Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm not against CPO's or estate regeneration. I even think the option to remain on the estate in a higher value property with the shared equity / zero rent concept is decent. The main problem for me is the valuations used. I have to agree that on the face of it, they seem extremely low. I mean how much does a 3 bed flat at Dog Kennel Hill estates costs these day?
The project began under the previous Libdem Council so it's not just Labour councillors who are poor on this. Lambeth council are going much further and ignoring tenant/ leaseholder consultation altogether. The government has promised increased tenant/ leaseholder powers on the process and decisions made and I think the governments ruling on this is the start of that process. It's one thing to regenerate an area or estate, it's another when you lock out sitting tenants and leaseholders from the plans and benefits of that regeneration.

What Southwark are being accused of is much more serious than that. They are essentially stealing people's money. If they pay you 150k when its worth 300k that is actual robbery.


I'm not saying I don't care about people getting to remain in the regenerated community etc just that if the accusations in the article are true, its very damning.

I'm not against regeneration where it makes sense. But anyone that has wormed to buybtheir home (and some of these people wont be the original Right to buy owners that cashes in) they have an absokute right to be given the value of an equivalent property in that area.


A 2 bed flat in a block is currently pushing 300k in Penge, so offering these people in a much more exoensive area less than 150 is taking the absolute piss.

Rosetta Wrote:

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

> Yes, andI don't see how Peter Johns can be both a

> councillor and leader of the council.



He's behaved disgracefully and I hope Southwark get properly knocked back in court, but I can't see how the leader of the council could not be a councillor?

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

    • He looks like the human version of the 😡 emoji. I'm sure he's lovely in real life (whoever he is).
    • Absolutely, Insuflo I very much doubt that anyone other than football fans would have heard of Dyche, much less his views on false number nines, mobile centre halves  dropping into midfield or diamond formations. But all middle-aged, portly, bald, gruffly spoken football fans from north of the capital who eschew fancy Dan tactics for the traditional, English merits of 4-4-2 shall be deemed knuckle-dragging Neanderthals by the Wokerati and the Metropolitan Elite. They care not what his views are, only that he looks like the sort of person who may have them. It's political correctness gone mad. But they, unlike Dyche, won't have a pub named after them.
    • I'm afraid I have no idea who Sean Dyche is, but I'm sure I could research him (and his views on library refurbishment timetables, if any) on any of the Southwark libraries' internet access computers. Free for any library member!
    • So that suggests the consultations with 'community' are just a tick box exercise where information given cannot be relied on. Not a good look. I hope Renata Hamvas who is the local councillor, as well as licensing, finds a way to stop the wholesale, spreadingmonetisation of an important green space in summer. If they get this it'll end up like Brockwell Park before you know it.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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