Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Crazy idea here, completely unprecedented I know

> and couldn?t possibly work but here you go:

> Regulate the cost of private rentals and if you

> are going to have a social housing system make

> sure the councils have enough of their own housing

> stock.

>

> I know I know it sounds nuts. It was just one of

> those mad thoughts I sometimes have.



If thats how you feel, then why DONT YOU GO TO RUSSIA AND SEE HOW YOU LIKE IT...


etc

Here is an update on the case of the Council House:


EALING: Council workers sacked over ?1.2m house

8:20am Friday 10th October 2008


Three temps have been sacked over their role in a ?12,500-a-month housing scandal.

Ealing Council hit the headlines yesterday when it emerged an Afghan mother of seven was staying in an Acton mansion for free, at taxpayers expense. David Lewis, of Balham, was called into an office with the rest of his team shortly after the news broke and all three of them were fired on the spot. He said: ?We were escorted out of the building like criminals. We?ve been made scape goats for it and now we are all unemployed. I have to start looking for another job and it?s not the best time now.? The council only has to give them one week?s notice, because they are temps, but chose not to let them stay, instead paying the trio for work they will never do.


Toorpakai Saindi came to the country seven years ago and was given the ?1.2m house after reporting to the council as homeless in July. Mr Lewis claims he and his colleagues have done nothing wrong but merely followed a set of criteria laid down by the Government. He says a different council department made the decision to put the family in private rented accommodation, and the price was set by an arm of the Department for Work and Pensions. He claims another office in the council had the power to cap the amount spent on the rent but chose not to. Verity Adams, a spokesman for the council, said: ?We have taken the decision to consolidate all work with private landlords into one housing team. ?This has meant that we ended the contract of three agency staff working on a temporary basis.?

How refreshing and re-assurring to realise some things never change in this wonderful world which we are so fortunate to inhabit!

When the poo-poo hits the fan its the dear old Temps who are the natural scapegoat:-$

Restores omes faith in the system somewhat.>:D<

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of Smoke Control law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, AFAICS, the "civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300" were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all per se, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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