Public or Private – The Debate

We conducted a survey of 100 HorNet Members in January 2017. Here is a summary:

Only 10% of people felt they were fully informed prior to purchase. This means 90% did not know what they were getting into.

Problems encountered and reported as individual comments:

Monopoly – no choice. Only 7% responded that there was an arrangement to switch management company.

Premature charging on unfinished estates

Lack of proper preparation by developer leading to greater expense down the line

Very common problem of play parks being unsafe and not built to standard

Errors in charging (usually overcharging – one of duplicate charging when a home was sold)

High costs for work done – poor value for money.

Disproportionate costs for administration.

Minimal or no response to concerns or queries.

Bullying tactics to recover “debt” which was often with held payment due to dissatisfaction.

Passing the buck for problems on the estate between management companies, developers and sometimes the council – can’t get anything fixed because no one will take responsibility.

Antisocial behaviour and vandalism on the amenity land.

We also ran a FaceBook group poll in December 2016

The Choices:

1. Forced adoption 39 votes

2. Common hold 6 votes

3. Regulation and choice in the current model 0 votes

Where does that leave us? Are these votes are truly representative?

If the government implements measures from the white paper the All Party Parliamentary Group on Leasehold and Common Hold is likely to contain we would have regulation, right to manage and some redress within the current system.

However, the issues arising from private ownership of public open space and the unfairness of one small group paying for its maintenance are not addressed. We should not oppose a change which will give us more rights, but it will not fundamentally change the model.

Is there an argument for bringing open space into public ownership through community trusts? This looks to be the way parks are going to be managed in future.

What other workable solutions can you suggest?

Please comment with your views (public on the web site) – you may also email or join our forum to post in private. You can discuss with others in our FaceBook Group.


Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Telford Group Fight in Court

A local HorNet group in Telford are defending themselves in court. It isn’t about bad debt but the principle. Home owners have been hoodwinked into signing deeds which are then used as a blunt instrument to extract payment for maintaining land which isn’t theirs and which gives them no special benefit as it is open to the general public.

This is what they say:

We contend that misleading or false information was given to us by Taylor Wimpey about the nature of the maintenance contract the covenant allows them to enforce.  Say home owners; Tracey Thatcher, Martin Walker, Tatiana Popa, Daniel Popa, Joanne Briggs, Karmjeet Singh Rai, Karolina Gryz,  Ewelina  Gryz, Edwin Chittenen, Susan Jesse,  Jaques Chiankem Fozao  
           
Taylor Wimpy have though their Maintenance company Mainstay have now taken us to the small claims court in Telford.  The Judge adjourned in favour of the home owners and now Mainstay have appealed. In case is due to go back to court before Judge McQueen on 27th March.

 

We are behind you 100%!


Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

The Female of the Species……

Just before International Day for Women 2017, three indomitable HorNet “queens” visited the Lincoln’s Inn area of London for preliminary talks with a top London lawyer. The mission – to challenge the private estate business model under UK wide law.

The talks went well and we are optimistic about being able to take a challenge to the courts. It is, however, early days and as we all know such things take time. We will keep all our members informed of progress when we are able to say more….


Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail