“More Hovis than Bovis”

“Like a loaf of bread, the house bullder Bovis is a bit crumbly. Its chief executive has just departed, in advance of some poor financial results. One of the company’s problems seems to be that it can’t build the houses it promised to build.

At the end of last year Bovis issued a profits warning. It stated: “We have experienced slower-than-expected build production across the group’s sites during December, resulting in approximately 180 largely built and sold private homes that were expected to complete in 2016 being deferred into early 2017”[1].

One story not covered in the company’s media releases featured heavily in The Times this morning, and also in the Guardian [2]. This is that Bovis was paying purchasers cash of between £2000 and £3000 to complete the purchase of new homes even though the houses were not ready. Some 650 people are members of the Bovis Homes Victims Group [3] set up on Facebook to share their depressing experiences.

One lesson to be drawn from this story is that reliance on the volume housebuilders to deliver the housing we need is a fool’s errand. Despite its use of standard designs, of as low a density and as a high a price as they can get away with, Bovis hasn’t met its own targets. Moreover, all large housebuilders shy away from building on brownfield – previously developed – land because it costs more to build there than on green fields. And so we get urban sprawl and loss of productive farming land or greenspace for us to enjoy. Meanwhile the government blames local authorities and the planning system for delays, while turning a blind eye to the failings among its own corporate supporters.

At the same time, small and medium-sized housebuilders are having difficulty finding land on which to build homes, as a recent report from the Federation of Master Builders and the Local Government Information Unit showed [4]. The report did aim criticism at local authorities for concentrating on large developments when drawing up local plans, a charge that is certainly true in some areas. This bias against small firms also hinders the development of housing co-operatives which design the housing their members want rather than what the housebuilders tell them they can have.

NOTES

[1] Bovis Homes Group plc press release 28 December 2016 at http://www.bovishomesgroup.co.uk/media-centre/press-releases/press-release-173/pre-close-update/

[2] Guardian story at https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/11/bovis-accused-of-pressurising-buyers-to-move-into-unfinished-homes The Times is behind a paywall.

[3] https://www.facebook.com/groups/BovisVictimsGroup/

[4] http://www.fmb.org.uk/about-the-fmb/policy-and-public-affairs/new-fmb-research/”

Source: https://petercleasby.com/2017/01/11/more-hovis-than-bovis/

Where to get the news first?

10 January 2017
Owl reports on website that Honiton Town Council standards High Court decision:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/01/10/high-court-confirms-that-decisions-under-delegated-authority-to-grant-planning-permission-require-reasons/

12 January 2017:
Sidmouth Herald reports website that Honiton Town Council standards case High Court decision:

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/high_court_rules_that_honiton_town_council_acted_unlawfully_1_4843762

Stay ahead with East Devon Watch!

Neighborhood planners – BEWARE

“Cheshire East Council has decided to close its grant scheme which was set up to help communities create Neighbourhood Plans, to establish local planning policy that is relevant to their communities and help shape local development.

The Council launched a programme of support for Neighbourhood Planning in July 2014 through which local town and parish councils could apply for a grant of up to £7,000 from Cheshire East Council to assist with the development of their neighbourhood plan.

The aim of the Neighbourhood Planning Grants Scheme was to support local councils with the preparation of Neighbourhood Plans, specifically to support the commissioning of technical support and specialist advice, community engagement and consultation and collating of necessary evidence.

However, Cheshire East Council has recently decided to cancel the scheme which means Alderley Edge Parish Council will have £7000 less than expected to create a Neighbourhood Plan for the village.

The Parish Council had to apply for the Government grant of £9,000 and receive it before they could apply for the Cheshire East grant of £7,000. Councillor Christine Munro applied on behalf of the council for £4,646.00 which will be use towards funding work on the Neighbourhood Plan. This was received in October 2016.

Councillor Munro explained “At the beginning of the financial year, providing we have used the amount we have received, we can apply for the remaining £4,354.00. We would then have been eligible to apply for the £7,000 from Cheshire East but unfortunately this is now no longer available.”

She added “Providing we can get enough help and advice from residents to enable us to produce a Neighbourhood Plan for Alderley Edge we should be able to produce it within the budget of £9,000.

Speaking about the decision to cancel this scheme, Councillor Ainsley Arnold, Cheshire East Council cabinet member for housing and planning, said: “Cheshire East is a high-performing council which delivers value for money and more than 500 services every day to local people.

“However, it needs to find £100m to balance the books over the next three years because of significant cuts in central government funding and rising demand for services, especially adult social care support.

“The council is a great supporter of neighbourhood planning and over the past three years has sought to build a platform within Cheshire East for communities to meaningfully participate in the plan-making system here.

“We are making good progress on the Local Plan and will continue to support our town and parish councils to deliver plan-led development.

“The council was originally one of the frontrunner authorities that supported neighbourhood planning, to get it off the ground, and has continued to be part of this important tier of plan making ever since, launching it’s own frontrunner scheme in 2014 to fund external consultancy support to the first 14 neighbourhood plans that came forward in the borough.

“Since then, the council has put in place a dedicated neighbourhood planning team, invested in a number of tools and guidance documents to ensure groups can minimise their costs, when employing consultancy support, and has directly provided high-value evidence to support neighbourhood plan policy development alongside providing professional guidance and support to groups across the authority.

“The council’s input and investment in this important area of work now means that Cheshire East is one of the top five most active authorities in the country for neighbourhood planning – with 40 neighbourhood areas either designated or being consulted on and excellent progress being made by town and parish councils across the authority.

“While regrettable that the council has now closed the grants scheme, the work it has done to date has established an excellent platform for neighbourhood planning in Cheshire East and a network of neighbourhood planners that the council will continue to work with to develop neighbourhood plans and deliver sustainable development across the borough.”

http://www.alderleyedge.com/news/article/15009/parish-left-7000-short-as-cheshire-east-pulls-the-plug-on-neighbourhood-plan-grants

“Bovis accused of pressuring buyers to move into unfinished homes”

“Bovis Homes has been accused of pressuring customers to move into unfinished houses before Christmas by offering them cash incentives, a week before it issued a profit warning.

Several Bovis customers said they had been offered cheques of £2,000 to £3,000, or other incentives, if they completed on their house purchases before 23 December.

Members of the Bovis Homes Victims Group on Facebook, which also has a YouTube channel, have swelled to 650, with 244 people joining in the last two months.

Marc Holden, one of the group’s administrators, said: “We were getting a lot of people joining the group just before Christmas who were posting about being ‘encouraged’ to complete by 23 December, some were being offered money and other incentives.”

He said a group of at least 30 disgruntled Bovis customers would stage a protest at the company’s annual meeting in Tunbridge Wells on 2 May.

A company spokesman said: “Bovis Homes is fully aware of the customer group and their complaints, and we take these issues very seriously. We recognise that in some of these cases we have not provided our best standard of customer service and have taken too long to rectify customer issues, for which we apologise.”

Bovis, one of Britain’s biggest housebuilders, added that a “limited number of customers were offered an incentive to complete before the year end and all homes were habitable with the requisite CML industry certification, with a timetable for outstanding finishing works to be carried out in the new year.”

The firm insisted that no one was forced to move in before Christmas and that the homes only needed some finishing touches. “Customers were clearly free to decide their preferred course of action. The group often offers a range of incentives at sale and completion in line with industry practice,” the spokesman said.

The housebuilder’s chief executive David Ritchie quit on Monday, less than a week after the group issued its profit warning. It warned last Wednesday that it would complete about 180 fewer homes than expected in 2016, blaming operational issues. This will affect profits – Bovis now expects to make an annual pre-tax profit of £160m to £170m, compared with analysts’ forecasts of about £183m.

One couple was offered a post-completion cheque of £2,000 if they could legally complete on their property by 23 December, according to an email seen by the Guardian.

Comments from other customers suggest the homes lacked more than just finishing touches.

Chad Clifton said he and his wife were “forced” to complete on their four-bedroom house in Brockworth, Gloucestershire on 23 December and found the fridge had not been fitted yet and that the hallway was unfinished, out of a list of 115 defects. They were offered £350 and a free move. “We were told we didn’t have much choice – if the house is ready we have to complete on 23r December.”

None of the defects have been fixed yet but Clifton said the couple “love the house” and that the customer service had improved vastly after his wife sent a scathing letter to Bovis’s head office.

Another Bovis customer said he and his wife had been offered £3,000 if they completed on 23 December, but declined the offer because of numerous problems (such as the wrong kitchen being fitted) at the £320,000 three-bedroom property in Inkberrow, Worcestershire.

The couple are still waiting for the problems to be rectified and to complete on the purchase. He said they had not been offered any compensation despite the stress caused, time taken off work and the cost of extending storage.

Holden and his wife form part of a group of eight families who bought Bovis homes across the country in recent years and have taken the company to task over defects and the length of time it is taking to fix them. In response, the firm launched a review in December and set up a team from across the business to resolve the issues.

Bovis said: “We recognise that our customer service has to improve and the leadership of the organisation is absolutely committed to getting this right.”

Karen Louise Richardson and her family said it had taken until now, two years after they moved into a four-bedroom house in Norwich, to fix more than 200 defects.

The Richardsons moved in on 19 December 2014 but maintain they were not advised that their house was unfinished until an hour after completion. “I’d never buy Bovis again; I’d never buy a new build again unless I did a lot of research,” she said.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/11/bovis-accused-of-pressurising-buyers-to-move-into-unfinished-homes?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Planning systems favour developers over communities” survey finds

“Almost three-quarters of local councils believe that the planning system is weighted too heavily in favour of developers at the expense of local democracy, according to a survey.

Commissioned by the National Trust and carried out by the Local Government Information Unit, the survey canvassed 1,200 ward councilors in England on aspects of the planning system.

The results, published today, show that 72% of councillors feel the existing system puts the interests of developers over and above those of councils and communities. Also, half of councillors said planning departments are inadequately funded, and the same amount claimed sites that are not in line with their council’s local plans are being approved for new housing.

The government has pushed for the adoption of local plans throughout England. In a statement to the Commons in 2015, then housing and planning minister Brandon Lewis described local plans as the “cornerstone” of the government’s planning reforms. Produced in consultation with communities, they are designed to offer “certainty on where new homes are to be built”.

The survey findings come as the government puts the final touches to its housing white paper, which is expected to be published later this month. The National Trust and LGIU urged Whitehall to revise the paper to boost confidence in the way the system works.

In a joint statement, the organisations argued that the views of councillors were often ignored in debates around the future of the planning system. “Yet, as local decision-makers, and an important link with local communities, they have an essential role to play in ensuring development is sensitive to the needs of the area,” they said.

Theresa May’s government has responded to pressure over a lack of new housebuilding in the country by announcing a raft of new measures and significant funding to boost construction.

As such, communities secretary Sajid Javid last week invited housing providers to bid for a share of a £7bn fund in what was described as a “dramatic expansion” of the affordable house programme.

The survey also revealed anxieties about loosened planning restrictions, with 58% of councillors believing their council would allocate green belt land for housing in the next five years. There are also concerns about the introduction of permitted development rights for home extensions, office-to-residential use conversions and other changes of use.

Moreover, the National Planning Policy Framework does not appear to be having the positive impact it was intended to have on design quality. Only 18% of councillors say designs have improved, and only 12% believe that loosening planning restrictions has had any positive impact.

Jonathan Carr-West, chief executive of the LGiU, said that five years on from the adoption of the government’s planning reforms, it was worrying that councillors felt it hadn’t delivered the localism that was promised.

He said: “If ministers are serious about local plans being at the heart of the planning system, then they should invest in council planning teams and use the housing white paper to give them the tools to deliver good quality housing in the right places.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/01/planning-systems-favour-developers-over-communities-lgiu-survey-finds

Honiton Neighbourhood Plan feedback requested

“In this week’s edition of the Herald, in the Honiton area, a copy of the Honiton Neighbourhood Plan questionnaire is being delivered to give residents the chance to put forward their opinions on the subject.

In a statement from Honiton Town Council, it said: “Honiton has seen a lot of housing growth in the last 30 years or so, without the community having a say.

“The Government has made it possible for local people to make a difference to their area by making a Neighbourhood Plan.

“The Honiton Neighbourhood Plan will be a document which says how local people want Honiton to be developed over the next 15 to 20 years.”

The Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group has produced a questionnaire to ask for the views of the whole community on the future of Honiton.

The chairman of the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group said: “It is really important that everyone in the community, both young and old, has their say.

“If we don’t know what local people want or need for the future, we can’t tell the Local Planning Authority.

“We would also like to hear from people who come to Honiton to work or to use the town’s facilities.”

The responses and comments from the questionnaire will enable the steering group to start to draft the neighbourhood plan.

There will be more opportunities to have your say on the draft plan as it develops.

The final neighbourhood plan, which may take up to two years to complete, will be a planning document which sets out the vision for the town and parish of Honiton and contains policies for the development and use of land in the area.

The town council spokesman said: “Please look out for your copy of the Neighbourhood Plan questionnaire in this week’s Herald, as it is time to have your say.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/chance_to_have_your_say_on_how_honiton_develops_in_the_future_1_4843733

Swire worried about MPs being “taken down”

Hugo Swire MP
9 January 2017

Question in Parliament

“On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Many will be alarmed by the recent reports of attempts by a foreign Government to “take down” Members of this House, including a senior Minister. Given the very serious implications of this matter, what measures will you take to investigate it, not least because one party to the discussions, according to the press coverage, was, or is, at least partially a paid employee of this House?”

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2017-01-09a.68.0&s=speaker%3A

Catch up with Swire in London and hear his views about Palestine

Monday, January 23, 2017 from 6:00 PM to 6:45 PM (GMT)

CMEC PALESTINE PROGRAM

Palestine: the case for recognition

The Rt Hon Sir Hugo Swire KCMG MP, CMEC Chairman

in conversation with

Sir Vincent Fean KCVO, former Consul General to Jerusalem

This discussion will be focused on Palestinian statehood and what impact British recognition of a Palestinian state might have.

The discussion will also consider the recent UN resolution against Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, the potential impact of Donald Trump on the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, and the UK’s role in supporting a peaceful two-state settlement.

The event will include a Q&A session.

One reason (close to home) why Bovis CEO resigned?

Axminster councillor Douglas Hull recently went on a tirade against badly-built homes in the town, though he took on the monkey NHBC (the business that issues 10 year warranties for new homes, rather than the organ grinders – the developers who build the shoddy homes in the first place.

Now, news reaches us of a national protest group taking housebuilder Bovis (a major player in Axminster, Seaton and all over East Devon) to task:

“Disgruntled Bovis Homes customers are to protest outside the annual meeting of the housebuilder, whose chief executive David Ritchie was ousted this week.

The Bovis Homes Victims Group has swollen to 650 Facebook members with a litany of complaints, as well as a YouTube channel with more than 9000 views.

Spokesman Marc Holden’s £490,000 Bovis home in Milton Keynes was beset with defects, prompting a company review.

Holden said: “We are not going to stop our active campaign. There are a lot of unhappy people.”

The meeting will be in Tunbridge Wells in May. Bovis warned on profits last month after delays to sales, prompting Ritchie to resign.

A Bovis spokesman said: “Bovis Homes is aware of the issues experienced by a small number of customers and recently established a dedicated team of specialists to resolve them, and apologises to the customers impacted.”

http://www.standard.co.uk/business/bovis-customers-plan-protest-at-beleaguered-builder-s-meeting-a3436836.html

To be an LEP or not to be an LEP – that is the question

Just before Christmas, we read that three local authorities ( including Plymouth and Exeter) were pulling out of the Heart of the Southwest Local Enterprise Partnership (comprising the whole of Devon and Somerset). They intended to form their own LEP – the so-called “Golden Triangle LEP”:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2016/12/13/the-extorply-lep-talks-continue/

We assume that, partly, this was because those authorities were not convinced that a “Devset” super-mayor (a requirement for government funding – and quite possibly from Somerset) would not adequately represent their interests.

Since then we have heard absolutely nothing about the situation from either side.

Is the “Golden Triangle LEP” still on the cards?
Have the local authorities which want to break away formally withdrawn?
If not, do they intend to withdraw and when?
If so, what happens to current funds held by the LEP on their behalf?
Are we having a Devset super-mayor or not?
When (if ever) will electors be consulted – and about what?
Will Devon continue to subsidise heavy HOTSW LEP investment in Hinkley C that, despite promises, shows little knock-on benefit to our county?

And when will Somerset County Council (as the chosen lead authority for scrutiny – though chosen by whom we do not know) be subject to scrutiny (or scrutinising itself) about where our money has gone, is going, and will go?

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/01/08/is-devolution-already-with-us-a-briefing-paper-on-the-major-changes-to-regional-funding-since-2010/

EDDC leads the way in showing HMRC how to relocate!

Extra £600m needed to pay for taxman’s new offices

“Britain’s tax authorities will spend nearly £600 million more than they promised on an “unrealistic” plan to modernise and streamline their offices, a critical report has concluded.

The National Audit Office (NAO) found that Revenue & Customs was operating out of 170 properties, costing £269 million a year to run. But it warned that the cost of plans to modernise and rationalise into 13 regional centres had been significantly underestimated and said that the reorganisation would disrupt services.

Meg Hillier, chairwoman of the public accounts committee, said the NAO’s findings showed that “early over-optimism” had once again resulted in increased costs to taxpayers. The committee is expected to call HMRC officials to explain how the forecasts were so wrong.

The NAO said that since HMRC first announced its relocation plans in the 2015 spending review, costs had risen and the project would now cost £594 million more over the next decade — a rise of about 22 per cent.

The organisation had also accepted that its current plans, that would involve moving all staff into new offices by 2020, carried “too high a risk of disruption to its business”.

An updated plan is yet to be published and relocating to regional centres will now happen later than the HMRC had planned.

It will take longer before savings from the new estate are realised, the NAO said.

An HMRC spokesman said: “Our most recent calculations now include updated day-to-day running costs, additional investment in two transitional sites which will ease the move for both staff and customers, and provision for more support for our staff with the travel costs of moving to a new office.”

Source” Times Newspapers Limited 2017 (paywall)

“No ‘independent consultation’ to be held on Exmouth seafront plans”

READ PARTICULARLY THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF THE ARTICLE BELOW!

SPIN! SPIN! SPIN! Councillor Skinner must be dizzy!

Perhaps the “group of like-minded individuals” who are not the Exmouth Creative Group ( including any creative developers) would like to identify itself ….!

There will not be an ‘independent consultation’ on redeveloping Exmouth seafront, the man leading the project has said.

Councillor Philip Skinner made the comments at the most recent full East Devon District Council (EDDC) meeting, when asked by Councillor Megan Armstrong about the result of a town poll held last April.

The poll produced a 94.9 per cent vote for Exmouth Town Council writing to EDDC, which it subsequently did, asking that before any further planning applications were approved for Queen’s Drive, additional independent consultation should take place.

Cllr Armstrong said: “It seems as if you are going to ignore the poll and continue regardless. How are you going to explain to all the residents who voted that their views have been totally ignored?”

Responding, Cllr Skinner said: “What we are going to do is, the phase two [developer] is going to put their application in, there will be a consultation process for that, there will then be another consultation process which will take place through the planning process. Phase three is going to be absolutely a full consultation with the public, that’s what’s going to take place, that is quite clear.

“To answer the question about an independent consultation – no, that’s not going to take place. I’m sorry about that, but that’s the reality.”

Cllr Skinner has also been criticised by campaign group Save Exmouth Seafront, which said he had talked to an unknown Exmouth Creative Group in lieu of other consultation, though EDDC denied Cllr Skinner had spoken to a group of that name.

SES spokesperson Louise MacAllister said: “There are many established community groups in Exmouth with an interest in the seafront who have not been asked for their opinion. This is concerning as the public made themselves very clear through the poll that they want to be consulted, and yet the public are now being ignored in favour of this unknown group.”

An EDDC spokesperson said: “Cllr Skinner has met several groups and individuals about rejuvenating the town, including the seafront.

“He recently met a group of like-minded individuals who have some great ideas for the town and they were enthused by what the council is doing. We are unaware of a specifically named group called Exmouth Creative Group.”

EDDC kicks out affordable housing on its own land in Sidmouth – using it for a third office site after relocation

Remember the old days, when EDDC said its move to a single new building in Honiton would save money?

Then it added an old, crumbling building in Exmouth (the Town Hall) neglecting to have a full survey before estimating the cost of refurbishment. Those refurbishment costs are now £1.669m, – £408,000 more than the original estimate.

Now we hear that, instead of providing 20 affordable houses on the Manstone Depot site in Sidmouth as set out in the local plan, EDDC has instead decided to build offices for its Estates Department and keep the Streetscene department there.

No costs appear to be in the public domain for this – which should form part of the relocation budget. And it begs the question: why is the Estates Department and Streetscene relocating to Manstone Depot rather than to the new site in Honiton? Is the Honiton site too small, or does EDDC have an antipathy to affordable housing in Sidmouth? Or is there some other more murky reason?

Or is it just that officers and councillors don’t want Streetscene vehicles and materials spoiling their view in Honiton?

Here is the story from Sidmouth Herald:

“East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) Manstone Depot is allocated for 20 homes in its Local Plan – but now the authority wants to keep its estates department in Sidmouth when it relocates to Exmouth and Honiton.

Its development management committee (DMC) has been recommended to approve the plans for a single-storey office block when it meets on Tuesday (January 10).

Jeremy Woodward, who has campaigned for transparency in the relocation project, said: “I am dismayed about what seems to be EDDC’s disregard for its own Local Plan – and promises of affordable housing which is much-needed in Sidmouth.

“This application is clearly very sensitive.

“Firstly, it is on a site reserved for housing in the Local Plan; and secondly, it is clearly part of the ‘larger picture’ of the district council’s relocation project.”

Mr Woodward submitted a Freedom of Information request in 2014 which revealed that EDDC’s housing service had made two conditional offers to build 25 homes on the Manstone Depot site. One had a mix of market and ‘affordable’ homes; the other was fully ‘affordable’.

The report to DMC members says the offices will be limited to one section of the site and housing could still be delivered on the remaining area. It adds, the departure from the Local Plan is not grounds to refuse the application.

The office building would act as a ‘hub’ for operations that already largely take place from the depot, which is used by the StreetScene team and for storage, adds the report.

An EDDC spokeswoman said: “The consolidation of Knowle Depot activities to our existing site at Manstone is an opportunity that results as part of the relocation project.

“The transfer of depot activities is an existing costed element of the relocation project and, as such, included within the independent and positive cost modelling of relocation.

“Manstone Depot continues to provide a base for a range of important services to Sidmouth and the wider district.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/dismay_at_office_plan_on_sidmouth_site_allocated_for_affordable_homes_1_4838725

High Court confirms that decisions under delegated authority to grant planning permission require reasons

“The High Court has held that local government officers granting planning permission under delegated authority are required to give reasons for their decisions, Francis Taylor Building has reported.

The decision in (Riki Shasha and others) v. Westminster CC [2016] EWHC 3283 (Admin) was based on the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, made under the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014, the set added.

Francis Taylor Building said: “This is despite the fact that the requirement to give reasons for a grant of planning permission which was at one stage imposed under amendments to the GPDO 1995 from 2003 was consciously repealed in 2013 as part of the red tape challenge and the current Development Management Procedure Order 2015 contains no such requirement.

“The decision will have inevitable implications for decision making by local planning authorities where officers are acting under delegated powers.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29563%3Adecisions-under-delegated-authority-to-grant-planning-permission-require-reasons-high-court&catid=63&Itemid=31

CEO of Bovis Homes leaves suddenly

“The boss of house builder Bovis Homes Group PLC (LON:BVS) has quit his role with immediate effect just over a week after the group warned it will miss home sales targets

The FTSE 250-listed firm said David Ritchie has stepped down as its chief executive officer with immediate effect but will remain with the firm until the end of February to help with the transition process.

Bovis added that Earl Sibley, the firm’s finance director, will be interim CEO as the group searches for a permanent successor to Ritchie, a process which it said will start immediately and which is expected to take several months.

No reason was given for Ritchie’s abrupt departure but it comes after the group cautioned on December 28 that new house sales this year will be lower than expected due to completions in December falling short.

The group said in an unscheduled trading update then that total sales for the year will now be between 3,950 to 4,000, with slower than predicted building times pushing 180 homes due to complete into the next trading year.

In a note to clients, analysts at Liberum said: “Management change could be positive for the Group in due course if the building of homes can be improved, so that the Group can exploit a decent landbank more effectively. …”

http://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/171312/bovis-homes-boss-quits-with-immediate-effect-just-over-a-week-after-cautious-update-171312.html

In early morning trade, Bovis shares were 2.5% higher, up 20.5p at 831.5p.

EDDC teaches the government a thing or two about reorganisation and relocation ?

Isn’t this rather like EDDC’s relocation and regeneration projects?

“Theresa May faces further criticism of her domestic policy in the face of Brexit pressures after it emerged that almost half of the staff in the newly created Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy admitted they did not know what the Whitehall office stands for.

The prime minister surprised many in Westminster when she combined business, energy and climate change to form BEIS. The move, one of several changes to the makeup of Whitehall, was aimed at bolstering the traditionally weak business department, and checking the dominance of the Treasury.

But as the business secretary, Greg Clark, prepares to launch the government’s industrial strategy later this month, it has emerged that almost half of his staff say they have no clear idea what BEIS stands for.

In a recent survey, carried out in the autumn, many of the staff based at two headquarters buildings in London showed little enthusiasm for the reorganisation.

About half (48%) of said they did not “have a clear understanding of BEIS’s purpose”; while 19% agreed that the organisational changes have been for the better. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/09/may-faces-criticism-of-brexit-vote-whitehall-restructuring-staff-department-for-business-energy-and-industrial-strategy

Outgoing Shelter chief: “The housing crisis has spread to everybody”

” … The housing crisis “has spread to everywhere. It’s not just poor people, or those who are just managing, it’s right up there.” The average house price in the UK has climbed 29.4pc in the last seven years; in London it has soared by 69.6pc, far ahead of wage increases.

As a result, it has become a hot potato. “It’s a political issue that has become real for a lot of people across the country. Not just in Labour seats, but Conservative MPs have people in their constituencies who are saying my children can’t afford to buy,” he says. “We have a group of people who are in their 50s and 60s for the first generation since the Second World War, looking at their children’s housing prospects, and they are worse than their own.”

Not only is there political pressure coming from voters, but also from big companies.

Deloitte and KPMG both bought flats in the capital for their graduates to live in, and Shelter has teamed up with companies such as Starbucks to introduce a rental deposit scheme which workers can pay back, interest free.

It could have been even worse, he says. “In the last seven years, if interest rates had gone up by 2 or 3pc you would have seen a raft of repossessions like those in the 80s. You would have seen a crisis beyond what we already have. So in some ways housing policy has been lucky.

This affordability crisis has been compounded by a “failure of certain policies”, he says, as well as the financial crisis and the austerity that followed. The previous governments, including New Labour and the coalition, all failed to build enough and put little focus on the supply side, he argues. They all “believed the way to solve the housing crisis was on the home ownership and on demand side, to effectively make money available cheaply through Help to Buy-type products, [which enables first-time buyers to purchase a home with a 5pc deposit] and less so in direct investment in house building.” Help to Buy was a crucial policy after the downturn, designed to get house builders moving again by stimulating demand. But that policy has continued, even while house builders are posting record profits once again.

There’s a problem with this model of solving the housing crisis, says Robb: “it’s broken”. “With the death of public housing and local authorities, the private house builders have had to carry that weight and they can’t,” he says. Part of the problem is due to the land market; the high cost of land forces developers to keep upping prices and making homes smaller. “You can’t criticise them for doing what they were set up to do, they are there to maximise profit for their shareholders,” he says. “That doesn’t necessarily translate into the best housing policy for Britain. That’s why you need more small builders, more land available – public and private – and you need public building. …”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/house-prices/robbthe-housing-crisis-has-spread-everybody/

The Guardian view on the housing crisis

“For too long councils have been unable to build for rent. The housing white paper should bring them in from the cold

The scale of the housing crisis is now as great as it was in 1951. That was the year in which Harold Macmillan, then housing minister, made his famous pledge to build 300,000 new homes a year. His success in achieving it helped pave his way to Downing Street. But decisions he made then can now be seen as the root of both the current critical shortage of homes and the matching inflation in values which so distorts housing policy. This is what the much-delayed housing white paper – due before the end of the month – has to tackle.

In Macmillan’s haste to meet his eye-catching commitment 66 years ago, many homes were built to inferior standards. In the later case of Ronan Point, the 1966 London tower block that collapsed catastrophically two years later, speed of construction overwhelmed the safety and security of the people who lived there. Just as significantly, it was during Macmillan’s premiership in the late 1950s that the private sector overtook the public as the nation’s leading housebuilder, for the first time since 1939. Public sector housebuilding remained significant for 20 years, but never regained its pre-eminence.

When the squeeze on council spending began in the second half of the 1970s, council housing was an early and lasting casualty, but building for sale did not increase to fill the gap. Without a steady supply of homes for rent, the conditions for today’s housing shortage were set. Private builders maximise value by preferring fewer, larger homes, unaffordable to first-time buyers. It is rational to keep prices up by releasing new builds slowly, and there is little incentive, once planning permission is granted, to fulfil commitments with community value such as primary schools, parks and GP surgeries.

Ever since, governments have been trying to unpick this tangle, but with only half the tools they need to do it with. To have a chance of meeting its commitment to build a million homes by 2020 – a target itself widely considered inadequate – this government must build at scale. Last week, the sites of 14 new garden villages were announced, promising 48,000 homes: these new settlements have few of the values of place creation, community value and housing standards that made Letchworth, the original and best surviving of the garden cities first proposed by Ebenezer Howard, one of the most successful urban developments of the 20th century. All the same, they will, one day, provide thousands rather than hundreds of new homes, and they offer a better chance of the kind of thought-through planning that is making Prince Charles’s Poundbury, an urban extension of Dorchester, look less of a royal eccentricity and more like a model of community creation.

But Poundbury has been 20 years in development. The government’s target is 2020. The private sector won’t meet it. A bigger role for housing associations, the main builders of social homes, needs changes to financial legislation to permit more borrowing. At last the government recognises the part that councils must play. Devolution settlements give larger local authorities new powers; they want to be able to control the speed and style of housebuilding too. That goes further than the new fund, announced in November’s autumn statement, that is intended to enable them to fund the complex financial and legal work necessary for big new developments. As an IPPR report concluded in October, what is needed is an active deal-making process between the devolved authorities and Whitehall, where the former release public land and invest public money in developing local skills. In return, the government rationalises funding streams, allows retention of stamp duty on new builds, and devolves control over council tax to shape types of tenure.

Harold Macmillan laid the groundwork for the privileging of home-ownership over social housing. The housing white paper is the moment to recognise that, until homes for rent are firmly back in the mix, there will be no end to the housing crisis.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/08/the-guardian-view-on-the-housing-crisis-right-to-rent

New independent group in Cornwall

… a new pressure group [is] being formed in Cornwall this week. Charter for Cornwall has been formed by the people who run the popular anti-developers Facebook group “It’s our Cornwall” and they told CS [Cornish Stuff blog] that the group will seek to be a “conduit for the unfocused energy we see around us – we are an essay in grassroots activism. Let’s make a better Cornwall together”

Charter for Cornwall will pressure those seeking election to the Council in May, when all Cornwall Council seats will be up for grabs, to pledge to support 4 commitments when they do get elected.

A launch statement on charterforcornwall.com says:

“We believe that we cannot give way to despair and apathy. We have to use what democratic rights are left to us to challenge Cornwall Council’s narrow and short-sighted strategy. Elections in May provide one opportunity to make our voices heard and make our future an issue.

We are not alone. Across Cornwall local groups have been campaigning against massive, speculative and unnecessary housing projects. Over 7,000 people have signed the CPRE’s petition Save Cornwall’s Green Fields, calling for a change in the planning system. Over 70 town and parish councils have supported Cornwall for Change, which is demanding a change in direction at Cornwall Council. Posts on the It’s Our Cornwall facebook page about building projects reach an average 2,000 people daily and sometimes as many as 10,000″.

People are dismayed, worried and angry about what they see around them. But anger and sadness too often leads to despair. That despair has to be transformed into hope. We can change things. We can take back control of our future. This is a first step”.

The statement continued,

“We will campaigns to increase community-level influence over the future of our land. We need to change Cornwall Council for the better by electing better councillors. We need a Council that is more open, more responsive and more willing to listen to residents’ concerns. In the short-term we will be supporting those candidates in next May’s local elections who stand for our values. In the longer-term we must work to end the Council’s pursuit of unsustainable growth policies”

The four ‘principles’ of the new group are to

Protect our Cornish heritage (“Councillors have been unable to stop Cornwall becoming an easy ride for property developers”)

Provide genuinely affordable housing (“The Government has cynically redefined ‘affordability’ to include housing at 80% of market prices that are simply unaffordable for most local people”)

Put limits on second homes (“The extension of second home ownership has destroyed community life in many of our coastal towns and villages”)

Plan for Cornish communities, not developers’ profits (“The planning system is rigged. Blatantly unsound data have been used to drive the housing target up to an unnecessary 52,500 minimum”)

The group has spent the last few weeks gathering contributions and support from various political groups, including KMTU who support the initiative. Formed by Pete Burton, Bernard Deacon, Julie Fox The Charter for Cornwall will roll out in three phases in Feb – May with the first phase to agree on the final wording of the pledges Councillors will be asked to commit to.”

21st century Cornwall: Developers Won, Paradise Lost? As Cornwall seeks to introduce planning charge, a new group is formed to pressure councillors