JOIN OUR 'UK RAAC CAMPAIGN GROUP' FB PAGE (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) Homeowners in Tillicoultry, who were evacuated from their properties due to the presence of dangerous Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC), recently met with Clackmannanshire Council officials to discuss their futures after years of displacement. The meetings, which took place with Senior Manager Andrew Sharpe and Project Manager Kim Grieve, were also attended by Mr Wilson Chowdhry, Chairman of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, who was invited by residents to support them in negotiations.
At the heart of the discussions were two options proposed by the council:
-
A Voluntary Acquisition Scheme, where the council would buy homeowners' properties at a fixed price.
-
A Joint Remediation Scheme, where homeowners would contribute financially to repair works being undertaken by the council.
Both options, however, have sparked deep dissatisfaction and even outrage among homeowners.
Deeply Discounted Valuations
Under the Voluntary Acquisition scheme, the council has offered to buy back homes for between £32,000 and £45,000—a figure that residents argue is up to £20,000 below their forecasted post-remediation value. The council set current valuations at zero equity, essentially writing off land value and treating the homes as worthless.
Fiona Crichton, a homeowner and secretary of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, presented evidence that comparable two-bedroom flats in Tillicoultry were selling for around £90,000. Her submission was disregarded by council officers, despite her sharing a 2019 RICS-qualified valuation (used for mortgage lending) that confirmed her property's higher value.
Mr Sharpe dismissed the earlier valuation, arguing that property values fluctuate. He justified the low offer by referencing a new valuation provided by Shepherd Chartered Surveyors, valuing Fiona’s home at £65,000 in a fully repaired state. Fiona countered that the £45,000 purchase offer would not even cover her mortgage debt.
Conflict of Interest Concerns
Wilson Chowdhry raised concerns that using a single contractor to repeatedly provide valuations for the council risked a conflict of interest, potentially breaching anti-corruption regulations. Mr Sharpe rejected this, stating that all RICS surveyors operate independently. However, a resident noted that clients can influence RICS valuations based on how requests are made—raising further concerns about manipulation.
Mr Chowdhry revealed that homeowners were arranging a separate RICS valuation, which would be shared with the council. Mr Sharpe reportedly scoffed at the idea, suggesting it would only lead to a £500 difference, implying it wouldn’t impact the council’s position.
Adding to the mistrust, Mr Chowdhry shared that one of the original surveyors admitted he was instructed to value the property both at market value and as if there was no RAAC in the roof—a contradiction that confused the process further. Meanwhile, homeowners were told by Mr Kevin Wells (Strategic Director: Place) that valuations would include costs of full remediation including cavity wall insulation, new render, and correction of council-inflicted damages—none of which appears to have been factored into the offers.
A Misleading Picture of Remediation Costs
If homeowners refuse the acquisition offer, their alternative is to pay towards a joint remedial programme, but that option appears increasingly unaffordable.
Initially, council communications suggested that remedial costs would include VAT. At a public meeting, James Flynn from McConnell Construction confirmed prices were VAT-inclusive, but now homeowners are being asked to pay an extra £10,000 due to a surprise VAT bill.
Mr Sharpe eventually apologised for the confusion but admitted the council had failed to prepare an analysis of VAT exemptions under VAT Notice 708—which allows reduced or zero VAT rates under certain conditions, including:
-
Properties vacant for over 2 years (5% VAT)
-
Over-60s homeowners (0% VAT)
-
Charitable relief or other concessions
Mr Sharpe has now promised a breakdown of VAT exemptions within a week, but Mr Chowdhry stated that holding consultations without this crucial financial information was premature and irresponsible.
Debt, Loans and Unaffordable Terms
Even more concerning, the council confirmed that any loan offered to homeowners for remediation contributions would now need to be repaid over 15 years, not 30 as previously suggested. This change could result in monthly payments exceeding £250—a crushing burden for residents already struggling with displacement and financial stress.
There will be no “missed share” opportunity—meaning homeowners cannot defer repayment until they sell or pass away. Instead, immediate repayment will be required, and the council confirmed it would charge interest at 5.5%, though no detailed rationale for this figure was provided other than vague references to council borrowing rates.
VAT Controversy Disrupts Meeting
One of the most heated moments occurred when a local residents’ meeting was abruptly cut short after just five minutes. Tensions rose when Mr Sharpe refused to continue answering questions following a query about VAT charges. Homeowners asked why VAT was being applied when the remedial works contract was between the council and O’Connells—a situation in which, as a public body and net VAT recipient, the council should not typically incur VAT costs.
At a subsequent meeting attended by another homeowner, Mr Sharpe returned alongside Lee Robertson from the council’s legal department. He clarified that while the council does not pay VAT for its own projects, VAT must be applied in this case because the remedial works are for private residential homes. Ms Robertson then took over responses to all VAT-related questions.
When Mr Chowdhry asked where the VAT would go, Mr Sharpe confirmed it would be passed on to HMRC.
Emotional Toll and Growing Desperation
After nearly two years of displacement, emotional fatigue and mental strain are taking their toll. Some residents—though angry and disillusioned—are considering taking the acquisition offer simply because they see no other path forward.
The council has offered to assist two homeowners in negotiating with lenders to secure a partial mortgage redemption, recognising that many now have zero equity.
However, these isolated gestures offer little comfort to the wider community, who feel betrayed, unheard, and financially abandoned.
Conclusion
What was once a housing crisis has become a crisis of trust, transparency, and affordability. With no clear path to full restoration or fair compensation, Tillicoultry’s RAAC homeowners continue to feel trapped between insultingly low buyback offers and unaffordable remediation plans.
If Clackmannanshire Council wishes to rebuild trust and offer real solutions, it must urgently reconsider its approach, consult independently, and deliver clarity on VAT, valuations, and loan terms—before more residents are pushed beyond the limits of endurance.
“The offers being made to these homeowners are not just financially insulting—they are morally indefensible. People have lost everything through no fault of their own, and instead of support, they are being boxed into impossible choices. The council’s failure to provide accurate valuations, clear financial data, and equitable solutions has created a crisis of trust. Until transparency and fairness become priorities, we cannot move forward.”
— Wilson Chowdhry, Chair of the UK RAAC Campaign Group
Owain Carter, a homeowner, has raised concerns about the council’s contract terms, which require homeowners to cover the council’s project management costs — despite McConnell’s already having their own project management team in place. He highlighted that the council, as a major shareholder in McConnell's, had previously assured residents that 'these costs would not be passed on', as the council would be incurring them regardless. Carter also expressed unease over the vague definition and potentially significant cost and delay implications of ‘unforeseen works.’
Fiona Crichton, a fellow homeowner and Secretary of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, shared her deep frustration:
“The council is now piling on costs that go far beyond the original estimates for remedial works. These include a management fee, legal costs, VAT, and even potential contingency charges for unforeseen issues — all of which could add tens of thousands of pounds to what was initially presented as a favourable offer. It’s now become an impossible financial commitment. We feel like we’re being manipulated and extorted.”
