When is a consultation not a consultation?
A member of staff representing a housing association argues that a questionnaire asking tenants to specify the contents of a property with no other communication with the tenants seeking opinion or input into the decision-making process constitutes proof that tenants were adequately consulted about the future of that property.
It could be argued that the provision of a questionnaire, whatever its purpose, is a form of consultation but does this constitute a consultation in the true sense of the word?
Wednesday, 7 May 2008
Tuesday, 6 May 2008
We Are Human
In the eyes of many members of the general public we are seen as social housing scum, the undeserving poor, living on state handouts in filth and decay, the source of all crime and disorder. When buying properties in new developments many potential purchasers want to be assured that they won't be living in proximity to the social housing that is a requirement of all new developments. There's no public outcry when social housing tenants are uprooted and "decanted" from the communities in which they were born and grew up in the centres of cities to the outskirts to make way for expensive housing and shopping centres.
It wasn't until I became a social housing tenant myself that I noticed that rural and semi-rural social housing has, in the past, been almost exclusively provided on the margins of towns. I also noticed that it wasn't unusual in this local authority area to find private housing on one side of a road and, on the other side, trees or high hedges hiding a parallel secondary road along which social housing is provided. Hide us from view and you can pretend that we don't exist.
We are not scum, you only have to look at the properties in this area, a typical non-urban social housing estate albeit with many properties now in private ownership but many of those properties still owned by their former tenants and, with very few exceptions, you can see the care and pride that goes into these homes and gardens.
In the cold, hard, uncaring face and demeanour of the Housing Officer yesterday morning, as I tried to explain the feelings and practical implications of the demolition of the garages for their tenants, I found myself saying, "We are human". And when I think of the current state of the garages, broken and now looking as though they fulfil the reason for their demolition, i.e. unsafe, I remember how the tenants kept the area clean and tidy, how one tenant always washed his garage door down when he cleaned his car, how neatly our possessions were stacked on the shelves at the back of our garage, how tenants carried out their own repairs in the face of refusal from the landlord and I remember the last time my husband accompanied me, frail and elderly, to help me remove things from the garage, and said "Shall we clean the floor?".
No, we are not social housing scum, the cause of all social ills, the majority of us are respectable, responsible, honest, decent people who care for and about their environment and we are fully human.
It wasn't until I became a social housing tenant myself that I noticed that rural and semi-rural social housing has, in the past, been almost exclusively provided on the margins of towns. I also noticed that it wasn't unusual in this local authority area to find private housing on one side of a road and, on the other side, trees or high hedges hiding a parallel secondary road along which social housing is provided. Hide us from view and you can pretend that we don't exist.
We are not scum, you only have to look at the properties in this area, a typical non-urban social housing estate albeit with many properties now in private ownership but many of those properties still owned by their former tenants and, with very few exceptions, you can see the care and pride that goes into these homes and gardens.
In the cold, hard, uncaring face and demeanour of the Housing Officer yesterday morning, as I tried to explain the feelings and practical implications of the demolition of the garages for their tenants, I found myself saying, "We are human". And when I think of the current state of the garages, broken and now looking as though they fulfil the reason for their demolition, i.e. unsafe, I remember how the tenants kept the area clean and tidy, how one tenant always washed his garage door down when he cleaned his car, how neatly our possessions were stacked on the shelves at the back of our garage, how tenants carried out their own repairs in the face of refusal from the landlord and I remember the last time my husband accompanied me, frail and elderly, to help me remove things from the garage, and said "Shall we clean the floor?".
No, we are not social housing scum, the cause of all social ills, the majority of us are respectable, responsible, honest, decent people who care for and about their environment and we are fully human.
How Do They View Us? (2)
When the housing association ceased to manage the council stock and became our landlord, along with the new tenancy agreement we were provided with a tenants' handbook.
This handbook informs us that we are responsible for paying the utility bills and various other glaringly obvious facts. But the best part of the handbook is an explanation of how to report a repair complete with simple illustrations. One that sticks in my mind is an illustration of a gate which we are informed is called a "gate" complete with a "latch" and "hinges".
I fell foul of the acceptable terminology when I rang earlier this year to report that a light switch in the sitting room was shorting, every time I used the words "sitting room" I was corrected with the words "front room", tempting though it was I really couldn't be bothered to inform the call centre operator that our front room is actually at the back of the property.
Few, if any, English-speaking tenants need to have the names of simple everyday objects spelled out to them. I can't decide if this and other publications we receive from the housing association are aimed at the lowest common denominator or based on an assumption that we are all uneducated, intellectually impaired and unable to function without their guidance.
The quarterly newsletter doesn't make the rationale behind the style of language or content of the publications we receive any clearer. We are routinely lectured about debt, the need to pay our rent, the consequences of anti-social behaviour and what the housing association is doing about it, not a lot in my experience, and, to add insult to injury, we were subjected to series of articles telling us how to clean our homes.
At least the quarterly newsletter affords my family some amusement when I read selected articles to them in an appropriately patronising voice over the phone.
This handbook informs us that we are responsible for paying the utility bills and various other glaringly obvious facts. But the best part of the handbook is an explanation of how to report a repair complete with simple illustrations. One that sticks in my mind is an illustration of a gate which we are informed is called a "gate" complete with a "latch" and "hinges".
I fell foul of the acceptable terminology when I rang earlier this year to report that a light switch in the sitting room was shorting, every time I used the words "sitting room" I was corrected with the words "front room", tempting though it was I really couldn't be bothered to inform the call centre operator that our front room is actually at the back of the property.
Few, if any, English-speaking tenants need to have the names of simple everyday objects spelled out to them. I can't decide if this and other publications we receive from the housing association are aimed at the lowest common denominator or based on an assumption that we are all uneducated, intellectually impaired and unable to function without their guidance.
The quarterly newsletter doesn't make the rationale behind the style of language or content of the publications we receive any clearer. We are routinely lectured about debt, the need to pay our rent, the consequences of anti-social behaviour and what the housing association is doing about it, not a lot in my experience, and, to add insult to injury, we were subjected to series of articles telling us how to clean our homes.
At least the quarterly newsletter affords my family some amusement when I read selected articles to them in an appropriately patronising voice over the phone.
Demolition Derby - Update
This morning I heard loud noises from the garage area.
I still hadn't completed emptying my garage, already disabled, when, without warning and during the time I had been given to clear it, the fencing was put up and later removed I had injured myself whilst trying to at least remove my husband's belongings before access to the garage was permanently denied. Having spent several days completely out of action, I could only manage two trips to clear the garage on a good day.
I went to investigate and the garage doors were being opened with a crowbar and checked for remaining possessions prior to the fencing going up (again) this morning, it must now be in place as my neighbour is using my offer to walk through our back garden to access his car which he has parked at the back of our properties.
The Housing Officer was in attendance, she confirmed that garage tenants would be charged for the removal of any remaining possessions in the garages. Fortunately, the workmen wielding the crowbars have emptied my garage for me at their supervisor's suggestion. Maybe the expressions, facial and verbal, of anger and distress that I was unable to suppress at yet again having not been warned after having been told, unofficially this time, that I probably had until 12 May to empty the garage had a part in them helping, whatever, I'm grateful for their help. Our remaining possessions are now residing at the bottom of the garden where the heavier items will have to remain for now.
So again, with no prior warning communication, the area is fenced off, this time permanently while the garages await demolition.
This is going on across the estate, I can hear the sound of the doors of one garage area after another being crow-barred open; it's a very melancholy sound that seems to herald a new low in the relationship between local residents, both homeowners and tenants, and the association. For me it feels as though they've somehow proved their authority over my life, I have no voice, I wasn't asked, the impact on my life is irrelevant, I'm powerless. And I feel a certain sadness that this area is going to change in some intangible way not least because of the very palpable anger that is displayed in faces and voices because I'm not alone, everyone is expressing the same feelings of anger and defeat, heads are down, shoulders hunched; we, and our opinions, count for nothing.
(Since writing this I have been to look at the garage area; behind tall wire fencing units the garage doors are up at various angles, one has been reversed, mine, not mine it was never mine, is fully open as I left it this morning, water is pouring from the tap that was provided for cleaning cars, there is an air of abandonment and of desolation, of no-one caring any more. How very appropriate.)
I still hadn't completed emptying my garage, already disabled, when, without warning and during the time I had been given to clear it, the fencing was put up and later removed I had injured myself whilst trying to at least remove my husband's belongings before access to the garage was permanently denied. Having spent several days completely out of action, I could only manage two trips to clear the garage on a good day.
I went to investigate and the garage doors were being opened with a crowbar and checked for remaining possessions prior to the fencing going up (again) this morning, it must now be in place as my neighbour is using my offer to walk through our back garden to access his car which he has parked at the back of our properties.
The Housing Officer was in attendance, she confirmed that garage tenants would be charged for the removal of any remaining possessions in the garages. Fortunately, the workmen wielding the crowbars have emptied my garage for me at their supervisor's suggestion. Maybe the expressions, facial and verbal, of anger and distress that I was unable to suppress at yet again having not been warned after having been told, unofficially this time, that I probably had until 12 May to empty the garage had a part in them helping, whatever, I'm grateful for their help. Our remaining possessions are now residing at the bottom of the garden where the heavier items will have to remain for now.
So again, with no prior warning communication, the area is fenced off, this time permanently while the garages await demolition.
This is going on across the estate, I can hear the sound of the doors of one garage area after another being crow-barred open; it's a very melancholy sound that seems to herald a new low in the relationship between local residents, both homeowners and tenants, and the association. For me it feels as though they've somehow proved their authority over my life, I have no voice, I wasn't asked, the impact on my life is irrelevant, I'm powerless. And I feel a certain sadness that this area is going to change in some intangible way not least because of the very palpable anger that is displayed in faces and voices because I'm not alone, everyone is expressing the same feelings of anger and defeat, heads are down, shoulders hunched; we, and our opinions, count for nothing.
(Since writing this I have been to look at the garage area; behind tall wire fencing units the garage doors are up at various angles, one has been reversed, mine, not mine it was never mine, is fully open as I left it this morning, water is pouring from the tap that was provided for cleaning cars, there is an air of abandonment and of desolation, of no-one caring any more. How very appropriate.)
Sunday, 4 May 2008
How Do They View Us? (1)
The use of a simple little word, "decant", seems to provide as good a starting point as any when attempting to gain insight into the way in which social housing tenants are perceived by their landlords. The Concise OED, admittedly mine is an old copy, defines decant in the following way:
This was certainly my understanding of the meaning and usage of the word, you decant chemical solutions, you decant wine, you decant sherry, you decant port, you do not decant people. Or you didn't until the advent of the 2012 Olympic Games. Social housing tenants are, in housing terminology, now being "decanted" to make way for the Games.
When I first read the word used in this context it immediately conjured up images of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. And of human foetuses artificially created in test tubes and intellectually and physically enhanced or diminished according to their predetermined social status in Huxley's hierarchical, socially engineered society.
So how are tenants viewed in the hierarchical brave new world of privatised social housing? I would suggest that we are the Epsilons, the lowest stratum of society to be coerced, controlled, moved at will and never, never to have more than token control over our homes or communities and, therefore, our lives.
decant, v.t. Pour off (liquid or solution) by gradual inclination of vessel without disturbing sediment; pour (wine) similarly from bottle into decanter; (fig.) move or transfer as if by pouring.[f. med. L DE(canthare f. L. f. Gk Kanthos CANT used of lip of beaker)]
This was certainly my understanding of the meaning and usage of the word, you decant chemical solutions, you decant wine, you decant sherry, you decant port, you do not decant people. Or you didn't until the advent of the 2012 Olympic Games. Social housing tenants are, in housing terminology, now being "decanted" to make way for the Games.
When I first read the word used in this context it immediately conjured up images of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. And of human foetuses artificially created in test tubes and intellectually and physically enhanced or diminished according to their predetermined social status in Huxley's hierarchical, socially engineered society.
So how are tenants viewed in the hierarchical brave new world of privatised social housing? I would suggest that we are the Epsilons, the lowest stratum of society to be coerced, controlled, moved at will and never, never to have more than token control over our homes or communities and, therefore, our lives.
Demolition Derby
This is not one of the estates so frequently stereotyped by government and media alike. There are no high-rise blocks, no no-go areas, no needles and syringes lying in doorways, we have the occasional drunk or drug addict and the occasional bout of vandalism and car theft but the incidence is no greater than is experienced on the leafy streets of Middle England. If it were not for the fact that the properties have that council-built look about them this could be Middle England, the majority of the properties have been bought under right-to-buy, many sold on for prices that only the very well-paid could afford, partly because this is a green leafy area in a very expensive small town and partly because we have a very good and over-subscribed secondary school a few hundred yards away. The Thatcherite policy of right-to-buy has created the mixed communities so beloved of New Labour but at the cost of the poor in towns like this who have little or no access to affordable rented social housing.
With the exception of one small block of flats, every property has gardens and the front gardens lead to narrow, tree-lined roads, many with just enough room for two cars to pass, the legacy of building in an era when car ownership was not the norm, particularly for the low-paid. And we have an awful lot of cars, it's not unusual for families to have two cars, some have more and some have vehicles they use for their trade. So we have a parking problem, narrow streets and two-car families and, just to exacerbate the problem, the road parallel to the school road is used by parents as a drop-off and collection point at the beginning and end of each school day and don't let's forget all the sixth-formers old enough to drive cars who leave their vehicles during school hours on the street where their parents used to drop them off and pick them up.
It would seem logical to acknowledge that as there is already parking congestion that there is a need for both off-street parking and the provision of garages for residents. Garage blocks along with parking bays in the garage areas existed long before we moved here. This is about to, in fact has, changed. Virtually all, if not all, it's hard to keep track of the planning applications, the garages owned by the housing association in this small town are to be demolished and houses, two-bedded terraced houses, built on the garage block plots. Whether these are intended for social rent, shared ownership or market rent or sale is unknown.
This mass demolition includes my garage but it and the other garages in our blocks are exceptional, our garages are to be demolished to make way for parking bays. On enquiring this has more to do with the cost of maintaining the garages, something that has not been done for at least three years, than providing relief for parking congestion, the number of parking bays will barely exceed the parking provision that already existed. We haven't been consulted, the only communication prior to the decision being made being a questionnaire asking what we used our garages for. Planning and change of use regulations don't apply so we have had no means of objecting via the planning system either.
The demolition of the garages has been an ongoing rumour for around three years, when we received the questionnaire I was personally assured by a member of the development team that our garages were unlikely to be effected. This matters to me, I have mobility problems and I was allocated the garage close to my home in what was an area with a long waiting list after the intervention of an Occupational Therapist due to my previous garage being increasingly difficult to walk to and from. I had also had my car vandalised when I left it out in the garage area while my garage was used for storage when we had the property decorated in 2003 so I feel, not unsurprisingly, the need for secure parking. I explained all this on the back of the questionnaire along with the obvious difficulties for all residents if access to secure parking was removed and there was an overall reduction in parking provision.
After occasional flurries of activity, including site inspections but no information provided on the purpose of these investigations, in November 2007 we were informed that by 2009 our garages would be demolished, in the week before Easter this year we had a hand-delivered letter stating that we would be given as much notice as possible, on Easter Saturday, with no-one available at the housing association to speak to until the following Tuesday, we received notice to quit by 21 April. (Actually, my husband who doesn't own a car, has never owned a car, doesn't drive and has never driven, received the notice to quit despite the fact that the tenancy agreement is my name. Clearly the housing association believes that their tenants live in a pre-1960s time-warp where female tenants don't experience the same level of independence and autonomy as other female members of society and that we rely on our husbands to deal with all aspects of our lives, indeed all correspondence is addressed exclusively to my husband despite the fact ours is a joint tenancy and I deal with all our affairs, including housing issues.)
All garage tenants received the garage rent increase notification for the financial year commencing 7 April, I rang and offered to pay by credit card, it seemed pointless setting up a standing order to cover only two weeks, the finance department were unaware that the garages were to be demolished and that we had notice to quit. On Friday a neighbour, an ex-tenant of another garage area, came home to be told by another neighbour that the long outstanding repair to his garage door had been dealt with that day, he checked and it had, he too had been evicted from his garage on 21 April. It appears that the association not only has a problem communicating with its tenants but also between departments.
Some tenants removed their cars and refused to pay their garage rents for the remaining two weeks, one has told me that he's received unpleasant letters from the housing association demanding payment. He also tells me that another tenant has received three threatening letters, I haven't seen these letters so I'm unable to judge how unpleasant or threatening they are but there is no doubt about the anger many garage tenants feel about the way in which the issue has been handled.
Two days after the eviction date and without prior warning fencing was erected round the garage area despite cars parked in the area surrounding the garage bocks being unable to be moved as a consequence. After complaints, one from me who had, after an initial suggestion of possible help from the association in clearing my garage which didn't materialise, been given an additional week to enable me to pay for help, the fencing was removed and is still removed. No-one now knows what will happen next, I was originally told demolition would commence in the week starting 28 April then that it would probably be post 12 May. As our property is extremely close to one of the garage blocks, the one in which my car was garaged, we don't consider it unreasonable to be notified in advance of the demolition.
Finally, I've yet to speak to anyone who, other than the residents whose properties overlook the garage area, intends to use the parking bays that are to replace our garages, all intend to park outside their homes rather than leave their cars in an unsecured parking area where they can't see them.
I have no problem with garages being demolished to make way for social housing for rent. I do have a problem with an organisation that believes that it can remove an amenity without any attempt at consultation and without an impact assessment involving residents to identify the problems that the loss of this amenity will cause both to individuals and the community as a whole. I do have a problem with an organisation that is willing to impose costs on its tenants in the interests of reducing its own costs, the rent receipts from the garages have never been ring-fenced for maintenance and repairs, the condition of garages has been allowed to deteriorate, possibly in order to justify their demolition, cost of maintenance and repair being cited to me as a reason for their disposal. I do have a problem with an organisation that, through lack of consultation is, in the case of our garage blocks, about to remove an amenity to provide an alternative that no-one wishes to use, the fact that they inform me that they may charge for the use of this unwanted alternative merely increases the prospect of the parking bays becoming underutilised.
Ultimately I have a problem with an organisation that shows little or no respect for the people that pay their salaries, that believes that their views are not worth seeking and that they have nothing valid to say, yet are willing to use our rents to pay consultants to provide them with the answers they want.
With the exception of one small block of flats, every property has gardens and the front gardens lead to narrow, tree-lined roads, many with just enough room for two cars to pass, the legacy of building in an era when car ownership was not the norm, particularly for the low-paid. And we have an awful lot of cars, it's not unusual for families to have two cars, some have more and some have vehicles they use for their trade. So we have a parking problem, narrow streets and two-car families and, just to exacerbate the problem, the road parallel to the school road is used by parents as a drop-off and collection point at the beginning and end of each school day and don't let's forget all the sixth-formers old enough to drive cars who leave their vehicles during school hours on the street where their parents used to drop them off and pick them up.
It would seem logical to acknowledge that as there is already parking congestion that there is a need for both off-street parking and the provision of garages for residents. Garage blocks along with parking bays in the garage areas existed long before we moved here. This is about to, in fact has, changed. Virtually all, if not all, it's hard to keep track of the planning applications, the garages owned by the housing association in this small town are to be demolished and houses, two-bedded terraced houses, built on the garage block plots. Whether these are intended for social rent, shared ownership or market rent or sale is unknown.
This mass demolition includes my garage but it and the other garages in our blocks are exceptional, our garages are to be demolished to make way for parking bays. On enquiring this has more to do with the cost of maintaining the garages, something that has not been done for at least three years, than providing relief for parking congestion, the number of parking bays will barely exceed the parking provision that already existed. We haven't been consulted, the only communication prior to the decision being made being a questionnaire asking what we used our garages for. Planning and change of use regulations don't apply so we have had no means of objecting via the planning system either.
The demolition of the garages has been an ongoing rumour for around three years, when we received the questionnaire I was personally assured by a member of the development team that our garages were unlikely to be effected. This matters to me, I have mobility problems and I was allocated the garage close to my home in what was an area with a long waiting list after the intervention of an Occupational Therapist due to my previous garage being increasingly difficult to walk to and from. I had also had my car vandalised when I left it out in the garage area while my garage was used for storage when we had the property decorated in 2003 so I feel, not unsurprisingly, the need for secure parking. I explained all this on the back of the questionnaire along with the obvious difficulties for all residents if access to secure parking was removed and there was an overall reduction in parking provision.
After occasional flurries of activity, including site inspections but no information provided on the purpose of these investigations, in November 2007 we were informed that by 2009 our garages would be demolished, in the week before Easter this year we had a hand-delivered letter stating that we would be given as much notice as possible, on Easter Saturday, with no-one available at the housing association to speak to until the following Tuesday, we received notice to quit by 21 April. (Actually, my husband who doesn't own a car, has never owned a car, doesn't drive and has never driven, received the notice to quit despite the fact that the tenancy agreement is my name. Clearly the housing association believes that their tenants live in a pre-1960s time-warp where female tenants don't experience the same level of independence and autonomy as other female members of society and that we rely on our husbands to deal with all aspects of our lives, indeed all correspondence is addressed exclusively to my husband despite the fact ours is a joint tenancy and I deal with all our affairs, including housing issues.)
All garage tenants received the garage rent increase notification for the financial year commencing 7 April, I rang and offered to pay by credit card, it seemed pointless setting up a standing order to cover only two weeks, the finance department were unaware that the garages were to be demolished and that we had notice to quit. On Friday a neighbour, an ex-tenant of another garage area, came home to be told by another neighbour that the long outstanding repair to his garage door had been dealt with that day, he checked and it had, he too had been evicted from his garage on 21 April. It appears that the association not only has a problem communicating with its tenants but also between departments.
Some tenants removed their cars and refused to pay their garage rents for the remaining two weeks, one has told me that he's received unpleasant letters from the housing association demanding payment. He also tells me that another tenant has received three threatening letters, I haven't seen these letters so I'm unable to judge how unpleasant or threatening they are but there is no doubt about the anger many garage tenants feel about the way in which the issue has been handled.
Two days after the eviction date and without prior warning fencing was erected round the garage area despite cars parked in the area surrounding the garage bocks being unable to be moved as a consequence. After complaints, one from me who had, after an initial suggestion of possible help from the association in clearing my garage which didn't materialise, been given an additional week to enable me to pay for help, the fencing was removed and is still removed. No-one now knows what will happen next, I was originally told demolition would commence in the week starting 28 April then that it would probably be post 12 May. As our property is extremely close to one of the garage blocks, the one in which my car was garaged, we don't consider it unreasonable to be notified in advance of the demolition.
Finally, I've yet to speak to anyone who, other than the residents whose properties overlook the garage area, intends to use the parking bays that are to replace our garages, all intend to park outside their homes rather than leave their cars in an unsecured parking area where they can't see them.
I have no problem with garages being demolished to make way for social housing for rent. I do have a problem with an organisation that believes that it can remove an amenity without any attempt at consultation and without an impact assessment involving residents to identify the problems that the loss of this amenity will cause both to individuals and the community as a whole. I do have a problem with an organisation that is willing to impose costs on its tenants in the interests of reducing its own costs, the rent receipts from the garages have never been ring-fenced for maintenance and repairs, the condition of garages has been allowed to deteriorate, possibly in order to justify their demolition, cost of maintenance and repair being cited to me as a reason for their disposal. I do have a problem with an organisation that, through lack of consultation is, in the case of our garage blocks, about to remove an amenity to provide an alternative that no-one wishes to use, the fact that they inform me that they may charge for the use of this unwanted alternative merely increases the prospect of the parking bays becoming underutilised.
Ultimately I have a problem with an organisation that shows little or no respect for the people that pay their salaries, that believes that their views are not worth seeking and that they have nothing valid to say, yet are willing to use our rents to pay consultants to provide them with the answers they want.
Saturday, 3 May 2008
What Price a Cheap Kitchen?
I'm sitting here watching the birds feeding in the garden, first the starlings, next a blackbird, a robin and then the collar doves and the wood pigeon. The blue tits, chaffinches and house sparrows, along with other, less frequent, visitors have yet to arrive or perhaps I missed them earlier.
Our gardens, our back garden in particular, have special significance for us, my now frail, elderly husband and me, younger and disabled. We created them from nothing, a long, hard labour of love. The front an expanse of grass, the back another expanse of grass with large, overgrown lilac trees at the bottom, have evolved into places of sanctuary and providers of fresh fruit and vegetables. We live beside farmland and they also attract a wide range of wildlife. For people who can only rarely leave their homes their gardens can take on a significance beyond the norm, they are their access to the world outside their walls.
Our back garden in its current state is now under threat, admittedly merely a rumour but one we take seriously. 15 feet of the back gardens of the four housing association properties backing onto the access road to what are now garages but are about to be demolished to make way for a similar number of parking bays, according to the rumour, are to be sacrificed to expand the single lane access road to a two-lane access road. Ours is one of the four properties.
Rumours are, like gossip, rarely pleasant and invariably untrue, but since our home was what was euphemistically termed "transferred", i.e. sold, to a housing association by the local council we've learned to listen to rumours, they have a nasty habit of proving true, the demolition of the garages started as one such rumour.
When we were given the keys to this property we were told that we had a home for life, we had a secure tenancy and a two-page tenancy agreement. When tenants voted for stock transfer in response to promises of improved housing conditions if they voted for the proposed transfer and dire threats of the deterioration of the housing stock if they voted against, they not only gave up their security of tenure but they also gave up their voice in influencing the future of their homes and local area, local politicians are accountable, distant management boards are not. They also found themselves in possession of a 39-page tenancy agreement, one-and-a-half pages detailing the landlord's responsibilities the remainder detailing the tenant's. They had sold their security and say in how their housing was provided in exchange for promises of cheap replacement kitchens and double glazing.
Since the transfer of the housing stock to the original housing association the association has grown; it has increased its housing portfolio through the transfer of additional council-owned stock; it has engaged in a merger becoming the one of the largest housing associations in the country; it has refinanced and, more recently, properties that, due to borrowing restrictions imposed on local authorities, were owned outright by councils now provide security for the largest loan made to a housing association in social housing history; "excess" stock in areas of high housing demand and low availability have been sold off; the association operates a commercial arm with property for market sale and market rent; staff refer to it as "the company".
This blog is about the privatisation of social housing, the removal of yet another building block of the Welfare State. It's about the personal experience of changing from a local, accountable housing provider to a distant, unapproachable and unaccountable bureaucracy that appears to put profits before people and doesn't appear to have the word "consult" in its vocabulary; it's about dealing with the preconceptions and stereotypes attributed to social housing tenants not least by their landlords and their staff; it's about fighting for services, failing services and, most of all, the experience of being voiceless, powerless and feeling that you are of no consequence, merely, as in the words of a neighbour, "treated like dirt" by an organisation that appears to have forgotten where its core purpose lies: in the provision of decent affordable housing for low-income individuals and families.
What price a cheap kitchen? All the above and perhaps the loss of a third of a garden beyond price to those who created it.
Our gardens, our back garden in particular, have special significance for us, my now frail, elderly husband and me, younger and disabled. We created them from nothing, a long, hard labour of love. The front an expanse of grass, the back another expanse of grass with large, overgrown lilac trees at the bottom, have evolved into places of sanctuary and providers of fresh fruit and vegetables. We live beside farmland and they also attract a wide range of wildlife. For people who can only rarely leave their homes their gardens can take on a significance beyond the norm, they are their access to the world outside their walls.
Our back garden in its current state is now under threat, admittedly merely a rumour but one we take seriously. 15 feet of the back gardens of the four housing association properties backing onto the access road to what are now garages but are about to be demolished to make way for a similar number of parking bays, according to the rumour, are to be sacrificed to expand the single lane access road to a two-lane access road. Ours is one of the four properties.
Rumours are, like gossip, rarely pleasant and invariably untrue, but since our home was what was euphemistically termed "transferred", i.e. sold, to a housing association by the local council we've learned to listen to rumours, they have a nasty habit of proving true, the demolition of the garages started as one such rumour.
When we were given the keys to this property we were told that we had a home for life, we had a secure tenancy and a two-page tenancy agreement. When tenants voted for stock transfer in response to promises of improved housing conditions if they voted for the proposed transfer and dire threats of the deterioration of the housing stock if they voted against, they not only gave up their security of tenure but they also gave up their voice in influencing the future of their homes and local area, local politicians are accountable, distant management boards are not. They also found themselves in possession of a 39-page tenancy agreement, one-and-a-half pages detailing the landlord's responsibilities the remainder detailing the tenant's. They had sold their security and say in how their housing was provided in exchange for promises of cheap replacement kitchens and double glazing.
Since the transfer of the housing stock to the original housing association the association has grown; it has increased its housing portfolio through the transfer of additional council-owned stock; it has engaged in a merger becoming the one of the largest housing associations in the country; it has refinanced and, more recently, properties that, due to borrowing restrictions imposed on local authorities, were owned outright by councils now provide security for the largest loan made to a housing association in social housing history; "excess" stock in areas of high housing demand and low availability have been sold off; the association operates a commercial arm with property for market sale and market rent; staff refer to it as "the company".
This blog is about the privatisation of social housing, the removal of yet another building block of the Welfare State. It's about the personal experience of changing from a local, accountable housing provider to a distant, unapproachable and unaccountable bureaucracy that appears to put profits before people and doesn't appear to have the word "consult" in its vocabulary; it's about dealing with the preconceptions and stereotypes attributed to social housing tenants not least by their landlords and their staff; it's about fighting for services, failing services and, most of all, the experience of being voiceless, powerless and feeling that you are of no consequence, merely, as in the words of a neighbour, "treated like dirt" by an organisation that appears to have forgotten where its core purpose lies: in the provision of decent affordable housing for low-income individuals and families.
What price a cheap kitchen? All the above and perhaps the loss of a third of a garden beyond price to those who created it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)