NavigationUser login |
Newsletter May 2008THLA ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING 7:30 pm 12th JUNE 2008 While Town Halls across the country are lost and won, we have the same message for Left and Right: Get us off this hook now! Reinstate the £10,000 cap In Tower Hamlets council the navel gazers and the soul searchers are the same people, and we pay them huge salaries. They are the managers searching for decisions to take, the consultants searching for processes to engineer, the time- servers looking for golden hands to shake. It’s a dying culture and the cost of keeping it alive is the bottom line on your service charge bill. When those service charge bills start coming, and they are inaccurate or extortionate, leaseholders must act. For many years our members have done just that, and the THLA has resolutely supported action by consumers who will pay for what they get but not a penny more. That action must continue until the landlord opens the books for scrutiny by an external auditor, consults with leaseholders about budgets and gets a grip on its housing management. Bitter experience has shown us that the council is desperate to recover its costs, but driving costs down is very low on its priorities. That is why the risks for anybody with a Right To Buy Lease are dangerously high and getting higher. For a local authority the lease is a contract to die for. It offers no protection to the homeowner and no sanctions against the landlord. For many years it has been the fig leaf to hide council incompetence and waste, and in a week or so the bills to pay for that costly mess are coming your way. If the bills are wrong we shall oppose them. And for every responsibility that the council evades, leaseholders will affirm their corresponding right. And the most important right of all is our statutory right to challenge unreasonable costs, unacceptable standards and the LBTH tax on homeowners which some call a “Management Fee”. The procedures to challenge unacceptable service charge demands are enclosed with this Newsletter for use by THLA members, but we urge every council leaseholder in the borough with a legitimate claim against the council, to become a member of the THLA, to campaign with other leaseholders and tear up the LBTH licence to print money. Your money! Nor will the issues around mixed tenure budgeting and leasehold management go away because a Housing Association, or an ALMO takes over the stock. The news we have from our London colleagues about the performance of these last two is very mixed, but if you take the Westminster ALMO, leaseholders report that there is less accountability than under the council, less freedom of movement than under an Housing Association, and that residents are sat between the devil and the deep blue sea, lacking information and denied input. Or, to take the example of a Housing Association, our very own Eastend Homes, (EeH), A Council clone without heart or brain, as one graffiti artist on the Isle of Dogs would have it, leaseholders who question EEH costs or standards are told to b***** off to the county court and sort it there because leaseholders, say the Grands Seigneurs of EeH, are peasants who need to be taught a lesson. On the Island, the Ancien Regime is back with a vengeance! The bottom line is this. Legislation makes few demands on social landlords. Abuse is rife and regulation almost invisible. It is for leaseholders across the sector to push for new policy and tighter regulation in this area of policy. We pay the piper and he who pays the piper calls the tune. This has been a remarkable year for the THLA. Leaseholders need to be aware that we are winning a war of attrition and that the efforts of a dedicated group of volunteers are bearing fruit at last. This is the most exciting time since the leaseholder campaign for a fair deal began. Read on and you will see the scale of our achievements and understand why so much is within our grasp. But, when you read on, you also need to think about the future of the THLA itself. We are a volunteer group with one paid worker and one paid part worker. We have been going since 1996. All too many core activists have sold up and left the East End. Significant core membership has been transferred to Housing Associations. It is well known that we are a subscription organisation receiving no grants from the council and relying only on the financial support of our members. Not surprisingly, the leaseholder Diaspora in Essex and beyond feels no need to finance the expansion of leasehold tenure on Tower Hamlets estates! Many specialists in the Housing field give their services free or at a concessionary rate because our cause is just, our legitimacy and integrity unchallenged. We are proud of our record and our members should be proud of what they have achieved However, the consequence of all these changes is that we have dropped below the level of finance we need to pay salaries, and as of June 2008 we shall become a wholly voluntary organisation again. This will be debated at our AGM and a package of proposals will be tabled for the approval or otherwise of our membership. These measures have been proposed following a workshop of THLA activists on 15th March and they are intended to modernise the structure and operation of the THLA. A new subscription structure offering different deals at different rates will be proposed, as will a strategy for expanding our volunteer base, training residents to deal with consultation, lobbying, dispute resolution and web management. We shall provide training to residents who want to get involved in casework and surgeries. There will be proposals on how we can generate the income we need to take our agenda forward. There will be proposals on how we can publicise our agenda and raise awareness of our homeownership issues. We shall transform our web site into an interactive forum to exchange news, experience and information, post complaints and request help. We shall introduce a system of affiliation so that leaseholder colleagues with registered social landlords, other than the council, can be part of the wider campaign for leaseholder rights in Tower Hamlets. All this will be created with vigour and purpose, but the future depends on your determination to build on the achievements we are commending to you below. 2007 / 2008 A Vintage Year for Leaseholders *Admin and Management the Blockbuster. Since 1997 our members have said No to the council’s charge for managing technical services, delivering a clean and safe environment and administering our accounts, Admin and Management, because of the council’s lamentable management performance. The jury is still out after the third referral of this vexed charge to the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal. Up to now the LVT has thought the service worth about half what the council is charging. We had a top class legal team supporting the strongest resident group fielded by any leaseholder organisation in the land. But the jury is still out. (See John Bloxam’s article). We have fought, we are fighting and we will fight on until we win not only the battle but the war. To all our members we say one thing. Hold the line! *Section 20 Consultation. The council spent thousands trying to pervert the intention of primary legislation and deny leaseholders their major works consultation rights. Other councils have railroaded this action through the tribunals, many unopposed by leaseholders. The THLA was the only leaseholder group in the country to oppose a local authority on this issue, and we won hands down. As a direct result of our action you will get early warning of council plans to spend money on your block. You will be able to analyse the plans, challenge them, and budget for them. This was a tremendous blow for our rights to meaningful consultation. When the council appealed the decision to a higher court, they were sent packing. One black eye from us the other black eye from the Lands Tribunal. *Alternative Dispute Resolution, (ADR), Negotiations. We have supported or represented many leaseholders in their fight for compensation for bad and overpriced services. Our members have been rebated thousands and thousands of pounds because the council has been forced to admit that residents quite simply didn’t get what they paid for. The Dispute Resolution procedures put in place by the THLA all those years ago have finally paid the ADR dividend leaseholders were promised. It’s never enough. But it’s a very great deal. Meanwhile the Director of Housing has forgotten how to say Please or Thank you. All she says is Mea Culpa! *Arbitrations Leaseholders are benefiting from the Arbitration procedure set up by the THLA, with some belated cooperation from the council, in 2002. It has been a positive experience. It is a revelation just how liberating it is to have an independent, intelligent and expert third party assess and determine our disputes. The boost to peoples’ confidence and self-respect - when they can exercise a right to defend their case without fear or favour, and do it without the risk of intimidation or financial ruin - is the biggest step our members have made since this campaign began. Increased awareness and civic responsibility don’t come from doing a Knees Up Mother Brown under the flag. They come when people have a voice, they know that they will be heard, and they have a genuine and equal opportunity to win justice; especially when the reward comes as a result of their own hard work, nerve and commitment. *The End of Cross Subsidy in Tower Hamlets!! A spectacular victory for the THLA! At long last the council have got our message. At least 25% of the borough’s housing stock is low maintenance, a fact denied by the council year in and year out. And for years, leaseholders in small secure tidy blocks have paid over £400.00 a year for very little. Why? Because Cross Subsidy rules in Tower Hamlets and money saved on good blocks is spent to try and bring the bad blocks up to standard. This is absolutely against the principle of Block Accounting which government, local government and the courts are pledged to uphold. What we had before was fraud. Apply for your rebates now! *£50 rebate on the Management and Admin charge. One small step for leaseholders. but a giant stride for the Tower Hamlets Labour Party. Anybody who has been fighting the leaseholder corner for the past few years will know that this concession by the majority party is hugely significant. It is the first time that elected members have bothered to analyse the bills. The first time they have publicly admitted that leaseholders are not getting value for money. The first time that members have stood up to the bureaucrats in the town hall and questioned their performance. Yes. The financial windfall is modest. But the decision to compensate leaseholders for poor service brings to an end at last the era of David Edgar whose warped hostility towards leaseholders and homeownership crippled progressive housing policy for eight long years. The fifty quid will go some way towards paying for building insurance premium which doubled last year and is about the same this year! Why is it that Harca, THCH, Swan and others take the trouble to look around for the best deals and get them, while LBTH, with all the economic muscle of the last of the big spenders can’t get anybody to quote competitively? These landlords have similar stock with similar social profiles, but LBTH either hasn’t done the work or hasn’t got the marbles, (or both), to get a decent price for leaseholders. Why? Frankly leaseholders, the council couldn’t give a d**n. Which is why, Cllr Francis and Cllr Archer, we rely on you to turn things round. You have both shown leadership and understanding and convinced leaseholders that pragmatism, not party politics, will win the day against both the bureaucrats and the ideologues at Mulberry Place. We urge you to go on working with us, because if leaseholders can be freed from the scourge of bad legislation, bad contracts and bad management, it may be possible to eradicate some of the deeply depressing and worrying features at the heart of local government. The problem this council has with leasehold is the most virulent symptom of a problem the council has with itself: Low self-esteem! Politicians know this. Voters know this. You’ll have to scale leasehold to take control in Tower Hamlets. We want an External Audit Now If the council is on the way out, and the ALMO on the way in, NOW is the time to open up the books. What we need is cross party support for this Conservative Party motion: Council notes the continuing dissatisfaction of leaseholders with the overall service they receive from Tower Hamlets Council, particularly in respect of: information and consultation on both major works and annual service charges Furthermore this council notes the following recent developments: the £50 refund being made to leaseholders by this council in recognition of leaseholder grievances and excessive charges to date This council therefore resolves to call on the executive to: provide leaseholders with an appropriate level of reassurance on the process and resulting charges levied by the Council, by way of an independent audit of leaseholder services to establish that Leaseholder service charges are fair and appropriately calculated. This review should be carried out by a recognised independent firm of auditors. DUE REGARD PANELS PROGRESS AT LAST! A priority for all leaseholders is that Major Works Consultation is done properly. LBTH just doesn’t do openness. Received wisdom inside the council is: if you don’t want problems keep people in the dark. But change, though painfully slow, is coming, and this is down to pressure from leaseholders. We have signed a lease that allows the landlord to charge us a share of maintenance and repair costs. The law gives us some protection. The works must be explained and justified if the landlord wants to recover the leaseholders’ share of the costs. The law also give the leaseholder the right to challenge a major works scheme if it is a bad scheme, for example, badly specified, unreasonably expensive, or just plain wrong. This is called section 20 consultation and we strongly urge all our members to make comments, ask questions and challenge badly thought out schemes. But you need to do something else. If the council’s response to your comments about a scheme is inadequate you should demand a Due Regard Panel. The Panel will review the scheme and produce evidence to justify it and demonstrate that they have taken your comments on board. You can make representations to the panel, and question council technical officers about any aspect of a proposed contract. The council must take due regard of all your arguments, evidence and witness statements. The council has got a lot of other peoples’ money to spend. It tends to spend it and ask questions afterwards. This culture has cost leaseholders all over London a fortune. The THLA has fought to make sure you retake control of council spending at every level and make the council accountable for every management decision it takes and every penny it takes from you. Use the Due Regard to get to the heart of the council’s plans or they will break your heart with their bills. Any doubts call us on 020 7780 9703 or email us on thlaleaseholders@btinternet.com . MORE THLA SUCCESS. IT CAN BE DONE. IT MUST BE DONE Lister House residents took on the LVT and won. How did they do it? They worked as a group. They collected good evidence to show the extent of the problems in their block and they documented the appalling failure of LBTH management to deal with the residents’ issues. They showed to the tribunal that they wanted a decent place to live in and value for money when they paid their bills. The tribunal agreed that the council had provided neither and that LBTH performance at Lister House was “dreadful.” The tribunal was so shocked and so condemning that its indictment left the council squirming with embarrassment. It shouldn’t come to this, but if need’s must, blow that whistle! Go to your local surgery and urge your councillor to help us put a stop to this shameful practice. And the bill? Put your money on deposit while we wait for Ofgem’s decision. Eastend Homes A Suitable Case for Treatment It’s not often you get that feeling that the grass was greener whence you came! Leaseholders who weren’t allowed to vote for or against the new social landlord are complaining bitterly about the Eastend Homes approach to Leasehold Management . They tell us that they are worse of than under the council because there is even less transparency and even less accountability. There is also resistance from Eastend Homes to leaseholders organising and working collectively to protect and promote their interests. We all know that there is no other way if leaseholders are to challenge unfair or unreasonable housing policy, substandard services or inflated service charge costs. Leaseholders must work together and from the board down, Eastend Homes is blocking attempts by leaseholders to do just that. Individuals who have tried to organise leaseholder joint action have been bullied and threatened, as Eastend Homes directors have tried to turn the clock back ten years, denying them information, refusing to engage with them and dismissing any homeowner with a claim as a delinquent non payer. For residents with long memories this a sad futile attempt by EeH managers to re-run battles they lost when they were the failing managers working for an ailing LBTH housing department in the late 90’s. Administration & Management Case LVT agonises over landmark decision 7 months later, leaseholders were still waiting for the result of last year’s Leasehold Valuation Tribunal (LVT) hearings into whether the Council’s 2006/07 estimated management charges are reasonable or not. Normally judgements are given 2 months or less after the LVT hears particular cases; the additional 5 months wait in this case has now been put down to the ‘complexity’ of the issues involved. Whatever the legal complexities, the basic issues at stake for both leaseholders and the Council couldn’t be clearer. The 2006/07 estimated management charges involved a huge hike over previous levels – doubling in the case of the housing management charges. For the Council this was just the start of a new ‘commercial’ approach, where management charges would continue to be jacked up over a number of years – rising, the Council hopes, to over £400. In taking their case to the LVT the Council wanted the Tribunal’s seal of approval for this approach. For leaseholders, faced with an overall management service that is clearly not fit for purpose, the management charges before 2006/07 were too much for what we got, and now the landlord was trying to get the green light to double them and much more. The Council are justifying the huge increases by saying that they need to recover their management costs. The lease allows them to do this, but the law says that these costs must be reasonably calculated and that the management services involved must be of a reasonable standard. Tower Hamlets leaseholders, on the receiving end of the Council’s management ‘services’ over many years, know very well that they are anything but of a reasonable standard – characterised instead by unreasonable and inordinate delays, persistent service failures, waste, inefficiency and incompetence. When the Council first took their case to the LVT in December 2006, they wanted to rush it through by ‘fast track’. They wanted the whole case to focus on the issue of recovery of costs, with as little time as possible spent on the standard of the Council’s management services. For the same reason the Council’s application concerned estimated charges, and not the actuals. Because estimated charges are made in advance, how can you discuss the standard of services that have not yet been provided? But these services do not drop out of the sky at the start of every new financial year, and leaseholders know the standard of management services they are receiving when the estimated charges arrive. They also know whether there is any evidence that the services might improve, stay the same or get even worse. The Council threw a lot of resources at the case – a barrister, experts and top housing officials as witnesses, and mountains of paperwork. They were met with a response organised through the THLA. The THLA opposed the Council’s attempt to ‘fast track’ the case, and successfully argued that leaseholders needed adequate time to oppose the Council’s application. They represented the 12 leaseholders that the Council chose as the ‘defendants’ in the case, and helped other leaseholders join the case to ensure that the Tribunal heard a genuinely ‘representative sample’ of cases. In fact, more than 20 other leaseholders from across the borough made the commitment to go to the LVT to explain the reality of the Council’s management ‘services’. The THLA also organised legal representation, including a barrister, on a ‘pro bono’ basis, and also an ‘expert witness’ – who was able to challenge much of the Council’s ‘cost recovery’ approach. In addition, 2 other leaseholders represented themselves in the case, and were able to bring considerable details of their own experiences over a number of years. One of these leaseholders was able to quote from a recent LVT judgement about their own situation, where the Tribunal determined “there is much evidence that the standard of management was exceptionally poor … Given all the serious failings of which we had evidence we have concluded that only 50% of all the management fees charged for the years in question was reasonably incurred and is recoverable.” In the end the case was heard over 7 separate days, finishing on 2 October 2007. This was much longer than the usual length of LVT cases, and reflected the scope and detail involved. Much of the time was spent with the Council’s evidence about costs, but in the end there was adequate time for the leaseholders’ case to be heard, particularly about the persistent and consistent failings in the management ‘services’ provided. There was also time to consider arguments about ‘low maintenance cost’ blocks, and whether a reasonable charging regime should reflect the fact that a significant number of blocks in the Borough cost considerably less to manage and maintain than others. Apart from producing a number of their own Housing officials as witnesses, the Council’s main response to our case was a one-off telephone survey from November 2007, which they claimed showed that a majority of leaseholders were ‘satisfied’ with the services. Even if the survey had shown what they Council claimed it did – which it didn’t! – a one-off telephone survey paid for by the Council is not a serious response to the detail that a range of leaseholders were able to bring to the Tribunal about the actual services received on the ground. The Tribunal’s decision, will clearly have an important bearing on the level of management charges faced by Tower Hamlets leaseholders. Will the Council get the green or red light – or even just an amber light – from the LVT for their avowed intention to hike up the charges, and keep jacking them up? Whatever the situation, leaseholders need to be aware that the issue of management charges will neither disappear nor be put to bed. For a start, the judgement will only relate directly to the 2006/07 estimated management charges, and we are shortly due to receive the estimated charges for 2008/09. Leaseholders will need to keep pressing our case that management charges should be tied to and limited by the standard of management services provided, and that the first and main issue is for the Council to start addressing and rectifying the large and persistent failings in a service that is a shambles and which cannot be considered as fit for purpose. John Bloxam Pro bono me lord! A tremendous “Thank you” to the City Solicitors Clyde and Inns of Court Barristers Maitland Chambers, and especially to Fiona Dewar, our barrister, and Simon Pulleyn, our solicitor, who represented THLA members in the LVT Admin & Management case, and did it for nothing. Our legal team was magnificent! Quite simply, their skill and tenacity got us to the end of an epic journey that began ten years ago! They believed in us. There is no price for that. They started reforming the House of Lords and the LBTH Caretaking Service at about the same time. Precious little progress in either place! Earlier in the year, the Council reviewed its arrangements for the caretaking and cleaning services provided to both tenants and leaseholders. This review included:- Looking at the methods used to monitor cleaning in the communal areas THLA is taking an active role in working with the Council on this review for the benefit of all leaseholders – and THLA members in particular. This Review should have been completed and we are waiting to see what is being proposed. As we all know, very often the charges made by the Council do not seem to be value for money when we look at the service we receive. In the future we want to be able to understand what the Council will provide and how much it will cost us. In order to enable this, THLA have provided the Council with a draft ‘Service Level Agreement’. The Service Level Agreement – or SLA – lists:- What the Council agree to provide in terms of cleaning standards Of course – cleaning the properties is a big job and in between cleans areas will get dirty. There may be times when cleaners are sick. But – at least we will be confident that when the blocks are cleaned – they are cleaned to an agreed standard and we will know what to expect. The Council don’t want to use Service Level Agreements – they want to use their own method of standard setting. Whatever method is adopted – we need to be clear on what we can expect – how this will be monitored and what we can do if service levels fall below the agreed standards. And, of course, how what we pay relates back to what we get. We also need to understand how our service charges for cleaning services and caretaking are calculated. We need to be able to see how much time each cleaner spends working in any particular block and how much this costs the Council. This is what we should be paying for – and we are asking the Council to provide us with this information for every block and leasehold property in Tower Hamlets. Only then will we be able to see clearly what we get for our money. THLA has written to all of the key people involved in the cleaning review – from Councillors to Council Officers – and we are determined to work with the Council to provide all of us with a cleaning service which is efficient, effective and provides us with value for OUR money! Martin Harvey THLA Cleaning Group Stop Press The Council has finally provided the THLA with details of how the cleaning and caretaking charges are calculated across the Estates. The Council has also provided sample charges for a number of blocks – including how the charges are calculated for these specific blocks. THLA are in discussion with the Council to see how Leaseholders’ charges for cleaning and caretaking can be calculated so that EACH BLOCK pays the appropriate amount of service charge for the level of service received – and that Leaseholders are able to clearly understand what they are paying for and what level of service they can receive. Please contact the THLA and let us know the following The Amount you are paying for cleaning When we receive that information we shall provide you with a standard rescheduling demand. The council will have to consider a cheaper, more efficient approach to cleaning your block. It could save you between 40% and 70% of your cleaning charge. LBTH Major Works: On the Roof or in the Clouds? Our building is due for roof renewal, this will cost several hundred thousand pounds (helped along, of course, by administration charges, hidden consultation charges and other pieces of non-transparent price inflation, bless them!). So we are naturally interested in the opportunities for innovation and for best value (something that the cosy relationships within LBTH 'partnerships' surely do not bring us). Here is the story so far, names have been removed to protect the innocent and to maintain good working relationships: Act 1: We ask the major works team to show us the roof with its defects in preparation for using an independent expert. A member of the major works team (now departed from LBTH) arrives, but, alas, he has no ladder or key for the roof. So we can't go up. He DOES, however, have a representative from the one of the 'partnership' companies who tells us that the roof is going to be wonderful. And so to bed, very reassured. Act 2: I ask and/or suggest (to some very sympathetic elements) the idea of a 'green' roof. I introduce some confusion (mea culpa) by not specifically suggesting passive solar (heating water or other fluid in roof pipes to be used in the building), photo-voltaic (generating electricity from sunlight, that can be used in the building or sold back to the grid) or earth-covered (provides insulation, longer wear and sometimes extra garden space). In spite of this, the council is able to say that the cost will be 20% 'more'. Actually we can compensate for most of this by removing the administration charge! And so to bed, amazed by how such complex estimates can be produced so quickly. Act 3: I go, as a witness, to the LBTH scrutiny committee and give the story of our roof as something that isn't an example either of best practice or of clear, constructive and egalitarian relations between tenants and the council. Later, I receive an email from someone at the council, saying that we must conform to thermal requirement specified by LBTH building control if we are seeking independent advice (given the 20 -25% unjustified markup for these works, who wouldn't?!). There's a further irony here in that our heating is not thermostatically regulated and is often tropical (I live at the end of the block too). Act 4: I write back and ask for complete specifications for our roof renewal rather than the drip feed of details, one by one. This, with a view to getting a genuinely independent opinion and quote. This, dear reader, is where the trail goes cold, nothing and again nothing. So we can draw the following tentative conclusions: There is no specification for our roof works, anyway, or it's a state secret THLA Message Board
Lies, Damned Lies & Statistics in Tower Hamlets! Faking the Evidence. As a respondent at the LVT, I received an advance copy of the MRUK report, but not the questionnaire. Now ponder on this awhile. If a child comes home with a school report saying he has failed his maths exam because the correct answer to a question was ‘6’, but he’d written ‘7’, surely any conscientious parent would ask to see the question paper, wouldn’t they? Knowing something about research methods, my first glance at the document had aroused my suspicions. I asked for a copy of the questionnaire. Only after six weeks of badgering, speaking with MRUK and the “Freedom of Information” office, did the Council grudgingly hand it over (and include it in their ‘Bundle of Evidence’). The questionnaire showed that, in a statistical sense, the Survey findings were gibberish; in addition, Council witnesses misrepresented what the report had claimed -- one question asked leaseholders whether, when they telephoned Home Ownership section, they were answered politely, given a prompt answer and good advice and were satisfied overall with that response. Answers to that question gave the only ‘evidence’ used to support the Council’s claim “the majority of leaseholders are generally satisfied with the standard of service provided by the Council”. An error-riddled Survey Report. It’s Our Money being squandered! Bob Potter |