Latest Activity

Christine Clifford replied to Jax's discussion I know we need Lecky but this is sad and noisy and dusty and dug up 3 time since new pavement laid a few months ago.
"At least they a dealing with it all this time instead of patching "
Thursday
Jax posted a discussion
Wednesday
Christine Clifford replied to Alex's discussion Major Works Costs: Crescent House (2022-2027)
"Sorry no idea."
Wednesday
Alex replied to Alex's discussion Major Works Costs: Crescent House (2022-2027)
"Good question. We need to find out. By any chance, do you know when is the next residents meeting?"
Tuesday

Forum

HEALTH & WELLBEING

131 discussions

ESTATE OFFICE ANNOUNCEMENTS

607 discussions

GENERAL COMMENTS & QUERIES

1353 discussions

MAJOR WORKS & PROJECTS

120 discussions

COLPAI

Site of former Richard Cloudesley School

168 discussions

BERNARD MORGAN HOUSE

16 discussions

COMMUNITY CENTRE

21 discussions

ITEMS FOR SALE OR RECYCLE

221 discussions

@GoldenLaneEC1

Text Box

Facebook

There are four Golden Lane Estate related facebook accounts and you can follow them here: goldenlaneEC1 

Golden Lane Estate / RCS site 

Save Bernard Morgan House

City of London

Golden Lane Estate tenants due a water charge refund

Public call for the City of London Corporation to respect the law

We, the City councillors named below, call on the City Corporation to pay its social housing tenants a full refund of a profit that it (and a number of other local authorities) made on “water reselling” from 2001 to 2019 following a ruling by the courts that this profit was unlawful.

The City Corporation should have taken the lead in paying a full refund, because it:

- prides itself on upholding the rule of law,

- is the wealthiest local authority in the country, and

- has the smallest number of social housing tenants. 

But it hasn’t done that. While many other local authorities - including Kensington and Chelsea (https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/housing/rent-employment-and-financial-suppo...), Southwark (https://www.southwark.gov.uk/housing/water-refunds) and Lambeth(https://beta.lambeth.gov.uk/housing/council-tenants/overpayment-tha...) - have been paying full refunds plus interest for some time, the City has yet to make any announcement about what it will (or, it seems, won’t) do. 

The issue of water charge refunds appeared in the agendas of the meetings of three City committees over the last nine months: the Housing Sub-Committee in May, the Community and Children’s Services Committee in September and the governing Policy and Resources Committee in November. Although each committee discussed the issue, no announcement has yet been made. The issue is expected to appear again in the agenda of the meeting of the Policy and Resources Committee on 20 January. All the discussions have been held behind closed doors - wrongly, in our view. Why should complying with the law be discussed in secret? Why should it be discussed at all? 

The public can deduce that most members of the three committees that have discussed the issue have been reluctant to agree to a full refund, otherwise an announcement would have been made by now. The Chair of the Policy and Resources Committee effectively confirmed this deduction when she mentioned, in answer to a public question after the meetings of the first two committees, that the issue had “reputational” implications. That must mean most members of the Community and Children’s Services Committee had wanted to avoid making a full refund, since otherwise there would be no “reputational” implications.

An officer recently stated in answer to a public question that provision had been made for water charge refunds in the relevant City accounts following a committee decision going back only six years. That would cover the period from 2013 to 2019, but not from 2001 to 2013. 

The Chair of the Housing Sub-Committee wrote in her newsletter to local Labour Party members that she thought the issue was “complicated”. We don’t think there’s anything “complicated” about the Corporation complying with the law.

 

We call on the City Corporation to stop procrastinating behind closed doors. At a time when many of its social housing tenants are suffering from a reduction in universal credit and increasing energy bills, the Corporation must cease holding on to money that rightfully belongs to its tenants. The Corporation should immediately announce that it will pay a full refund, plus interest, then make the repayments promptly.  

 

Sue Pearson   (Cripplegate)

Marianne Fredericks   (Tower)

Jason Pritchard   (Portsoken)

Munsur Ali   (Portsoken)

Graeme Harrower   (Bassishaw)

Views: 204

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of goldenlaneestate.org to add comments!

Join goldenlaneestate.org

Comment by Christine Clifford on January 19, 2022 at 15:56

Thank you all for this. It beggars belief that the CoL still has not repaid the full amount with interest as some other councils have .

© 2022   Created by Paul Lincoln.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service