PLEASE JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)
On Saturday, 17th August, residents of homes evacuated due to the presence of dangerous Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC) in their roofs convened at The Crossed Peels in Stirling to discuss the next steps in their campaign. The meeting followed the news that the Clackmannanshire Council's report on decisions related to affected RAAC estates, initially expected on 29th August, had been postponed.
Wilson Chowdhry, Chairman of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, briefed attendees on his recent conversation with Wilson Lees, the Homelessness and Supporting People Manager at Clackmannanshire Council. During their discussion, Mr. Lees explained that officers would continue to pursue pre-RAAC-declaration valuations in voluntary agreements for owners of private homes evacuated due to RAAC, which provided a morale boost for the residents. However, he did iterate that the final decision rests with the council. Additionally, Mr. Lees agreed to expedite a Special Meeting for the report as soon as it was ready, to avoid a three-month delay that would result from the council’s quarterly meeting schedule. This was seen as a positive development, especially since Aberdeen City Council had announced that it would be valuing homes under current market value in a report for their Full Council Meeting on 21st September.
Mr Lees, said:
"I can only reiterate that all decisions relating to potential purchase of the affected properties rest exclusively with the Council's elected members who will make their decision based upon the information presented to them and after consideration of the recommendation presented by officers.
I am not in a position to second guess what that outcome will be, nor make any statements that would bind or commit the Council.
Purchase from the owners at pre-RAAC discovery values is one of the options that Council may consider. However, elected members must take account of the needs of the community/rent payers and act in their best interests. They will be required to consider which option represents best value."
A follow-up meeting between Clackmannanshire Council officers, homeowners, and Mr. Chowdhry was scheduled for 22nd August. The primary focus of this meeting was to ensure that homeowners understood the report's context and were not unduly alarmed by references to compulsory orders. These orders, if pursued, would lead to lower valuations and additional costs for homeowners who declined voluntary agreements, as stipulated by the Building (Scotland) Act 2003.
Residents expressed concerns over the delayed report, to which Mr. Chowdhry explained that the council’s limited resources and the scarcity of contractors capable of RAAC-related work in Scotland placed them at a disadvantage. Larger councils with more significant RAAC issues were being prioritized by contractors due to their higher payment capacity. Mr. Chowdhry reiterated his request for Mr. Lees to expedite the special meeting once the report is finalized.
During the whatsApp conversation, Mr. Chowdhry was advised by Mr Lees that Clackmannanshire Council does not consider itself liable for compensation related to the losses homeowners have incurred. Many residents are facing the dual financial burden of paying mortgages and rent, along with removal and storage costs. This position was confirmed through a Freedom of Information request submitted by Mr. Chowdhry during a Teams meeting with three senior officers, which stated: "Clackmannanshire Council does not consider itself liable to pay compensation relating to the relevant accommodation. Should affected homeowners believe the Council is liable for financial loss they are entitled to seek legal advice on the matter." Read full response to FOI request at end of post.
However, Mr. Chowdhry was provided with contact details for the District Valuer's office to inquire whether they would consider including the value of a new Wren Kitchen in the property valuation. The kitchen was installed two years ago, and the owner will still be paying it off for the next two years.
Residents were also awaiting a final, and hopefully accompanied, re-entry into their properties to retrieve their possessions. Mr. Lees confirmed that a date would soon be provided and that the status of access for homeowners would be finalized shortly. While Mr. Chowdhry was informed that it was highly unlikely fitted cupboards could be recovered, he expressed hope that appliances might still be salvageable. Additionally, Mr. Chowdhry received a response to his open letter addressed to the Chief Executive and Leader of the Council, which largely reinforced the points discussed above. You can read that letter (here).
Mr. Chowdhry reminded residents of the ongoing Scottish Parliament petition, which has garnered 999 signatures, calling for a national budget to address RAAC-related issues across the 13 affected Councils and Housing Associations in Scotland. Lynsey McQuater informed the group that she and others had been distributing flyers and posters in shops and community centers to rally broader support. Additionally, some members were contacting local community councils to propose motions in support of the petition. A national budget would enable Scottish councils to cover additional costs and offer fairer valuations for affected homes.
Mr. Chowdhry proposed holding a protest outside Clackmannanshire's headquarters on the day the report is presented to the full council, and it was unanimously agreed to proceed once the date is announced. In collaboration with Lynsey McQuater, Mr. Chowdhry drafted and submitted a public petition via Clackmannanshire Council's online portal. Today, Gillian White from the Council's Committee Services Team confirmed receipt of the petition. She stated, "The Council has received your request to place an on-line petition on the Council's website for "A fair deal for Tillicoultry Homeowners faced with RAAC Crises". The Petition is currently under review by the Council's Monitoring Officer and we will let you know the outcome of the review and whether or not the petition can be published on the website to allow the required number of signatures to be gathered." Read more about Aberdeen City Council's report (here).
"The approach taken by Clackmannanshire Council, potentially offering pre-RAAC-declaration valuations, represents a crucial step in mitigating the financial hardship faced by homeowners affected by RAAC issues. This approach acknowledges the investments made by property owners before the problem was identified and aims to provide fair compensation based on these prior values.
In stark contrast, Aberdeen City Council's consideration of current market values is concerning. This method, which often results in valuations below the original purchase prices, risks creating negative equity for homeowners and their mortgage providers. This could leave many in precarious financial situations with no national support scheme to fall back on.
Given these disparities, it is imperative that we rally more support from the wider community. The plight of these homeowners is urgent, and broader public awareness and support can help drive the necessary changes and advocate for more equitable solutions."
— Wilson Chowdhry
Thank you for your information request dated Tuesday 4th June 2024.
I am happy to supply you with the information you requested.
Q1. Voluntary Purchase and Evaluation: Wilson Lee has informed Grant Kerr that the council intends to offer a voluntary purchase of properties and that a desktop evaluation will assess the value of homes from before the October evacuations. We request this information in writing to understand the terms and process involved.
A1 - As per our meeting of 7th June 2024, voluntary purchase is one option that may be progressed however, the decision on matters such as this are reserved to the elected officials of the Council at a full meeting of the Council. Officers will make recommendations in a paper to Council in due course. At this time no methodology has been established to determine what might constitute an appropriate offer.
Q2. Compensation for Expenses: Will the council compensate homeowners for any expenses incurred, including temporary accommodation rents, mortgage payments for empty properties, and utility costs where the council failed to act responsibly by switching off these utilities?
A2. Clackmannanshire Council does not consider itself liable to pay compensation relating to the relevant accommodation. Should affected homeowners believe the Council is liable for financial loss they are entitled to seek legal advice on the matter.
Q3. Recompense for Renovations: Will homeowners be offered any recompense for the significant investments made in home renovations? Many have poured their life savings into these properties, only to face displacement due to RAAC concerns.
A3. Clackmannanshire Council does not consider itself liable to pay compensation relating to the relevant accommodation. Should affected homeowners believe the Council is liable for financial loss they are entitled to seek legal advice on the matter.
Q4. Lack of Written Records: We are deeply concerned that the council has not documented the details of the two public meetings held, which is a blatant lack of transparency.
A4. The two meeting which have taken place were open only to the affected owners, they were not public meetings. Owing to the Council's limited resources it is unable to officially minute every meeting, though, of course, homeowners were free to take their own notes. The meetings were attended by senior officers of the Council and an elected official who provided information to homeowners on a range of issues and fielded a number of questions which were answered candidly The Council believes it has been open and transparent in its communication with homeowners.
Q5. Access to Properties: Homeowners were abruptly evacuated with minimal notice, and access to their properties for retrieving personal belongings, some of which are very sentimental, has been severely restricted. We demand clarity on when and how homeowners will be able to access their properties and retrieve their belongings, along with appropriate compensation for any losses incurred.
A5 - Steps are being taken to facilitate re-entry to the affected buildings to carry out a final recovery attempt of belongings. Homeowners are being kept abreast of developments. As above, Clackmannanshire Council does not consider itself liable to pay compensation relating to the evacuation of the relevant accommodation. The Council has no obligation to recover homeowner belongings yet it has done so on two previous occasions without recharge to the homeowners.
Q6. Lack of Pre-Advisory: Homeowners were left uninformed about the presence of RAAC in their properties before purchase, and the need for regular inspections was not communicated. This negligence is unacceptable and has put residents at risk.
A6. This is a statement rather than a question and no response will be offered.
Q7. Neglect of Property Maintenance: Why were these properties neglected while under the council's management as property factors, especially considering their construction with RAAC and other substandard materials? Despite reports of issues like water ingress causing significant damage, the council failed to respond adequately, allowing buildings to deteriorate into hazardous conditions. Contradictorily, a report by Harley Haddow asserts that RAAC panels have been in place for over 50 years without recorded failures, raising questions about the accuracy and reliability of assessments.
A7. The Council denies the allegation of neglect. Responsibility for the maintenance of the buildings was shared equally by all owners and not the sole responsibility of Clackmannanshire Council. Should the affected owners believe the Council is liable for financial loss they are entitled to seek legal advice on the matter.
Q8. Plans for New Development: Was there always a predetermined agenda to construct new homes on this land, thereby neglecting the maintenance of existing buildings? We have received information indicating the existence of plans for a larger, more ambitious development on the site. Can you confirm the veracity of these plans? We demand a clear record stating that there were no prior intentions to rebuild over the remnants of our homes. It must be explicitly stated that the aesthetics of our properties and potential financial gains did not influence the decision to demolish.
A8. The Strategic Housing Investment Plan (SHIP) represents the Council's approved affordable housing development plan and forms the basis of investment discussions with the Scottish Government. I attach links to SHIPs covering the timeframe from 2007 to 2027 https://www.clacks.gov.uk/site/documents/housing/strategichousinginvestmentplan/
The RAAC evacuated blocks are not identified within these documents as locations where the Council has considered development works.
Q9. Awareness of Short Lifespan: Was the council aware of the limited lifespan of RAAC before selling properties to unsuspecting homeowners under the Right-to-Buy scheme? If so, why were these properties still sold? Was this a deliberate attempt to shift liability onto unaware buyers, under the guise of promoting equitable housing? It appears that homeowners were misled into believing that their purchases would result in lifetime investments and the creation of legacies for their descendants. Do you acknowledge that the Right-to-Buy scheme has ultimately failed, leaving homeowners vulnerable to unforeseen risks and financial burdens?
A9. Clackmannanshire Council does not consider itself liable in relation to the Right to Buy Scheme relevant to this accommodation.
Q10. Excessive Costings: Residents were shocked by the excessively high cost estimate for roof replacement provided during a public meeting organized by the council on15th November 2013. We demand transparency on how these figures were calculated and whether alternative assessments were sought.
A10. The Council is seeking costs from its appointed roofing contractor. As has
previously been intimated to homeowners, the information will be shared with them when it becomes available.
Q11. Insensitivity and Lack of Communication: The council's actions have been very insensitive. We understand that these properties were evacuated on safety grounds, but until homeowners are compensated or their properties are repaired and returned to the, the buildings still belong to them. They should have been contacted before any shutters or boards were placed on to their properties and windows removed. It feels as though the council is acting without regard for the hurt and anguish, they are causing to homeowners.
Communication with the council has been difficult, especially for one local resident, who has experienced the following issues:
• Requests for information are often ignored.
• Follow-up requests are disputed as constituting a request for information.
• FOI requests go unanswered.
• Review FOI requests are also ignored.
• Reports to the Scottish Information Commissioner result in adjudications that the council must supply information.
• The council eventually supplies incomplete and heavily redacted information.
• Further reports to the Scottish Information Commissioner are required to adjudicate on the redactions.
A11. This is a statement rather than a question and no response will be offered.
Further questions asked during the time of meeting with Mr Chowdhry (on 7th June 2024) were agreed to be answered as part of this Freedom of Information Request:
Following a recent online meeting between Council Officers and Mr Chowdhry officers agreed to investigate whether or not it was their duty to inform residents of the Council de-registering as property factors and to include this information in the FOI response. I can confirm that we do not believe there to be any requirement for notification of de-registration to be provided in writing however we do accept that it may have been beneficial to have notified residents in writing of this change.
Mr. Chowdhry sought confirmation that evidence being redacted or not found was not intentionally being excluded to protect the council, but rather for legal reasons related to privacy of information. I can confirm that redactions were made only for reasons relating to privacy of information.
If you are not satisfied with this response, you may contact the Council's Legal and Governance Senior Manager seeking a review of your request within 40 working days of receiving the response (the address is: Clackmannanshire Council, Kilncraigs, Alloa, FK10 1EB, or reply to this email. If you are not satisfied with the outcome of the review, you have the right to appeal directly to the Scottish Information Commissioner, Kilnburn Castle, Doubledykes Road, St Andrews, Fife, KY16 9DS, or online WWW.itspublicknowledge.info/Appeal within 6 months.
Yours sincerely,
Pearl McMenemy
Monitoring Officer
Clackmannanshire Council
No comments:
Post a Comment