Dundee RAAC Campaigner Demands National Fund as Housing Crisis Escalates

IMAGE: Kerry Mackintosh, Yvette Hoskins, Wilson Chowdhry, and Wayne Hoskins at the inaugural meeting of the Dundee RAAC Campaign Group.

 JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)

PLEASE SIGN OUR PETITIONS  (CLICK HERE), OFFICIAL SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (CLICK HERE) AND OFFICIAL UK GOVERNMENT PETITION (HERE).

WATCH FIRST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FEATURE ON RAAC HOUSING CRISES (HERE)

Watch the historic moment as the Scottish Parliament Petitions Committee officially backs the UK RAAC Campaign Group’s petition—a groundbreaking step in our fight for justice and accountability! (here)

Please complete our impact survey (here) 

Yvette Hoskins, Vice Chair of the Dundee RAAC Campaign Group, was invited to give evidence to the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee on 18 March 2025 at 9:30 am, as part of its scrutiny of Building Safety in Scotland. She claims to have spoken to over 3,000 residents in RAAC-affected homes across Dundee and Angus.

Addressing the committee, she revealed that concerns about RAAC in properties in Dundee date as far back as the 1970s.

Yvette Hoskins stated:
“In our local area, I have met with over 3,000 residents in RAAC-affected homes—that’s homeowners and tenants. We have information that suggests RAAC was known about with a particular development in our area in 1977, 1978, and 1979. It was used as a pilot for testing how to deal with RAAC roofing. This has been going on for quite a long time. It needs to be fixed – the numbers are extremely high and increasing all the time.”

Recent reports indicate that 887 households in Dundee and 26 in Angus are currently affected.

'We Are Very Much on Our Own'

The campaigner called for the creation of a national fund, arguing that homeowners have been abandoned without support.

“We are not receiving any support, we’re not receiving any communication from local authorities, and very little from government bodies as well,” Yvette told the committee. “We are very much on our own. The impression being given is that anybody who bought under the right-to-buy scheme is responsible for their own homes. However, they were sold their properties—like any other homeowner—without knowing there was RAAC in them.”

She stressed that a national fund was essential: “If you don’t remove the RAAC, it causes issues for homeowners regarding lenders, mortgages, and insurance cover.”

Concerns Over RAAC Inspections

Yvette Hoskins also raised serious concerns over the way RAAC inspections are being conducted by local authorities, stating that many residents have reported inadequate assessments. She criticized the lack of transparency and information-sharing from Dundee City Council, contrasting it with Angus Council, which has taken a more cooperative approach with affected residents.  

You can read Yvette's full submission on the Scottish Government website (here)

Statement from Wilson Chowdhry, Chairman of the UK RAAC Campaign Group

Wilson Chowdhry, who helped Yvette and her husband, Wayne Hoskins, start the Dundee RAAC Campaign Group, echoed the concerns, stating:

“The rapid escalation of the RAAC crisis in Scotland highlights the need for urgent intervention. Residents should not be left abandoned by the very institutions that should be protecting them. Local authorities and the Scottish Government must take immediate action to ensure safe and thorough inspections and to establish a national fund to support those impacted. Homeowners should not bear the burden of a crisis they did not create.”

The Dundee RAAC Campaign Group, alongside the UK RAAC Campaign Group, continues to call for decisive government action to address this growing housing crisis.

The UK RAAC Campaign Group, a dedicated advocacy organization focused on addressing the widespread issue of Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC), has submitted a crucial report to the Local Government, Housing, and Planning Committee in response to their review of Building Standards. Despite learning about the review late, Mr. Wilson Chowdhry, Chairman of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, ensured the report was presented for consideration, even though oral witnesses had already been selected. The committee acknowledged the importance of the report and included it in their evidence review. You can read a copy on the Scottish Government website (here).

RAAC Homeowners in Bathgate Forced to Sell at Huge Losses Amid Government Inaction

Wilson Chowdhry led a RAAC protest and deputation at West Lothian Council in May 2024—still no action!

 JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)

PLEASE SIGN OUR PETITIONS  (CLICK HERE), OFFICIAL SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (CLICK HERE) AND OFFICIAL UK GOVERNMENT PETITION (HERE).

WATCH FIRST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FEATURE ON RAAC HOUSING CRISES (HERE)

Watch the historic moment as the Scottish Parliament Petitions Committee officially backs the UK RAAC Campaign Group’s petition—a groundbreaking step in our fight for justice and accountability! (here)

Please complete our impact survey (here) 

The plight of homeowners affected by Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC) continues to deepen, as residents in Bathgate, West Lothian, are left with no option but to sell their homes to cash buyers at significantly reduced prices. With no support from West Lothian Council, the Scottish Government, or the UK Government, those affected by this crisis are being forced to absorb financial losses that could have been avoided with timely intervention.

Nicole, a private homeowner in Bathgate, has shared her personal struggle with the situation. Her property, a flat-roofed end-terrace house, appears to have RAAC panelling in the roof. Recognizing the urgent need to sell, she has begun the process of trying to place her home on the market, only to face multiple hurdles.

One of the main barriers to selling is the requirement for a specialist structural engineer to inspect the roof and confirm the presence of RAAC. This inspection is necessary to allow a Chartered Surveyor to provide an accurate valuation of the property. However, after contacting seven different companies—including the Institute of Structural Engineers—Nicole found that no engineers were available to carry out the assessment. Even West Lothian Council’s building standards department lacks professionals qualified to undertake the work.

In one case, an engineer offered to provide a report at a reduced cost (typically £600 + VAT) if a joiner could drill into the roof. However, even obtaining building plans for the property from West Lothian Council proved to be another dead end, as records for Building Standards only go back to 1987 and Planning records to 1992. Nicole has now been advised to search the archives for the information she needs—an arduous and time-consuming process.

In a bid to move forward, Nicole has secured an inspection with a local roofing company that has agreed to confirm the presence of RAAC and provide a quote for roof replacement. However, the survey is scheduled for 4th April 2025, meaning she must endure a long wait with no certainty of a solution.

A Housing Crisis Ignored by Authorities

Nicole’s story is far from unique. Many homeowners in Bathgate and other RAAC-affected communities are finding themselves in similar situations. With no financial assistance or practical guidance from the government, they are being left to fend for themselves. Some have resorted to selling their homes via auction or seeking cash buyers willing to take on properties with structural concerns, often at a fraction of their previous market value.

This crisis is the direct result of cost-cutting measures by local authorities that originally built these homes using RAAC—an inherently weak material that deteriorates over time. Many of these properties were later sold through the now-defunct Right-to-Buy scheme, which was meant to provide homeownership opportunities. However, homeowners now find themselves abandoned by the very institutions that encouraged them to invest in these properties.

Despite the clear government failure in allowing RAAC homes to be sold without warning homeowners of the risks, the Scottish Government, UK Government, and local authorities continue to dispute liability and refuse to provide assistance. Meanwhile, homeowners like Nicole are left with no choice but to sell their properties at devastating losses, stripping them of the financial security they had worked hard to build.

The urgent need for intervention cannot be overstated. Homeowners require immediate financial aid, professional assessment services, and clear government-backed solutions to address the RAAC crisis. Without action, more families will be forced into economic hardship, selling their homes under distressing circumstances, while those responsible continue to evade accountability.

"The ongoing crisis faced by homeowners in Bathgate and across the UK, in my opinion, is a direct result of government and local authority negligence. For decades, successive governments allowed homes to be built with RAAC, an inherently weak and time-limited material, without proper warnings or contingency plans for affected homeowners. Many of these properties were later sold through the Right-to-Buy scheme, meaning buyers unknowingly invested in homes that were always destined to fail.

Now, as these structural failures become undeniable, both the UK and Scottish Governments are abdicating their responsibility. They have a duty to act—not only because these homes were built under their watch, but because they actively encouraged private ownership without disclosing the risks. It is unacceptable that homeowners like Nicole are left with no option but to sell at devastating losses, simply because essential surveys, funding, and solutions remain unavailable.

The government must step up with immediate financial aid, professional assessments, and a clear pathway to remediation. Without urgent intervention, more families will be forced into financial ruin, while those in power continue to turn a blind eye to a crisis they helped create."

— Wilson Chowdhry, Chairman of the UK RAAC Campaign Group

UK RAAC Campaign Group Submits Report to Local Government, Housing, and Planning Committee on RAAC and Building Safety Concerns

IMAGE: Opening page of Mr. Chowdhry's submission to the Local Government, Housing, and Planning Committee, available on the Scottish Government's website.

 JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)

PLEASE SIGN OUR PETITIONS  (CLICK HERE), OFFICIAL SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (CLICK HERE) AND OFFICIAL UK GOVERNMENT PETITION (HERE).

WATCH FIRST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FEATURE ON RAAC HOUSING CRISES (HERE)

Watch the historic moment as the Scottish Parliament Petitions Committee officially backs the UK RAAC Campaign Group’s petition—a groundbreaking step in our fight for justice and accountability! (here)

Please complete our impact survey (here) 

11th March 2025 – The UK RAAC Campaign Group, a dedicated advocacy organization focused on addressing the widespread issue of Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC), has submitted a crucial report to the Local Government, Housing, and Planning Committee in response to their review of Building Standards. Despite learning about the review late, Mr. Wilson Chowdhry, Chairman of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, ensured the report was presented for consideration, even though oral witnesses had already been selected. The committee acknowledged the importance of the report and included it in their evidence review.  You can read a copy on the Scottish Government website (here).

The report sheds light on the significant safety risks associated with RAAC, a material widely used in the 20th century for roofing, flooring, and walls in public and private buildings. Structural weaknesses, particularly its vulnerability to water damage, have resulted in increasing instability, raising urgent concerns about occupant safety. Despite these risks, the material's historical approval processes remain unclear, with questions about whether adequate testing for water and blast resistance was ever conducted.

A particular area of concern highlighted in the report is the potential impact of historical quarry blasting activities near RAAC-affected homes in Tillicoultry, Scotland. The report calls for investigations into whether vibrations from nearby quarry operations and past mining activities may have contributed to the deterioration of RAAC structures.

The report also exposes the inadequate response from local councils and the Scottish Government, which have framed RAAC issues as routine maintenance problems rather than recognizing the material’s fundamental flaws. Notably, councils in Scotland approved the use of RAAC in social housing without full disclosure of its risks, leaving homeowners unaware of the significant maintenance costs and safety concerns. Secondary roofing measures implemented by councils to mitigate RAAC’s weaknesses have proven to be insufficient in addressing the core structural problems.

Further concerns raised include:

• The Scottish Government’s failure to act on early warnings about RAAC, despite evidence from previous demolitions of RAAC-affected homes in England and Scotland.

• The correlation between RAAC, damp, and mould, which exacerbates health risks and structural decay in affected homes.

• The lack of transparency and financial support for private homeowners who unknowingly purchased RAAC-affected properties.

• The failure of the Scottish Housing Regulator (SHR) to provide adequate data on affected private homeowners, forcing the UK RAAC Campaign Group to conduct independent research.

The UK RAAC Campaign Group calls on the Scottish Government to take immediate and coordinated action, including:

• Engaging with the British Research Establishment (BRE), the Scottish Committee on Structural Safety (SCOSS), and the Institution of Structural Engineers (IStructE) to reassess existing guidance and include analyses of past RAAC home demolitions.

• Establishing an independent regulatory body to protect ex-council homeowners, as reliance on local councils presents a clear conflict of interest.

• Providing financial assistance and clear guidance for affected homeowners to ensure safe remediation of RAAC-related issues.

Wilson Chowdhry stated: “This is not just a maintenance issue—it is a national crisis. Homeowners have been left to deal with the catastrophic consequences of government inaction and a lack of transparency. The Scottish Government must take urgent steps to support affected residents and prevent further tragedies.”

The UK RAAC Campaign Group remains committed to advocating for affected homeowners and ensuring that the government takes accountability for this crisis. The group will continue to engage with policymakers, structural experts, and affected residents to push for meaningful solutions.

Wilson Chowdhry Urges Aberdeen City Council to Pause Demolitions Pending Full Cost Assessment and Viable Options Assessment

VIDEO: Mr. Chowdhry addressed the Communities, Housing & Public Protection Committee via Teams on March 11, 2025.

 JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)

PLEASE SIGN OUR PETITIONS  (CLICK HERE), OFFICIAL SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (CLICK HERE) AND OFFICIAL UK GOVERNMENT PETITION (HERE).

WATCH FIRST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FEATURE ON RAAC HOUSING CRISES (HERE)

Watch the historic moment as the Scottish Parliament Petitions Committee officially backs the UK RAAC Campaign Group’s petition—a groundbreaking step in our fight for justice and accountability! (here)

Please complete our impact survey (here) 

Deputation Speech to Aberdeen City Council's Communities, Housing and Public Protection Committee 11.03.25

Chair, Councillors, and Officers,

Thank you for allowing me to present this deputation today.

Due Diligence and Financial Model

In reference to point 1.2 of your report, I must ask whether the Council believes that due diligence has been adequately undertaken in regard to the RAAC Homeowner situation and whether the correct financial model has been followed. At the last meeting, Stephen Booth admitted that only desktop reviews had been conducted in regard to costs for repairs. Across Scotland, we have seen that thorough cost assessments have led to significant reductions in estimated replacement costs. For example, Clackmannanshire Council has now cut the estimated cost of roof replacements from £39,000 to £20,000 per homeowner, resulting in a new sundry debt proposal following direct engagement with homeowners and myself.

Furthermore, Mr. Booth previously stated in two separate meetings with myself and members of the Torry RAAC Campaign Group that a roof replacement for a four-bedroom home would cost £71,000. However, he later denied this in a full Council meeting despite confirmation from Mr. Meiklejohn in a BBC article. Even his revised estimate of £50,000 appears to be excessive when compared to other local authorities that have obtained actual costed assessments from validated contractors.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

On point 1.3, I acknowledge that the Torry RAAC Campaign Group is also speaking today and calling for an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to be included in the planning process. I raised this very issue in my last deputation, albeit in a more measured way, simply seeking clarity on why the Council believed an EIA was not required for this project.

Additionally, I warned that the Torry RAAC Campaign Group’s proposal could fail if an EIA was deemed necessary. I even suggested amendments to their application during a meeting with Mr. Booth, Chief Officer - Corporate Landlord and Ms. Eleanor Sheppard, Chief Executive Families, Communities and Housing, as well as in my previous deputation, yet these concerns were ignored. Following a subsequent meeting with Ms. Sheppard—where Mr. Booth was absent due to an ongoing complaint regarding his previous responses—I was invited to submit an amendment for review, which I intend to do later today.

Exploring Viable Alternatives

Section 2.1 states that plans can still be adapted and that engagement with homeowners will continue. I sincerely hope that my proposals will be considered in this spirit, particularly in light of developments in other local authorities. Dundee City Council is set to announce a 40% grant towards homeowners’ RAAC replacement costs, while Clackmannanshire Council is offering a sundry loan. A hybrid approach combining both of these models is entirely within the powers of Aberdeen City Council and would provide a fairer solution for affected homeowners and no doubt cost you less overall, than demolition and redevelopment.  You would also reduce loss of crucial housing stock.

Demolition Programme and Voluntary Acquisitions

In Section 2.4, the Council acknowledges that the demolition programme is subject to interdependencies, which could delay proceedings. Given this, I urge the Council to recognize that a significant majority of homeowners are refusing to accept the meager voluntary acquisition offers currently on the table.

Despite acknowledging the homeowners' plight, the Council has failed to set a precedent for fair acquisitions. It is widely recognized that the current situation is not the homeowners’ fault but rather a consequence of past cost-saving measures by this very Council in whatever guise was operating at the time, during the construction of these properties.

Transparency and Homeowner Support

Regarding Section 2.10, with so much uncertainty around property values and acquisition processes, I formally request an amendment to reinstate verbal reporting on rehoming numbers at future committee meetings. This is particularly crucial considering that, at the last full council meeting, Stephen Booth stated that 50 people were still engaging in the voluntary acquisition process. However, your report lists the total number of participants as 55, with only 29 still actively engaged. Clear and transparent updates are essential to ensure accuracy and accountability.

In Section 3.3, the report acknowledges that some properties within the wider site are privately owned and that affected homeowners can pursue their own solutions. However, the Council has failed to inform these homeowners that they could submit group applications for available financial assistance, including loans, shared funding, or grants for remedial works.

Moreover, I have repeatedly requested information on the location of these private properties but was denied access under the guise of GDPR and confidentiality laws. Yet today, the Council has openly shared this information in its report. Ms. Sheppard confirmed in our latest meeting that this data is now publicly available. I demand an apology from the Council for previously withholding this information, as well as a commitment to transparency moving forward.

Furthermore, I request that no misleading or distorted statements be made following my deputation, particularly through the use of leading questions that misrepresent my position after I have spoken and am unable to respond.  I bring to your attention that I  have an ongoing complaint against a Councillor present today, which has been submitted to the Ethical Standards Commissioner.

Public Inquiry

It is also worth noting that none of the properties classified as medium or high risk have progressed to critical risk. This strongly suggests that the Council’s actions thus far have been premature and rushed. Given the likelihood of a public inquiry into the handling of RAAC, I call on the Council to pause its current demolition and acquisition plans and instead focus on properly exploring all viable alternatives, as other local authorities have done.

Your council may not have the authority to call for a public inquiry, but it can urge the Scottish Government to do so. You also have the power to continue advocating for a national fund. My proposal, submitted through the Scottish Parliament Petitions process, suggests using the cladding levy, the affordable homes budget, or the creation of a dedicated fund to support affected homeowners. This proposal has been publicly endorsed by a RICS spokesperson and is available online for anyone to review. Surely, it is time for ACC to intensify its efforts toward securing a national solution.

Aberdeen City Council has a duty to act with due diligence, transparency, and fairness. Homeowners affected by RAAC should not be forced into financial ruin or displacement due to past decisions beyond their control.

I urge the Council to reconsider its approach, explore more sustainable solutions, and ensure that affected residents are provided with the support and financial assistance they deserve.

Thank you for your time.

 

Executive Director Engages RAAC Campaigners, Opens Door for Solutions in Aberdeen

Image taken before meeting of Wilson Chwodhry and Hannah Chowdhry with Stephen Booth and John Wilson in August 2024.

 JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)

PLEASE SIGN OUR PETITIONS  (CLICK HERE), OFFICIAL SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (CLICK HERE) AND OFFICIAL UK GOVERNMENT PETITION (HERE).

WATCH FIRST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FEATURE ON RAAC HOUSING CRISES (HERE)

Watch the historic moment as the Scottish Parliament Petitions Committee officially backs the UK RAAC Campaign Group’s petition—a groundbreaking step in our fight for justice and accountability! (here)

Please complete our impact survey (here) 

Aberdeen, UK – A key meeting took place between Wilson Chowdhry of the UK RAAC Campaign Group and Elainor Sheppard, Executive Director of Families & Communities at Aberdeen City Council, to discuss solutions for homeowners affected by RAAC-affected properties. Also in attendance via Teams online portal were Jacqui McKenzie, Customer Service Development Manager at Aberdeen City Council, and Fiona Crichton, Secretary for the UK RAAC Campaign Group.

During the meeting, Mr. Chowdhry outlined his work in Clackmannanshire, where negotiations have led to a proposal for full roof replacements, with costs significantly reduced from £39,000 per homeowner to £20,000. Residents there have indicated willingness to contribute an additional £9,000 to include external rendering and cavity wall insulation—essentially a partial retrofit to bring homes up to modern standards. The council is also pursuing a Scottish Government fund to further ease financial burdens.

Mr. Chowdhry urged Aberdeen City Council to consider a similar scheme, highlighting concerns over delays and the worsening condition of affected properties. In response, Ms. Sheppard invited him to submit a formal proposal for council review. She said:

"I'd be grateful if you could put all options on paper for me. I will look at the costings and practicalities. Working through the options together would help. I will look at all proposals that are sent my way. We'll try to find the best solution to suit everyone."

Discussions also addressed financial estimates, with Mr. Chowdhry pointing out that Aberdeen’s initial cost assessments—originally estimated as high as £71,000 per property—had already been revised down to £50,000, suggesting that a more detailed estimation process was needed. He emphasized that councils must prioritize practical, affordable solutions for affected homeowners rather than protecting their own financial positions.

Further comparisons were drawn with Basildon Borough Council, which allocated £8,680 in support to council tenants—far exceeding the £1,500 given to tenants across Scotland. Basildon also offered voluntary acquisitions at pre-RAAC market values, covering relocation and loss expenses, which Mr. Chowdhry cited as an example of a fair and effective approach.

Concerns were also raised about the deteriorating condition of evacuated council homes in Aberdeen, with reports of broken fences, fly-tipping, and security risks. Ms. Sheppard assured attendees that the police, fire service, and council wardens were monitoring the properties, with regular patrols in place.

A key issue discussed was the potential for a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO). Mr. Chowdhry sought reassurance that Aberdeen City Council’s request for financial flexibility would not be used to force homeowners into a CPO. Ms. Sheppard confirmed that any statutory dispensation request was not intended to enable CPOs unfairly but rather to provide the council with more financial flexibility for solutions.

The meeting also clarified that private tenants and homeowners could be added to the RAAC Impact Housing List without being required to accept voluntary acquisitions. Additionally, those who moved into a secured tenancy following remedial grants or house swaps would retain their tenancy rights.

Mr. Chowdhry requested that the UK RAAC Campaign Group be involved in discussions with government officials, particularly in meetings with Housing Minister Paul McLennan, to ensure homeowners’ voices are heard. While no such meeting is currently scheduled, Ms. Sheppard agreed to revisit the matter in the future.

Finally, Mr. Chowdhry pressed for transparency regarding which properties could be retained by homeowners. He reminded Ms. Sheppard that council officials had previously stated homeowners could proceed with their own repairs in certain blocks and apply for grant or loan support. Ms. Sheppard confirmed that GDPR restrictions would not prevent this information from being shared and committed to including a map of these blocks in the next council report.

The UK RAAC Campaign Group remains committed to advocating for affected homeowners and ensuring that councils take decisive action to resolve the ongoing crisis.

Wilson Chowdhry, after the meeting, said:

"Meeting with an Executive Director of Aberdeen City Council offers some hope that progress can finally be made for RAAC-affected homeowners. I appreciate Eleanor Sheppard’s assurances that the financial flexibility being sought will not be used to push through a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO), which has been a major concern for residents. However, while this meeting was a step in the right direction, it’s clear that Aberdeen is falling behind other Scottish councils in delivering real solutions."

"Dundee is now offering homeowners grants covering up to 40% of RAAC roof replacement costs, while Clackmannanshire has introduced loan schemes that fund not only new roofs but also essential improvements like cavity wall insulation and external render. Across Scotland, councils are finding creative ways to support homeowners, recognising that voluntary acquisition funds for buyouts and redevelopment are unlikely to materialise anytime soon. Aberdeen must follow suit. Homeowners cannot afford more delays, and we will continue pushing for fair, workable solutions that put their needs first."

Bridgewater Housing Association Nightmare: RAAC, Leaks, and a Factor’s Failings in Erskine!

IMAGE: Tenant pointing to water dripping down communal hallway with flat RAAC roof. 

 JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)

PLEASE SIGN OUR PETITIONS  (CLICK HERE), OFFICIAL SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (CLICK HERE) AND OFFICIAL UK GOVERNMENT PETITION (HERE).

WATCH FIRST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FEATURE ON RAAC HOUSING CRISES (HERE)

Watch the historic moment as the Scottish Parliament Petitions Committee officially backs the UK RAAC Campaign Group’s petition—a groundbreaking step in our fight for justice and accountability! (here)

Please complete our impact survey (here) 

Erskine, 6th March 2025 - When Lynda bought her home in Erskine, during August 2022, she believed she was securing a place to build a future. What she didn’t expect was a slow-burning crisis unfolding above her head—one that would expose a series of maintenance failures, unresponsive property management, and, ultimately, the alarming presence of RAAC in her building.

The Leaks Begin

Initially, Lynda had no concerns about the condition of her new home, though her home buyer report brought up wet sarking boards it was not described as a major issue. 

"I called Bridgewater to ask about repairs and maintenance - which they wouldn’t disclose until I was the owner", she explained.

VIDEO: A leak in Lynda's property was discovered while painting her hallway ceiling.

However, it wasn’t long before a leak appeared in the hallway, with plaster peeling from the ceiling. Over time, two more leaks followed, the most recent occurring about a year ago. The problem? A poorly maintained flat roof.

Bridgewater, the property factor responsible for maintaining the building, were slow to act. Lynda pushed for answers, asking whether there had been any prior repairs. She was assured there were no significant issues. 

After continued pressure, Bridgewater eventually repaired a section of the roof. While this stopped the immediate leak in the hallway, Lynda remained concerned about the overall state of the building. She urged Bridgewater to carry out a more comprehensive inspection. They seemed eager to access top-floor properties, yet meaningful action was still lacking.

The Ongoing Battle with Bridgewater

Lynda’s frustrations didn’t stop with the roof. Another major issue lay with the communal water tank, which had a history of leaking. Worse still, it had no lid, and fitting one would require removing an entire section of the roof.

Bridgewater charged residents for disinfecting the water tank—a job that was never done. Only after complaints were raised did they issue a refund. Meanwhile, routine gutter cleaning remained neglected, despite being a basic maintenance responsibility.

The RAAC Shock and Delayed Communication

Four weeks ago, Lynda’s daughter made a worrying discovery—her home had been flagged for RAAC concerns. Lynda immediately contacted Bridgewater for confirmation, but they denied sending any letters about the issue. Then, just an hour later, the letter arrived in the post.

IMAGE: An email from 14 months ago from a tenant to Bridgewater Housing Association outlines multiple concerns regarding their due diligence and duty of care.

Realizing the severity of the situation, Lynda’s husband turned to Facebook to raise awareness. This led to a meeting organized by Erskine Community Council, which should have been a chance to address residents’ concerns. However, out of 130 affected homes, only about 12 people attended. Sam Mullins, a key figure from the council, was present but has since remained unresponsive.

Unanswered Questions and More Discoveries

At the meeting, Lynda was assured that someone would follow up with her within 24 hours. A week later, with no contact, she reached out herself. She was particularly concerned because she needed to update her letting agent about her tenants’ safety.

During her investigations, Lynda spoke to a tenant who had been moved out of a nearby property, where a supporting brace was later installed to stabilize the roof. Initially, the tenant was told the evacuation was due to RAAC. However, when Lynda questioned Bridgewater Housing Association, she was given a different explanation—they claimed the tenant was removed due to concerns over potential asbestos disturbance and contamination.

This conflicting information raised serious doubts. If asbestos was the real concern, why was a brace installed to reinforce the roof? Was RAAC the real issue all along? The uncertainty left Lynda wondering: were residents being given the full truth about the structural risks in their homes?

Eventually, Lynda was informed that her own roof was unsafe and had now been braced. The uncertainty only deepened her frustration.

What Now?

For Lynda’s daughter, the situation is even more dire. The communal area of her flat, with its flat RAAC roof, experiences severe water leaks along the inner walls whenever it rains—a clear sign of serious structural deterioration. Tricking water indicates a dangerously compromised roof, yet no action has been taken to address the issue. Despite many homeowners in the development being willing to pay for essential maintenance, persistent problems—like hanging gutters—continue to be ignored. With each rainfall, the risk grows, putting residents' safety in jeopardy while those responsible fail to act.

Bridgewater has not offered a clear way forward. They have told homeowners to arrange their own structural surveys, while inspections are still ongoing. But for Lynda, the message is clear: waiting for further deterioration is not an option. She wants action now—before the situation becomes even more disastrous.

"My roof hasn’t been braced—at least not yet," Lynda said, concern evident in her voice. "They inspected my property yesterday (3rd March 25), but when I called for an update, I was told to wait. I’m still waiting for a callback."

This story is yet another example of homeowners being left in the dark, battling unresponsive factors, and dealing with the legacy of RAAC. The question remains: when will those responsible finally step up and take accountability for the worsening conditions?

Wilson Chowdhry, Chairperson for the UK RAAC Campaign Group, said: 

"For Lynda and her daughter, the uncertainty is not just frustrating—it’s unbearable. They are left navigating a maze of bureaucracy while their homes continue to deteriorate. Meanwhile, Bridgewater’s lack of urgency leaves residents fearing the worst: further structural failures, increased repair costs, and a declining property value that could leave them trapped in unsafe homes.

"With each passing storm, the cracks—both literal and figurative—widen. Homeowners need answers, action, and a commitment to real solutions. The time for vague assurances and delays has long passed. Now, they ask: who will finally take responsibility, and when will change come?"

Clackmannanshire Council's U-Turn on RAAC Homes: Homeowners Demand Clear Terms and Full Transparency

IMAGE: Tillicoultry homeowners at an earlier meeting with Wilson Chowdhry. 

 JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)

PLEASE SIGN OUR PETITIONS  (CLICK HERE), OFFICIAL SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (CLICK HERE) AND OFFICIAL UK GOVERNMENT PETITION (HERE).

WATCH FIRST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FEATURE ON RAAC HOUSING CRISES (HERE)

Watch the historic moment as the Scottish Parliament Petitions Committee officially backs the UK RAAC Campaign Group’s petition—a groundbreaking step in our fight for justice and accountability! (here)

Please complete our impact survey (here) 

Clackmannanshire, 20th February 2025 – 

Homeowners affected by RAAC were evacuated from their homes in October 2023 and have since been living in a mix of council-rented properties or with friends and family. Those residing in rented council homes are still required to pay off their mortgages for properties they have had no access to. In addition to this financial strain, homeowners have suffered the loss of property they could not remove from their homes and have endured the indignity of paying for futile insurance that does not cover RAAC-related damages. This issue is expected to result in claims investigators deflecting responsibility for any claims made.

Led by Wilson Chowdhry, Chairman of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, homeowners attended a critical meeting with Clackmannanshire Council’s Strategic Director for Place, Kevin Wells, on 19th February 2025. During the meeting, Mr. Wells outlined a potential solution that had been under discussion with Mr. Chowdhry since January 2025. The council’s latest proposal involved replacing the current RAAC roofs with timber alternatives at £39,000, alongside the possibility of a loan to fund the remedial works. Mr. Wells stated that a loan from the council was highly likely and sought a clear indication from homeowners on whether they preferred this option over the council’s previous focus on voluntary acquisitions. 

It was made clear during the meeting that the voluntary acquisition process would only offer homeowners the current market value of their properties—a figure significantly lower than pre-RAAC valuations. Many homeowners, having been evacuated since October 2023, are already struggling with financial burdens and feel trapped between a rock and a hard place. They sought clarity on how the proposed loan would operate, but only vague details were provided. Additionally, homeowners urged the council to continue pressing the Government to cover the cost of the loan should they proceed with the remedial works. Council officers acknowledged this concern and stated that securing Government support remained their preferred outcome.

At the conclusion of the meeting, council officers Andrew Buchanan and Murray Scott informed Mr. Chowdhry that he should have requested updated cost estimates for the proposed works. It was only then disclosed that the original estimate of £39,000 per homeowner had been significantly reduced to £29,000 for full remedial works, including an external render and cavity wall insulation, or £20,000 for roof replacement alone. 

Homeowners were unable to reach a decision during the meeting and held a private discussion later that day. Mr. Chowdhry relayed the newly disclosed repair costs, and those in attendance unanimously agreed to proceed with the remedial works programme. However, frustration remains over the council’s lack of transparency, and homeowners are demanding clear assurances before committing to the proposal.

While they welcome the offer of a sundry debt (loan) to fund the repairs, several critical concerns require urgent clarification. Wilson Chowdhry, Chairman of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, has submitted a formal letter to the Council outlining key homeowner demands, which include:

1. Loan Terms and Assurances – Homeowners require written confirmation outlining the details of the Council's loan agreement, including clear approval criteria, terms, and conditions.

2. Cost Breakdown and Legal Fees – A full breakdown of additional costs, including legal fees and potential charges against title deeds, must be provided. Homeowners also seek assurances of a manageable repayment structure with small monthly payments.

3. Suspense Account Costs – Residents are calling for the removal of all costs related to the Council’s decanting process, arguing that the evacuation was premature and has already caused them significant financial loss.

4. Scope of Works – Confirmation is needed that repairs will include a full new render of the building’s exterior and cavity wall insulation, as previously intimated.

5. Revised Cost Estimates – The Council must confirm the newly reduced costs of £29,000 for full repairs (roof and walls) and £20,000 for roof-only repairs, while guaranteeing no hidden or additional charges.

6. Government Grants and Loan Removal – Homeowners seek assurance that the Council will continue to lobby the Government for a national RAAC fund and that any future government grants will be used to cancel or reduce the proposed loans.

7. Tenancy Concerns – Clarity is needed on whether tenants rehoused in Council homes will be required to relinquish their new properties under the proposed scheme.

8. Restrictions on Property Sales or Letting – Homeowners need confirmation that there will be no restrictions on selling or renting their properties following remedial works.

9. Public Procurement Risks – Transparency is required regarding the Scottish Public Procurement process, and the risks it may pose in increasing homeowner costs beyond the current agreement with their approved contractor.

10. Impact on Petition and Standing Orders – Homeowners demand that their petition proceed through the Council’s official process, ensuring their right to present their case at the full Council meeting. They also seek clarification on their request for standing orders to be set aside, allowing Mr. Chowdhry to speak on their behalf during the discussion of the options report.

11. Timelines for Works – Homeowners request that the Council provide a clear estimated start date for the remedial works, following any decision by councillors, along with a projected timeline for completion.

Homeowners Express Frustration Over Delays

While homeowners welcome the proposed solution, they have expressed deep frustration over the prolonged delay in reaching this point. They believe that the remedial loan option should have been made available much earlier, rather than leaving them in limbo for an extended period.

Furthermore, they have reiterated their opposition to the Council’s earlier stance that it could impose a decision without proper homeowner consultation. Had this approach been pursued, residents were prepared to challenge it legally, citing concerns over conflicts of interest and lack of due diligence.

Mr. Chowdhry also highlighted concerns that vital cost reduction information was withheld from homeowners during the meeting, only to be revealed afterward. Given that initial estimates were based on a desktop exercise, greater transparency is now being demanded.

“We need the Council to act swiftly and with full transparency,” said Mr. Chowdhry. “If all terms are agreed upon, homeowners are eager to proceed without further delay. We are requesting an urgent meeting with the contractor to finalise the next steps.”

The UK RAAC Campaign Group now awaits a response from Clackmannanshire Council, hoping for a resolution that will finally allow homeowners to move forward with securing their properties.

Mr Chowdhry, Added:

"After a year and a half of delays, a decision on this matter should have been reached much earlier. For an extended period, I have been advocating for a loan agreement that would allow homeowners to remain in their properties while making necessary repairs to bring them up to modern standards. I am encouraged by the council’s current proposal, which includes a partial retrofit, as it not only ensures the long-term value of these homes but also prevents the loss of housing stock and avoids unnecessary delays in new build projects. The substantial reduction in costs is a significant development and, I believe, serves as a model for other councils facing similar challenges. I am keen to bring this solution to the attention of Stephen Booth - Corporate Landlord and Eleanor Sheppard Chief Executive for Housing at Aberdeen City Council at a meeting on 28th February. It is critical that we prioritise innovative and practical solutions like this, which will enable homeowners affected by the RAAC crisis to continue living in their own homes without the burden of rent, providing them with the stability they deserve."

Council’s Misleading Claims Exposed: The Truth About Homeowner Engagement

Wilson Chowdhry led a deputation at Aberdeen City Council Meeting on 5th February 2025.

In a despicable attempt to undermine the UKRCG campaign, both Councillor Radley and Mr. Stephen Booth appear to be engineering questions and responses to serve their own agenda. Mr. Chowdhry has lodged a formal complaint with the council and has requested a response from both individuals.

One glaring issue concerns Mr. Booth's response to Councillor Gordon Graham’s query about the estimated cost of repairs suggested to both the TCRC and UKRCG in separate meetings.

In a private meeting with Mr. Chowdhry, Mr. Booth and Mr. John Wilson stated that repairs for a four-bedroom property—such as Mr. Chowdhry’s daughter Hannah’s home—would cost £71,000. This figure was allegedly sourced from Fairhurst Contractors. However, during the reconvened Full Council meeting on 17th February, Mr. Booth suddenly changed his position, claiming the figure was not from a contractor but rather from a Quantity Surveyor—as if this somehow justified such a ludicrous estimate.

Further concerns arise from Mr. Booth’s refusal to provide minutes for the meetings held with either TCRC or UKRCG, citing an alleged lack of resources to arrange a scribe. This is despite the fact that Mr. John Wilson contributed very little during Mr. Chowdhry’s meeting. Additionally, an assurance that the meeting would be recorded and shared was never met. Instead, an email containing an alleged recording turned out to be a hoax.

During the meeting, Mr. Booth contradicted himself again, claiming that the £71,000 estimate was inaccurate and instead citing a figure of £50,000 in a report to  council — one which he claimed was the minimum cost for a two-bedroom property in meetings with community groups. However, his deception was exposed when the BBC had already quoted Mr. John Meiklejohn from TCRC stating exactly the same £71,000 figure as Mr. Chowdhry though having met with council officers separately. A copy of this article can be found (here) Mr Booth's problem is that he told the same lie to two groups.

It is becoming increasingly clear that council officials are intentionally attempting to frighten homeowners into accepting undervalued offers—a tactic we will not cave into.

Cllr Radley seemingly ask questions designed to fabricate a situation

Councillor Miranda Radley appears to be collaborating with Mr. Booth in crafting misleading responses aimed at undermining Mr. Chowdhry’s deputation. She falsely claimed that Mr. Chowdhry stated only four homeowners were engaging with the council, when in reality, he explicitly stated that only four had accepted offers:

"To date, not a single property has been acquired, and only four homeowners have even expressed a willingness to accept an offer. This is a clear sign that the voluntary acquisition scheme is failing. Homeowners are not rejecting assistance; they are rejecting unfair and inadequate offers that do not reflect the true value of their homes before RAAC was declared a risk."

Despite this clear statement, Mr. Booth failed to correct Cllr Radley’s misrepresentation. Instead, in what appeared to be a deliberately engineered response, he falsely claimed that Mr. Chowdhry was wrong and insisted that around 50 homeowners were still engaging with the voluntary acquisition process.

However, the council’s own report contradicts Mr. Booth’s claim, providing the following breakdown:

Owners who have engaged and proceeded to valuation inspection 55

Owners who have engaged but are undecided whether to progress to valuation inspection 29
Owners who have engaged but have decided not to proceed to valuation inspection 21

These figures do not support Mr. Booth’s attempt to dismiss Mr. Chowdhry’s statement. Rather, they reinforce the argument that homeowners are engaging with the council—but rejecting its undervalued offers.

Owners who have engaged and proceeded to valuation inspection 55

Owners who have engaged but have decided not to proceed to valuation inspection 21

Owners who have engaged but are undecided whether to progress to valuation inspection 29 

Additionally, Cllr Radley questioned his assertion that properties were being undervalued and asked about the valuation process.

In response, Mr. Booth stated that valuations were conducted through the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) and implied that this ensured independence. However, both he and Councillor Radley conveniently ignored the core issue Mr. Chowdhry raised—that undervaluations were driven by the council’s inflated repair estimates, a point made clear explicitly in the first few paragraphs of this blog. Moroever, in his deputation Mr Chowdhry emphasized other issues:

It's ominous that the council, in Section 5 of their latest report, states that their preferred strategy for addressing privately owned RAAC-affected properties remains voluntary acquisition. They justify this by claiming it aligns with their broader plan to demolish council-owned RAAC properties, presenting it as the ‘optimum option’ for streamlining housing delivery and addressing safety concerns. While they insist compensation packages comply with the Land Compensation (Scotland) Act 1973, this approach seems more like an attempt to pressure homeowners into selling at undervalued rates. However, I remain hopeful that the council will eventually recognize the severe difficulties, high costs, and reputational damage associated with pursuing a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO), forcing them to abandon their stubborn attempt to rinse local homeowners."

Mr. Chowdhry’s remarks clearly highlight the council’s failure to explore alternative solutions for retaining affected homes, alongside their persistent use of CPO threats—a tactic they now admit is not a viable option at this stage. The council lacks the budget for a redevelopment programme, and none of their inspected RAAC-affected roofs have deteriorated to a critical risk level.

Given these facts, homeowners firmly believe that the council’s true motivation has always been to pressure them into accepting undervalued offers. The involvement of an independent officer from the Valuation Office Agency does nothing to change the fact that the council itself artificially depressed market values—a strategy that was never justified, given their current admission that CPOs are off the table.

Councillor Miranda Radley also addressed Mr. Chowdhry’s concerns regarding rubbish accumulating in vacated council properties, which he highlighted in his deputation:

"Concerns have been raised about the condition of vacated council properties, with images circulating on Facebook showing rubbish and building materials piling up in front gardens, creating a sorry state for the area. This neglect not only impacts the community but also raises doubts about the council’s willingness to adopt the community-proposed solution. If they were genuinely committed to addressing the issue efficiently, one would expect better upkeep of these properties, rather than allowing them to fall into disrepair."

In response, Mr. Booth claimed that fencing around empty council homes had been removed due to fire risk and that the rubbish was only present for a single day. However, this statement is plainly false—a fact that local residents can readily disprove.

We have clear photographic evidence spanning several days, showing rubbish continuously accumulating in gardens, as well as fences being pulled down far earlier than Mr. Booth claims. In fact, images of the fences being removed were posted on Facebook on February 1st—four days before the Full Council Meeting on February 5th, when Mr. Booth claimed this occurred. Additionally, a separate video uploaded on February 3rd by a different resident from another area further contradicts his version of events.

The most egregious moment in the attempted character assassination by Miranda Radley and Mr. Booth came in Ms. Radley’s final question. She blatantly ignored Mr. Chowdhry’s repeated requests for the council to explain why it was withholding house numbers for blocks where no council-owned properties were present. Instead, the council hid behind confidentiality and GDPR legislation, which did not apply to this situation.

In an expanded response to a councillor’s question, Mr. Chowdhry highlighted that the council’s report once again confirmed that homeowners in these blocks were eligible to apply for loans, grants, or other schemes—they were not obligated to enter the Voluntary Acquisition Scheme and could instead carry out repairs themselves. Mr. Chowdhry’s only request was to identify which blocks these were so that homeowners could be informed—either through a public meeting citing the block numbers or via a letter drop organized by the UKRCG.

At no point did he request personal details, a fact he made abundantly clear in his response. Yet Ms. Radley deliberately distorted the situation, seemingly in an effort to obstruct the dissemination of this crucial information. Her actions appeared to be an attempt to prevent these homeowners from being empowered with the option of self-repairs or seeking targeted support from the council.

You can watch Mr. Chowdhry’s request for the block numbers, where he clearly states that he is not asking for any personal details. He even anticipates that the council will fabricate a GDPR-based excuse to withhold the information. This can be seen from 5 minutes and 13 seconds into the video above.

The reality is simple: local people are exhausted by the council’s repeated dishonesty and its deliberate attempts to undermine community advocates fighting for homeowners’ rights. For all intents and purposes, it appears the council only acted to clear the rubbish after Mr. Chowdhry raised the issue—yet Cllr Radley and Mr. Booth have since concocted a misleading response to discredit him.

We now await a proper and truthful response from them, one that acknowledges the reality faced by residents rather than attempting to cover up the council’s negligence.  We will keep everyone posted.

RAAC Campaign Group Submits Urgent Letters to Prime Minister and Ministers at 10 Downing Street

Wilson Chowdhry, Willow Chowdhry, Hannah Chowdhry and Naomi Chowdhry handing in letters to the Prime Minister and his Housing Ministers.

 JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)

PLEASE SIGN OUR PETITIONS  (CLICK HERE), OFFICIAL SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (CLICK HERE) AND OFFICIAL UK GOVERNMENT PETITION (HERE).

WATCH FIRST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FEATURE ON RAAC HOUSING CRISES (HERE)

Watch the historic moment as the Scottish Parliament Petitions Committee officially backs the UK RAAC Campaign Group’s petition—a groundbreaking step in our fight for justice and accountability! (here)

Please complete our impact survey (here)

London, 8 December 2024 – On Saturday, Chairman of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, Wilson Chowdhry, accompanied by his three daughters, Hannah, Naomi, and Willow, hand-delivered letters to Prime Minister Keir Starmer MP, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities, and Local Government Angela Rayner MP, and Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Local Growth and Building Safety Alex Norris MP at 10 Downing Street. The decision to submit these letters in person followed a failure to receive responses to emailed versions, despite previous correspondence from the group having been acknowledged through this method.  Please watch video below:

A firm knock on the door prompted the officer inside to open it and accept our petition.

The letters highlight the UK Government’s ongoing inaction regarding the Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC) homes crisis and call for urgent legislative and financial intervention to support affected homeowners. Mr. Chowdhry expressed deep frustration at Mr. Norris’s prior response, which deflected responsibility by labeling building safety as a devolved matter, despite many proposed reforms falling squarely within Westminster’s jurisdiction.

Among the key legislative proposals put forward by Mr. Chowdhry are:

1. Amendments to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 – To allow affected homeowners to reduce existing loan payments to capital-only contributions, easing the financial burden of owning uninhabitable properties.

2. Amendments to the Finance Act 2003 – To restore first-time buyer status to affected homeowners, enabling them to access financial support schemes to secure new homes.

3. Improved Housing Safety Regulations – Strengthening the Building Safety Act to ensure developers remain accountable for safety defects even after resale, for up to 60 years. Additionally, fostering dialogue with the Scottish Government, which currently lacks such legislation, to encourage its implementation.

4. Amendments to the Insurance Act 2015 – To facilitate affordable insurance options for RAAC-affected homeowners, including a government-backed scheme to provide necessary coverage.

Delivering our petitions in person guarantees there can be no denial of their receipt.

Mr. Chowdhry condemned the government’s failure to address the concerns raised by Scotland’s Housing Minister, Paul McLennan, who has confirmed that no funding has been provided despite the Chancellor’s previous commitment to “spend what is necessary” on RAAC-related repairs. The ongoing political impasse between Westminster and Holyrood continues to leave homeowners in financial limbo, with no clear route to recovery.

In Aberdeen alone, repair costs for RAAC-affected homes are estimated to reach up to £71,000 per property—an unaffordable sum for most residents. The majority of affected individuals are elderly or financially vulnerable, making access to credit or alternative housing solutions nearly impossible. Currently, Aberdeen City Council is at a stalemate, as homeowners have rejected the inadequate voluntary agreement offers from the cash-strapped council (click here). Meanwhile, the council continues to press the UK and Scottish Governments for assistance in finding a viable resolution to this crisis.

Mr. Chowdhry also highlighted distressing testimonies from Clackmannanshire, where 30 families are currently paying mortgages on uninhabitable homes while also being charged council rent and insurance premiums that offer no coverage for RAAC-related damage. The emotional and financial toll on these families is immeasurable, yet government responses have been dismissive and inadequate.

“The UK Government has historically intervened in financial crises to protect banks and corporations,” said Mr. Chowdhry. “Yet when it comes to struggling homeowners—many of whom bought their properties under the Right to Buy scheme using public funds—there is an appalling lack of urgency and compassion.”

The UK RAAC Campaign Group is urging the UK Government to provide financial assistance or to pressure the Scottish Government to allocate a portion of the £3.4bn Treasury budget for RAAC remediation and property buyouts—or to designate the funding directly.

Additionally, the group is urging the implementation of enhanced property surveys to prevent similar crises in the future.

“This is no longer just a building safety issue—it is a national housing emergency,” Mr. Chowdhry stated. “We will not stop advocating until a real solution is put in place.”

The UK RAAC Campaign Group eagerly awaits an official response from the Government and will continue to fight for the rights of affected homeowners.

Hannah Chowdhry (21yrs), said:

"As a law student, I already face the burden of significant student debt—but now, I’m staring down the prospect of paying a mortgage on what is essentially rubble. The stress of this crisis is overwhelming and is taking a serious toll on my studies—this is not the future I envisioned when I bought my home in good faith.

In England, ex-council homes don’t carry the same hidden risks as these RAAC-affected properties in Scotland, and it’s clear this crisis has uniquely Scottish dimensions. But the UK Government cannot simply stand by while the Scottish Government fails to act.

Some of the blame lies with Westminster—after all, these cheaply built homes came through the Right to Buy scheme, a policy the Scottish Government never fully supported. Given this history, there is a clear responsibility for the UK Government to shoulder at least some of the costs in finding a fair resolution for homeowners like me." – Hannah Chowdhry, Law Student & RAAC Homeowner

Full deputation delivered by Wilson Chowdhry at the Full Council Meeting in Marischal College on 5th February 2025

 JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (HERE)

PLEASE SIGN OUR PETITIONS  (CLICK HERE), OFFICIAL SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (CLICK HERE) AND OFFICIAL UK GOVERNMENT PETITION (HERE).

WATCH FIRST NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL NEWS FEATURE ON RAAC HOUSING CRISES (HERE)

Watch the historic moment as the Scottish Parliament Petitions Committee officially backs the UK RAAC Campaign Group’s petition—a groundbreaking step in our fight for justice and accountability! (here)

Please complete our impact survey (here)

Deputation Speech – Aberdeen City Council Full Council Committee

5^th February 2025

Wilson Chowdhry, Chair, UK RAAC Campaign Group

Provost, Councillors, and Officers,

I sit before you today as Chair of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, representing homeowners who have been living in uncertainty and distress due to the RAAC crisis. They have been patient. They have engaged in good faith. But their patience is wearing thin, and today I am here to make their position absolutely clear.

On 4th February 2025, I met with Eleanor Sheppard, Executive Director of Families and Communities, and Stephen Booth, Chief Officer of Corporate-Landlord, via Teams to discuss the ongoing situation. It was both revealing and vindicating to hear them acknowledge that I had been right all along about the voluntary acquisition process, which is now stalling. Many homeowners are refusing to engage, while the majority who initially participated have since withdrawn after receiving insultingly low offers for their properties. At present, only four homeowners remain in discussions to accept offers—a clear indication of the scheme’s failure.

I warned this Council that the people of Torry would not tolerate such blatant disregard for their rights, and that prediction has now been realized. Even more telling was the officers’ confirmation of a point I have raised repeatedly: a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) cannot proceed without secured funding for a regeneration project, nor without clear evidence of critical structural risk—which, as it stands, simply does not exist.

I am glad the Council has finally come to this realisation, though it should never have taken this long.

This is a humiliating failure for Aberdeen’s council officers and councillors who arrogantly believed they could steamroll local residents without challenge.

It's ominous that the council, in Section 5 of their latest report, states that their preferred strategy for addressing privately owned RAAC-affected properties remains voluntary acquisition. They justify this by claiming it aligns with their broader plan to demolish council-owned RAAC properties, presenting it as the "optimum option" for streamlining housing delivery and addressing safety concerns. While they insist compensation packages comply with the Land Compensation (Scotland) Act 1973, this approach seems more like an attempt to pressure homeowners into selling at undervalued rates. However, I remain hopeful that the council will eventually recognize the severe difficulties, high costs, and reputational damage associated with pursuing a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO), forcing them to abandon their stubborn attempt to rinse local homeowners.

To date, not a single property has been acquired, and only four homeowners have even expressed a willingness to accept an offer. This is a clear sign that the voluntary acquisition scheme is failing. Homeowners are not rejecting assistance; they are rejecting unfair and inadequate offers that do not reflect the true value of their homes before RAAC was declared a risk.

One resident (who chooses not to be named at this stage) has challenged the district valuer after receiving an initial offer of £30,000 for his flat. Coincidentally, he submitted his appeal to the Valuation Office Agency on Monday 2^nd February. He highlighted that the most recent comparable sales in his postcode were two one-bedroom flats, both selling for £65,000. The estimated cost of replacing the roof is around £9,000, with an additional maximum of £2,000 for internal repairs—likely less—bringing the total cost to approximately £15,000, split between two flats at £7,500 each. While he acknowledges that an offer of £57,500 is unlikely due to ACC’s aggressive stance, he has argued that the initial £30,000 offer was far too low. He now awaits a response.

Meanwhile, alternative proposals—such as a roof replacement scheme and a house swap initiative—have been put forward by homeowners, yet they nor so many other options have ever received the serious consideration they deserve. Why is the Council so intent on acquiring properties rather than exploring solutions that could allow residents to remain in their homes? Any refusal to properly assess these alternatives would suggest a predetermined agenda rather than a genuine commitment to fair and viable outcomes.

During my meeting with Mr. Booth, I raised concerns that these two proposals might fail to meet equitable standards, and he acknowledged that there would be challenges. Council red tape does not usually allow for innovative schemes like these, and we did not even discuss the additional environmental retrofit concerns that would arise under a review. However, this critical information has not been shared with the group that originally developed these proposals. This omission appears to be a disingenuous attempt to placate homeowners rather than a genuine effort to engage in meaningful solutions—especially given that the voluntary acquisition process is clearly faltering.

I understand that a decision on funding research into these proposals is being made today. Instead, I propose an amendment: a direct grant system that would allow homeowners to fund their own roof replacements, rather than relying on the Council’s more expensive contractors under the proposed scheme for around 50 homes. This would provide a more cost-effective and homeowner-driven solution, empowering residents to take charge of any exchange properties rather than being forced into a process they do not trust. If grants were valued at what it would have cost the Council to carry out these repairs, they might even cover retrofit requirements.

An even better approach would be a grant programme available to all homeowners, without requiring them to move from their current homes. A grant system would in my opinion pass through all Council checks and balances, except financial viability. To make this possible, I urge the Council to redouble its efforts to secure financial support from the Scottish Government. Either this or a fair pre-RAAC valuation voluntary agreement would be the most equitable solution—and, in my view, the only fair outcome for affected homeowners, especially considering that this RAAC crisis has arisen due to earlier council cost-saving measures.

Concerns have been raised about the condition of vacated council properties, with images circulating on Facebook showing rubbish and building materials piling up in front gardens, creating a sorry state for the area. This neglect not only impacts the community but also raises doubts about the council’s willingness to adopt the community proposed solution. If they were genuinely committed to addressing the issue efficiently, one would expect better upkeep of these properties, rather than allowing them to fall into disrepair.

Let me acknowledge the Council’s ongoing dialogue with the Scottish Government regarding financial implications and potential flexibilities. However, let me also be clear: this cannot be a backdoor attempt to enable a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) without the necessary funding in place. Homeowners will vigorously challenge any attempt to force them out of properties they believe are safe enough to remain standing. A CPO without secured financial backing is not only premature—it is unjustifiable.

This Council has a duty to restore trust. Trust that decisions will be fair. Trust that homeowners will not be left in financial ruin. And trust that “financial flexibility” is not a coded phrase for advancing a CPO through indirect means. I have raised this issue with Stephen Booth on multiple occasions, and he is well aware of our concerns. I ask this Council today for absolute clarity: will you guarantee that these financial discussions are not being used to bypass proper procedures in order to push forward a CPO?

Finally, with a budget decision due on March 5, 2025, homeowners cannot afford more delays, uncertainty, or shifting goalposts. They need transparency, they need fairness, and they need answers—not after funding is secured, not after CPO proceedings are initiated, but today.

The UK RAAC Campaign Group stands ready to work with you to find genuine, fair, and viable solutions. But if the Council chooses a path that disregards the rights and interests of homeowners, we will not hesitate to challenge it at every level.

Thank you.