Balnagask RAAC Crises: From Protest, to Deputation, to Funding Pursuit!

Please sign our petition for the UK or Scottish Government to introduce a national fund for RAAC Homeowners and initiate a public Inquiry into the response of Councils across the UK (click here)

On Thursday, March 28th, over 50 protestors gathered for a rally outside Aberdeen City Headquarters at Marischal House. 

Organized by the Torry Community RAAC campaign, the event aimed to challenge a decision by Aberdeen City Council to offer no support or assistance to local homeowners grappling with 'bubbly' concrete in their roofs, from properties purchased from the council.

Chants of "Stop the RAAC...don't let it crack" and "What do we want? Justice! When do we want it? Now!" resonated through the air as protestors voiced their frustrations.

Hannah Chowdhry, recently elected as Chair of the Torry Community RAAC Campaign, delivered a passionate deputation that she would later present in the Town House chambers.

As a symbol of solidarity, attendees also sang the chorus of "We shall not be moved," a song popularized by The Seekers in 1966. The words of one of the verses were modified to reflect the sentiment: "We're Torry folk together, We shall not be moved."

Despite the looming threat of rain, individuals took time off work, skipped university lectures, and journeyed from as far as Essex to denounce Aberdeen City Council's announcement on February 29th, 2024. The council declared that no financial assistance would be extended to homeowners grappling with RAAC-infested properties. These homes were originally sold to unsuspecting buyers under the right-to-buy scheme, a UK government initiative aimed at providing homeownership opportunities to disadvantaged individuals. However, in Torry, one of the most underprivileged communities in the UK, locals suspect that this scheme was used to unload substandard properties and saddle the community with debt.

During the protest, an 84-year-old man, deeply attached to his home for its cherished memories, sat steadfast on a street bench despite the light rain, ensuring his voice was heard.

The one-hour event culminated in a procession to the end of the street, where Hannah Chowdhry and her father addressed ACC's Communities, Housing, and Public Protection Committee. They passionately advocated for a fair deal for homeowners affected by RAAC issues. Earlier, Hannah Chowdhry, elected as Chair of the Torry Community RAAC Campaign, outlined seven action points in her deputation:

Name	Hannah Chowdhry
Email Address	h.chowdhry@hotmail.com
The Council or Committee you want to speak to	Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee
The agenda item you want to speak about	The Impact of RAAC Roofs on Unsuspecting Homeowners of ex-Council Homes
The action you want the Council to take	1.Acknowledge ACC's Oversight Regarding the Replacement of Roofs Post-BRE Ruling 2.Concede the Inherent Flaw in Selling ACC Properties with Undisclosed Latent Defect 3.Request Clarification on ACC's Post-BRE Report Roof Inspection Practices or acknowledge failure to comply. 4.Acknowledge ACC's Failure to Disclose RAAC Roof Condition and Expiry of Lifespan to Homebuyers 5.Urgent Action Needed: Addressing Homeowner Limbo position Amid Delayed Decision-Making That Could Lead to Wasted Investment in Repairs and Replacement. 6.Appeal to ACC for Support: Replacement of RAAC Roofs Rather Than Demolition to Safeguard Homeowners' Investments in Now Zero Equity Homes and Prevent Homelessness and Loss of Housing Stock. 7.Proposal for Risk Mitigation After ABI Disclosure that Insurance Cancellations Will be Minimal: Underwriting Homeowner Insurances for Balnagask Properties

The protest transformed into a solemn procession, with four individuals walking abreast in each row as they made their way towards the Town House. Their voices echoed through the streets, chanting powerful slogans such as "What do we want? Justice! When do we want it? Now!" The resonance of their unified voices reverberated throughout the pedestrianized area surrounding Marischal House, drawing the attention of numerous onlookers.

Approaching the Town House, the protestors amplified their voices even further, boldly demanding justice. The familiar refrain of 'We Shall not be Moved' reverberated within the building, serving as a clarion call to the councilors awaiting their arrival. After five minutes of making their presence keenly felt, the majority of protestors proceeded to the public gallery, while Wilson and Hannah Chowdhry prepared to address the Council chamber.

Hannah Chowdhry prepares herself to present deputation.

During her deputation, Hannah Chowdhry presented her case focusing on the emotional and financial toll on residents, especially vulnerable groups like the elderly and those in palliative care. She urged Aberdeen City to fulfil its moral obligation to assist homeowners affected by what they perceived as ACC's mistakes with RAAC.

Hannah Chowdhry, delivers her deputation: Wilson twice tried to gather the attention of Lynsey McBain as he noticed that his participation had been overlooked by the Meeting Chair.

Wilson Chowdhry, father of Hannah Chowdhry, emphasized the impact of the situation on the relatives of RAAC homeowners. He also elaborated on the complexities of ownership, including those who shared flats in shared buildings and the challenges posed by shared equity properties. Additionally, he highlighted the potential difficulties the council would face if it proceeded with the demolition of existing council homes, particularly because many owner-occupied buildings were terraced and adjoined council homes. Chowdhry reminded the council that it wasn't only homeowners but also most council tenants who had invested in renovating and decorating their homes, hoping to reside in them for the long term.

Wilson Chowdhry was affected by feedback from the microphone, which compounded the oversight of him being inadvertently overlooked by the Committee. Later, they acknowledged their mistake in forgetting his input into the meeting. Despite the time constraint of only having two minutes to deliver a four-minute address, he persevered.

During the Q&A session that ensued, various concerns and challenges faced by homeowners were brought to light, alongside the council's response to the RAAC crisis. Mr. Chowdhry fielded questions regarding the impact on homeowners and their prevailing sentiments. He articulated the anger and suspicions prevalent among local residents. When probed about communications with Aberdeen City Council, both Hannah and Wilson shed light on their experiences. Mr. Chowdhry lamented the minimal communication, often devoid of responses to his inquiries. He highlighted that during the initial phase, Council Officers assured of efforts to find a holistic solution involving homeowners, yet no guarantee of assistance was extended. Furthermore, he expressed dismay that despite a complete failure to secure funds, the council simply absolved themselves of any responsibility, without even extending an apology for their shortcomings. 

In the email mentioned above, ACC acknowledged and upheld a complaint lodged by Mr. Chowdhry regarding the absence of any response from November 2023 to February 2024, despite numerous emails and telephone calls, including some directed specifically to Stephen Booth, Chief Housing Officer.

Interestingly, following the deputation, a council officer investigated Mr. Chowdhry's claim of being inadequately communicated with and acknowledged yet another failure in communication.

Mr Chowdhry several times during the questioning expressed a desire for ACC to aknowledge that properties had been sold to unsuspecting buyers with a latent defect, he also clarified that their was a perceived lack of duty of care and negligence, for failure to undertake annual inspections after the BRE report in 1995 that suggests RAAC had a lifespan of 30 years. he 

The Q&A section was doubled from minutes to 20 minutes and only Cllr McLellan seemed to be unsupportive.

During the discussion, Cllr McClennan raised the issue of the council's obligation to disclose RAAC information to buyers of homes sold on the open market. Mr. Chowdhry tried to clarify that if Aberdeen City Council had fulfilled their duty by informing the initial ex-council tenants about RAAC, they would have been responsible for passing this information on to subsequent open-market homeowners like Hannah. However, since the council failed to inform anyone, the fault and consequent responsibility for addressing the current RAAC crisis rested with them. It appeared uncertain whether Cllr McClennan fully grasped this point, but it was even more astonishing that he attempted such a weak defence to shield the council's indifference to homeowner concerns. 

Mr. Chowdhry elaborated that the insurance policies paid for by homeowners were ineffective, as they now excluded any claims related to RAAC. He expressed concern that risk litigators would invariably connect RAAC to any claims to avoid payout. To underscore his argument, Mr. Chowdhry provided scenarios illustrating the potential ramifications.

After an extended 20-minute Q&A session, Hannah and Wilson Chowdhry left the chamber and joined the people of Torry in the public gallery. Unable to speak further, they watched as councillors and chief officers discussed progress with the RAAC crisis.

Ms. McKenzie, a housing officer, provided a verbal update during which she informed the CHPPC that a report would be presented to them as per the agreed process. She noted an increase in the stock available for relet, with 123 properties now ready to be offered. Emphasizing their commitment to mitigating the situation, she mentioned plans to undertake inspections as part of their strategy, [I assume this is likely aimed at identifying RAAC-affected properties, particularly those where tenants refuse to vacate due to safety concerns]. Currently, there are 214 applications on the RAAC priority scheme, with 33 offers generated directly and an additional 8 by social landlords. She highlighted some positive outcomes from these offers but notably omitted any mention of homeowners in her address.

Ms. McKenzie outlined their flexible approach regarding appointments and expressed hope that engagement with council tenants would be completed by the end of the first week in April. She stressed the importance of mental health and well-being, noting efforts to signpost tenants to mental health support services and assistance offered by the British Red Cross. Additionally, she mentioned outreach to community groups and cross-service support involving social services, education, and other departments to provide comprehensive assistance. Acknowledging the need to reintegrate affected individuals into new communities, she explained the limited housing stock available, managing expectations regarding relocation. To cope with the workload, new staff had been brought in.

Mr. Booth elaborated on technical solutions being explored, emphasizing the consideration of all options, including logistics, disruptions, costs, and timescales. He acknowledged that housing options would be covered by tenants' rents but did not address support for increased rents in some areas. Notably, only £1500 is offered for relocation costs, with nothing provided for the loss of investments in properties. Mr. Booth mentioned communication with other local authorities experiencing RAAC problems but indicated that ACC was further ahead in their process, potentially unaware of issues faced by residents elsewhere. He highlighted collaboration with national working groups, including NHS Estates and University Estates, and engagement with the Housing Regulator and Scottish Government for potential solutions.

Regarding communication efforts, Mr. Booth mentioned letter drops and leaflets distributed, with responses to further matters raised in the deputation promised for the week. He stated that survey reports were shared online for transparency and would be shared with residents and owners before any final decisions. Mr. Booth clarified that there was no current plan for a Compulsory Purchase Order and explained limitations on the council's ability to buy back properties due to revenue requirements [I believe this is referring to the fact that the council is not willing to buy back zero equity properties]. He addressed concerns about engineering inspection costs, stating homeowners' responsibility for their properties. Mr. Booth also mentioned issues around valuations and committed to seeking guidance from RICS to determine the best solution 'but would need to identify best solution and impact before knowing the impact on property values'.  This comment carries ominous implications, suggesting that the value of a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) offer will be determined based on property values at the time the CPO is announced. This aligns with concerns I had from the outset, especially after reviewing the Government guidance on the CPO process.

Finally, he spoke about communication with ABI and UK Finance regarding support for private owners, indicating forthcoming FAQs to address their concerns.

Councillor Mrs. Stuart, evidently sensing the gravity of the situation, empathized with the community, mentioning her own experience with homelessness in the past. However, her remark linking the protestors fighting for their homes to potential homelessness raised eyebrows and concerns among some attendees. She directed a question to Mr. Stephen Booth, the Chief Officer for Housing, asking if reasons beyond safety had factored into the council's decision to evacuate residents. It seemed she was following up on Mr. Chowdhry's concern that the evacuation and subsequent demolition might be influenced by significant investments in the surrounding areas. She also questioned the necessity of the evacuation itself a query that came up several times through other councillors. 

Mr. Booth's explanation centered on a report from Fairhurst Surveyors, highlighting a high risk of roof collapse, albeit not classified as critical. He emphasized that evacuation and remedial workwas necessary to comply with measures set by IstructE regarding high-risk situations.  You can read the IstructE guidance (here).

However, Mr. Booth did not confirm that all buildings were deemed to be in this high-risk state. The fact that homeowners have been permitted to remain in their properties suggests a belief that not all properties are in imminent danger. This position aligns with the Scottish Government's stance, as declared in a Topical Questions Committee session on 8th March. Mr. Booth also mentioned the BRE report of 1995, which purportedly indicated no substantial risk, yet he omitted any reference to their recommendations for roof maintenance or their advocacy for annual inspections.

Upon reviewing the IStructE guidance, it's evident that the 30-year lifespan assertion is misleading. The same guidance however, underscores the necessity of ongoing maintenance. It explicitly states:

 'If manufactured correctly, installed correctly, and appropriately maintained (for example no overloading and managing water ingress) throughout its in-use life then RAAC should perform comparably with similar materials.'  Read FAQ 3 (click here)

At the same meeting Mr Wilson Chief Capital Officer had stated:

“We became aware of Raac in public buildings in around August 2022,”

“We then started to investigate our current housing stock, and with regard to the presence of Raac in council houses [the council became aware ] around September 2023.

“It is correct to say it was the view of the council that these houses were built to building regulations and housing standards, up until then.”

I believe Mr. Wilson's assertion raises a valid point of negligence. It's unlikely that the council was unaware of the presence of RAAC in the properties when they were built. However, even if there was a period where oversight was lost and then regained, this doesn't release them from their responsibility to maintain the roofs or to inform buyers about the necessity of regular maintenance and inspections. In my view, there remains a clear duty of care that the council must uphold, regardless of any lapses in oversight.

Aligning with various local groups, Mr. Chowdhry and Hannah Chowdhry intend to compose a letter to ACC requesting further clarification on the necessity of the evacuation and insisting on obtaining a second opinion from qualified surveyors. They advocate for an open tender process that allows public participation in selecting the contractor.

Cllr Stuart mentioned a 'Missing Share' process that the council can implement in situations like this, where the council funds repairs and seeks reimbursement of these costs at the time of any property sale. Mr. Booth confirmed that this could be a possibility and would be a factor to consider once a final decision was made on the way forward.

Cllr Davidson inquired whether consideration had been given to temporarily relocating people and then returning them to their properties once a way forward had been determined. Miss MacKenzie responded affirmatively, stating that this could indeed be a consideration once a decision had been reached on the best course of action.

Earlier, Mr. Booth had asserted that they followed technical advice from Fairhurst, who are specialist surveyors in the field. However, he did acknowledge that properties vary in condition, indicating that not all are in the same state of disrepair.

Additionally, Mr. Booth mentioned that the Town House building also had RAAC roofing but was on a managed program. This raises the question of whether RAAC roofs could endure for an extended period if managed correctly. The management of RAAC roofing is evident in NHS estates and many other public buildings, suggesting that with proper maintenance, these roofs could potentially last longer.

At the conclusion of the Q&A session between the councillors and council officers, there was a brief period of reflection lasting for 5 minutes. Some councillors appeared visibly affected by the challenges faced by the Balnagask community, and many gathered in a huddle to privately discuss their thoughts away from the approximately 50 local residents in the public gallery. The allotted 5 minutes stretched considerably longer, with the deliberations extending for over 20 minutes before the councillors emerged with the following recommendations:

Essentially, the councillors reached an agreement that any tenants relocated from the Balnagask Estate would have the first option to return to their former homes. Additionally, they decided that any homeowners displaced from the estate would be given priority for relocation to any newly built homes within the estate. Furthermore, they have tasked the Chief Officers responsible for Corporate Landlord, Capital, and Housing to investigate funding opportunities to support owner-occupiers and to provide a report at the next committee meeting. While this offers a small glimmer of hope for all of us, it represents no substantial gain. Nonetheless, our advocacy for a fair resolution will persist.

Below is a quote I sent out to media groups post-decision.

"Our efforts have yielded some positive outcomes.

"There is now a significant opportunity for all Council Tenants affected by relocation, as they will be given priority to return to their original homes once they are repaired, should the Council decide against demolition.

"Additionally, they will also have the first choice to move into any new properties in the area should demolition be the chosen path. This ensures that those who were deeply connected to the local community can retain their links, undoubtedly contributing to the social well-being of many."

"For homeowners, there is a glimmer of hope as the council has tasked the Chief Officers – Corporate Landlord, Capital, and Housing – with exploring funding options to assist Owner Occupiers with their costs.

"A report will be presented at the next committee meeting, indicating a proactive effort to secure funding.

"While this isn't a guarantee, it represents a step forward from a complete absolution of responsibility. We can't afford to get too excited at this stage, and we will redouble our efforts behind our campaign.

"During the meeting, Chief Capital Officer Mr. John Wilson stated, "My understanding of the report by BRE in 1995 is that there was an awareness of RAAC, but no suggestion that RAAC posed a problem. Whereas, after recent collapses in England, we have responded."

"He explained that this led to the discovery of RAAC in public buildings in October 2022 and in Balnagask homes in September 2023.

"He later reiterated that he was not personally aware of any other involvement. In my opinion, ACC should have known about RAAC when they built the properties circa 1965. I do not believe that the fact they lost oversight of this RAAC material in homes absolves them of responsibility.

"The failure for them to inspect homes and public buildings after the BRE report seems negligent. To me, it would seem they had a duty of care to check these buildings before selling them to unsuspecting buyers.

"Moreover, their lack of identification of RAAC in 1995 meant that they failed to meet expected annual inspections. I think the council may want to seek legal clarity on their position based on the information provided by Mr. Wilson; local homeowners certainly will be looking into this."

Please sign our petition for the UK or Scottish Government to introduce a national fund for RAAC Homeowners and initiate a public Inquiry into the response of Councils across the UK (click here)