Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We have just been told that Southwark council have changed the regulations regarding the purchase and installation of new front doors for leaseholders. If leaseholds require a new front door they must be purchased from and installed by a sole contractor designated by Southwark. The cost is nearly 2k and there appears to be no choice of design or style. The doors are windowless. We are very concerned about the way this has been managed with no consultation. The cost is obscenely high - a door that meets the same fire safety and security specs, indeed higher specs, can be found independently at half the price. Has anyone else heard about this?
I would write to Leaseholders Citizens Advice Bureau for advice. They are at 8 Market Square on the Southwark Park Road. This situation sounds NUTS! I get that any council feels responsible for its own leaseholders safety and so on, but this is madness. Fight fight fight.

Would the Council have to issue a section 20 notice and all the prior notifications and consultation period.


Even Major Works over ?250 per flat would need a tender process.


What if the block consists of only 6 flats? where a section 20 would have to be issued as the cost would be more than ?250.

My thoughts exactly spider69. There was no section 20 notice. The front doors are not compulsory at the moment. But if and when leaseholders want/need a new front door, we are being told the new regs now stand. I have asked these same questions to our local housing rep, waiting for a response...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Today we are seeing the impact of increased taxes (employers NI) with tje UK unemployment rate rising  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdxrp7znkdlo Unfortunately, to increase tax burdens will see the economy stall or a recession, as Angelina says, cutting spending, whilst painful short term, is a good way to bring down government borrowing.  True, we don't want to see cuts to services but there are other areas of government spending that can be reduced and with AI impacting all jobs across all businesses, maybe it will also reduce overall staffing costs. 
    • or cut costs.  The cost of debt is a huge burden, it cannot be increased.
    • Yes, they should clearly have been more honest on taxes before the election and not backed themselves into a corner. After 14 years of mismanagement and decline, they have to invest and at the same time start to bring borrowing down (otherwise they continues to be at the mercy of the bond markets). Continued cuts / degrading of public services is counter productive (a successful economy and society needs good infrastructure, education and health care).  The single biggest thing they could do to immediately improve growth would be to rejoin the single market, but I appreciate that is difficult politically.  So if you can't significantly boost growth short term, can't cut too much further, and need to raise money without borrowing, that only really leaves taxation.    Of course, where best to target those taxes - that's the real question.
    • Need moving boxes for house move - all sizes / shapes and bubble wrap too if available. Can collect asap. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...