- Mobile site
- E-Newsletters
-
- News feed
- Find us on Twitter
@BucksFreePress
The latest BFP news, views & sport.
- Find us on Facebook
Bucks Free Press
Like us on Facebook!
Labour claim fee rises could force people out of homes (From Bucks Free Press)
Send your news, photos and videos by texting bucksfreepress to 80360 or email
Labour claim fee rises could force people out of homes
11:30am Wednesday 23rd May 2012 in Bourne End & Wooburns By James Nadal
LARGE rises in basic maintenance fees for some leaseholders in over 6,000 former Wycombe council houses could force them out, Labour claims.
The Wycombe branch of the party have lambasted council chiefs after learning of the increases.
For some Red Kite Community Housing leaseholders rises in charges for services such as caretaking and cleaning, repairs and heating water, is over 100 per cent, Labour says.
The party has aimed its fire, not at the new housing association which took over the homes in December, but at the Tory council.
Councillor Victoria Groulef, leader of the Labour group on Wycombe District Council, accused housing bosses of failing to understand and then inform leaseholders before the homes were sold.
She claimed the true impact of the transfer to Red Kite was not made clear and now the rises could force some out of their homes or at least cause them financial troubles.
She said: “The stark reality is that substantial increases will have a dramatic impact on people during tough economic times, many of whom took up their right to buy in order to provide more stability and financial certainty.
“I have met with staff at Red Kite and under housing association rules they have no choice but to charge the full cost for the services they provide to leaseholders.
“Red Kite are in fact doing all they can to minimise the impact of the increase in charges”.
She said verbal assurances from Cllr David Carroll, Cabinet Member for Housing, prior to the housing sale, have proved hollow because the contract had no protections after all.
Wycombe District Council said it did not want to comment.
Zosia Katnik, Red Kite spokesman, said the organisation is committed to working with tenants and leaseholders to introduce a fair and proportionate charging structure reflecting the costs of the service.
She said: “Based on the level of service as specified in each lease, 84 per cent of our leaseholders were asked to pay less this year for their estimated charges than last year and 16 per cent were asked to pay more.
“We continue to provide our tenants and leaseholders with value for money to ensure we deliver on our promises.”
Comments(16)
Judge 2
says...
12:22pm Wed 23 May 12
Labour supported the transfer and knew the risks of "privatisation"!
Move on you sad lady!
geoffW
says...
12:25pm Wed 23 May 12
wayneo wrote:"The party has aimed its fire, not at the new housing association which took over the homes in December, but at the Tory council."
They voted for it, they got the system they voted for, no point whining now.
.
Well they would, wouldn't they. Doesn't really matter about the 6,000 as long as Groulef cn get some political ammunition out of the situation.
.
Saying that these rises could "force some people out of their homes" is quite staggering really. She didn't work for the tabloids in a previous life?
yog
says...
12:30pm Wed 23 May 12
If Labour hadn't done so they would still be owned by the Council.
Too late to whine now. You didn't stand up when it mattered.
sparky49
says...
12:31pm Wed 23 May 12
miccles
says...
12:40pm Wed 23 May 12
I reckon well over 50% don't pay anything anyway, so it shouldn't affect them that much.
I'm sure the social will let them know if its too much or not, but they just pay it anyway.
Judge 2
says...
1:03pm Wed 23 May 12
miccles wrote:So true...........
"She claimed the true impact of the transfer to Red Kite was not made clear and now the rises could force some out of their homes or at least cause them financial troubles." I reckon well over 50% don't pay anything anyway, so it shouldn't affect them that much. I'm sure the social will let them know if its too much or not, but they just pay it anyway.
Catflap
says...
1:48pm Wed 23 May 12
tigeran
says...
4:54pm Wed 23 May 12
Catflap wrote:Fair play Catflap. It is unfortunate that a few undesirables bring the whole thing into disrepute. I have to say that if certain services etc have gone up 100% then they must have been stupidly low and probably are still way below what anyone in privately rented accomodation would have to pay.
I am a council tenant and have always worked to provide for my family and pay my rent. I know there are a few who sit back and take what is handed out but please do not tarr us all with the same brush
DannyDiv
says...
10:49am Thu 24 May 12
a political one at all.
Most tenants voted in Red Kite on the basis that it was "business as usual".
Why? Well, because WDC assured all tenants that this was the case and that there would be no additional costs or burdens under the new arrangement for tenants.
It is fair enough for posters on here to say "you voted for it", but it is not as simple as that. Tenants voted for a manifesto made up of commitments and promises.
Whoever was responsible for housing at WDC when these commitments were made, be they Tory or Labour, civil servant or elected, should be hauled before the courts on criminal charges.
This is miscohduct in a public office, pure and simple.
DannyDiv
says...
11:03am Thu 24 May 12
http://www.bucksfree
press.co.uk/news/940
0818.Sparks_fly_as_c
ouncil_homes_sold
Well done Victoria on not letting this rest.
There is serious jail time awaiting a few people here if she continues her efforts, mark my words.
sparky49
says...
11:44am Thu 24 May 12
tigeran wrote:Read the detail Tigeran before you embark on another crusade to put done the working classes.
Catflap wrote:Fair play Catflap. It is unfortunate that a few undesirables bring the whole thing into disrepute. I have to say that if certain services etc have gone up 100% then they must have been stupidly low and probably are still way below what anyone in privately rented accomodation would have to pay.
I am a council tenant and have always worked to provide for my family and pay my rent. I know there are a few who sit back and take what is handed out but please do not tarr us all with the same brush
The charges refer to maintenance for LEASEHOLDERS which are the tenants that bought their council flats in a block which were a Leasehold not a Freehold. So these people are PRIVATE not social housing tenants. Basically your kind of people.
Barbara B
says...
12:03pm Thu 24 May 12
Barbara B
says...
12:03pm Thu 24 May 12
DonRockell
says...
6:08pm Sun 17 Jun 12
DannyDiv wrote:That's the problem - it is business as usual with big emphasis on the business part of it.
I don't see Cllr Groulef's stance as
a political one at all.
Most tenants voted in Red Kite on the basis that it was "business as usual".
Why? Well, because WDC assured all tenants that this was the case and that there would be no additional costs or burdens under the new arrangement for tenants.
It is fair enough for posters on here to say "you voted for it", but it is not as simple as that. Tenants voted for a manifesto made up of commitments and promises.
Whoever was responsible for housing at WDC when these commitments were made, be they Tory or Labour, civil servant or elected, should be hauled before the courts on criminal charges.
This is miscohduct in a public office, pure and simple.
Red kit is in it for the money if they weren't they would be a charity and not a business and anyone daft enough to think that a business would take on all those houses, even at the vastly knocked down rates they were sold to them for is not looking at it logically.
The council are directly responsible to the people and as such when it owned the properties the people had a say in what was done.
Red Kite is responsible to those who put up the money and their share holders and that's it.
I would be asking - who on the council or those that backed the sale are profiting from it now and could they be liable for any action being taken against them for profiteering or giving away council (Our) properties to a private company for private gain.
sparky49
says...
9:30am Mon 18 Jun 12
WDC did have a responsibilty to their tenants, but treated them like a bad smell and did NOT let tenanats have a say. Their atitude was be grateful you have a home with the cheapest materials, any repairs will be done on the cheap or do them yourself. As for Red Kite they are non profit making, which means the money goes back into maintaining their assets (properties) and the tenants have a say in things. Agreed you ask why they would go into business without making money, non profit making companies make their money from paying the directors higher levels than the public sector.
wayneo says...
12:09pm Wed 23 May 12