide any new infrastructure, no new schools, hospital places, improvements to roads, to sewers; make sure that local industries; the marina, the last dairy farm are closed down and covered in new, ugly boxes with no gardens and in regimented rows.

[Three] You’re nearly there now! Make sure that the roads are so congested with new cars that traffic can’t move and then for your final flourish, sell off its most treasured, vital area, in the case of Totnes, the market and the garden and the central car parks without which a town such as Totnes cannot function.

Wonderful, you’re there. You have successfully choked an ancient and very special place to death; you look at the million pound houses replacing the marina and it looks good; you look at the tacky tacky boxes spreading out over the hillside along the river and you smile to yourself, who needs farmers, they’re mucky – we can buy all we need from the huge industrial intensive farming block in Hampshire. Who needs a market?

The Black Prince may well have given this ancient town a charter, but that was such a long time ago, who needs history? Who needs tourism, there must be other jobs these people can do, well it doesn’t really matter, once we’ve got the locals out and replaced them almost entirely with second home owners, then we won’t be bothered with their complaints – black windows all winter are a bonus.

Look at Salcombe, 70% second homes and no trouble at all. All those ridiculous transition people with their big ideas and their trying to live responsibly, there’s no money to be made in that, what’s the matter with them.

No, lets make sure we do to Totnes what we have done so successfully in the past to Torbay and towns like Newton Abbot, there’s nothing quite so satisfying as ripping the heart out of a marvellous old place and replacing that heart with concrete…”

https://allengeorgina.wordpress.com/2016/10/12/how-to-kill-a-town-a-how-to-guide/

Take control …

“Take control” are two of the most potent words in our language that have come to mean just one thing in the weeks since the Brexit vote.

But the desire for more control over our lives is not the exclusive preserve of Leave voters – and nor can it or should it be confined to the issue of immigration.

Our polling shows that people from all backgrounds and with every kind of belief now feel they have lost control over what matters most to them, whether it is the price of a home, the pace of technological change or the poisoning of our planet.

Far from being supporters of the status quo, a clear majority of remain supporters specifically identify big business and corporate elites as having “too much power over their lives”.

By an even bigger margin of 62%, those who voted remain in the referendum say that only a few people in power take all the big decisions, adding that there is not much the average citizen can do about it.

Those decisions now seem further out of reach than ever for millions of people after the party conference season. The government has confirmed its determination to pursue a hard Brexit, even though that risks making matters worse for people who already feel left behind in this economy.

At the same time, many people see opposition parties as being in disarray and deeply divided, leaving some to despair at the prospects for progressive politics ever providing answers, let alone getting the chance to put them into practice.

A storm in our economy and our democracy that has been gathering for decades is now firmly upon us. A torrent of wealth of power is washing away even the fragile footholds people had established in the economy. Many more now face losing control all together in the face of global, technological and climate change.

Yet, even in the midst of all this upheaval, a surge of energy is being generated that can crack open new possibilities for people to take more control right now – not at some distant point in the future.

The New Economics Foundation seeks to give people the tools to take control and change their lives for the better
Today, the New Economics Foundation is setting out ways to shift debate beyond secret negotiations over Brexit in the capitals of Europe, seemingly endless party infighting in Westminster’s opposition, or literal fights in Brussels over whose turn it is next to lead Ukip.

Instead, we are setting out an agenda for people to take control themselves, without having to wait for government to do it for – or to – them.

Our agenda for people draws on real experiences, ranging from those in seaside communities who feel abandoned by the political elite, taxi drivers in London trying to make a living in an Uber-ised economy, small businesses starved of finance, consumers overcharged for energy, and young families hoping for their first home or worried about the cost of childcare.

It seeks to give all of them the tools they need to take control and change their lives for the better. Coastal communities will find ways to revive a clean marine economy which brings together people who care about the environment with those who care about getting decent jobs. We are helping to develop a new taxi app owned and controlled by drivers themselves, from London to Leeds, to give them the chance to share in the vast new digital value being created around us.

The foundation is also drawing up plans to turn the scandal-torn RBS into 130 stakeholder banks that serve local firms rather than expecting them to serve it. We have teamed up with the Switched On London campaign to help communities generate renewable and affordable energy that gives them a real stake in a low-carbon future.

Furthermore, in a project with Citizens UK, we are creating the first maps of vacant public land available for the houses that need to get built. And we are helping parents expand the number of childcare co-operatives so they can not only afford a service fundamental to modern working lives, but also exercise more control over it.

This is not an agenda merely for clicktivists who think change happens on a smartphone screen on the way to a rally. We recognise that the tools people need to take control must be fashioned in partnership with institutions wielding real power, ranging from devolved government, city mayors and forward-looking businesses to trade union and community-led campaigns across the country.

But this is the first time a major thinktank has set itself a bigger ambition than merely influencing ministers or future legislation, or getting included in a political party’s manifesto.

The New Economics Foundation will focus on helping people and communities take control by engaging with new partners – from the Mayor of London and Google DeepMind to the GMB and Citizens UK – to explore new possibilities for change right now.

We are rooted outside the traditional boundaries of politics. We care most about people’s everyday experience. And we will work with communities of all kinds to give them the tools they need to build a better future because there has never been a more urgent need for a new economy than right now.”

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/11/politicians-housing-employment-childcare-control-new-economics-foundation

“Greater Exeter” and its impact on housing and infrastructure in East Devon

We learned recently that the current Stagecoach depot opposite the bus station in Exeter is going to be turned into a massive block of student housing – 557 units.

Now we hear that there are plans for the site of the Honiton Inn, on the roundabout opposite the bus station to be another student block of 101 flats with their own private gym and cinema – opposite a public gym and cinema!

http://m.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/plans-in-for-huge-exeter-city-centre-student-block-on-honiton-inn-site/story-29794670-detail/story.html

What effect will this have on East Devon?

Well, “Greater Exeter” – whose “Visioning Board” like all such development and regeneration boards in “Greater Exeter” meets in secret – is making arrangements to do the next revision to its 3 Local Plans (Exeter, East Devon and Teignbridge) together.

It will be totally evident (in fact it is already) that Exeter’s main growth in housing will remain student housing. So, where will housing for other people go? Obviously East Devon and Teignbridge.

Cranbrook has natural boundaries beyond which it will soon make its further expansion much more difficult than heretofore. Therefore, it will be towns such as Exmouth, Honiton and Sidmouth – and the green fields in-between – that must be expanded to take in the commuters into Exeter, with a possible massive impact.

None of this is being put before the general public in any of the three areas nor is adequate infrastructure being planned for this big change (or at least we cannot be allowed know of any). And, of course, our Local Enterprise Partnership will “own” the business rates of the Exeter “Growth Area” and will have its fingers in the many development pies.

Time to start talking about the NEXT revision of the Local Plan which may well see even more massive development in East Devon on a much bigger scale than we could ever have imagined and could dwarf the extra numbers already agreed..

Chartered Institute of Housebuilding tells government to build more affordable rent homes

“…The professional body for the sector made the comments as the chancellor Philip Hammond prepares to make his first major spending announcements in the Autumn Statement on 23 November.

At the Conservative Party conference last week, the chancellor and local government secretary Sajid Javid unveiled a £3bn housebuilding fund, and outlined plans to directly commission the construction of homes on publicly owned land. The aim is to build 25,000 new homes before 2020.

The CIH welcomed the announcements and recommended a range of further initiatives in its submission to ministers.

It called on the government to focus on substantially increasing the number of affordable rented homes in the UK. It also recommended increasing funding for regeneration, improving standards in the private rented sector, and renewing the fight against homelessness.

Gavin Smart, deputy chief executive of CIH, said: “We welcome the level of focus on housing by the government recently; in particular the acknowledgement that enhancing affordability will be central to solving our housing crisis.

“We believe that the Autumn Statement is the opportunity to turn this commitment into action and build a substantial amount of new properties at affordable rents. This is the only way we can really begin to tackle our housing crisis and make sure people of all incomes have access to a home they can afford.”

Among its other recommendations, CIH urged the government to follow through on pledges to introduce greater flexibility for affordable homes funding.

It also advised the government to allow councils to borrow more for housebuilding through “reshaping and extending” the housing revenue account borrowing provisions. Currently, councils are limited in how much they can borrow under a cap introduced when councils were made self-financing for housing debt in 2012.

The CIH also said local authorities should be exempt for the remaining stages of the scheme to cut social housing rents in exchange for extra investment in rented homes.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/10/autumn-statement-must-deliver-government-housing-promises-says-cih

No comment …

… “Exeter City Council has [also] celebrated success at another awards ceremony recently. Its chief executive and growth director Karime Hassan was named Property Personality of the Year at the Insider’s annual South West Property Awards in Bristol.” …

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/exeter-city-council-scoops-award-for-hosting-radio-1-big-weekend/story-29794037-detail/story.html

Towns being pressurised to take the strain from rural areas?

Two articles below from the Rural Services network are essentially telling the same story: it’s too expensive to fund rural communities (particularly health and social care for older people) so let’s increase densities in towns and persuade people to live there instead.

What seems to be the message is “build it and they will come” – but who will come and why?

If you have no primary school, no doctor, no bus service in your rural village are you expected to up sticks and move to a town or city where housing density increases and these services are supposedly more easily accessed and where transport is supposedly better?

Very little of the new housing in towns and cities is affordable or built for low-income families or pensioners. Infrastructure is not being built to service the new houses (roads in Cranbrook are still unadopted) and doctors are stretched to their limit with current patients.

Community hospitals are likely to be closed in half of our towns, so, in a deepest rural area you will actually probably be closer to a community hospital than if you live in a town – if you have a car. Maternity services will be non-existent for rural parents.

What would persuade rural dwellers to move to towns where facilities are just as bad as in their villages? People who CHOSE a village carefully in the first place?

And how would those villages survive if they COULD and did move? Only the rich will soon be able to afford rural living (where no access to a “transport hub” or a school or a doctor will not worry them) and ordinary rural families and older people on average incomes will be forced into inadequate town and city properties whether they like it or not.

And why, if this IS the way of the world, is there still so much pressure to build more and more houses in these small villages?

Is this really the answer to our problems?

Cranbrook or Uplyme? Honiton or West Hill?

Soon you may have no choice.

Leave you home to grandchildren not children says Housing Minister!

“The housing minister, Gavin Barwell, has suggested that parents should leave their houses and savings to their grandchildren rather than their children to help them get on the housing ladder.

Barwell made the call for pensioners to skip a generation when writing their wills as he revealed that his 75-year-old mother had chosen to leave her £700,000 house in Croydon to her five grandchildren rather than himself and his brother.

The MP for Croydon Central, who owns a £750,000 house three miles from his mother’s, said the decision could help to reduce intergenerational financial inequities. “Generally in life we all like to think that our children are going to be better off than us. In terms of new technology and life expectancy, they are going to be,” he told a fringe meeting at the Conservative party conference in Birmingham last week.

“But at the moment, as things stand, they are less likely to own their own home and we need to do something about that.”

However, Barwell added that he did not want to live in a country where it was necessary to have a wealthy grandparent simply to get on to to the housing ladder, the Telegraph reported.”

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/09/skip-a-generation-when-passing-on-homes-says-housing-minister