Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to think that this has no place in this country

190 replies

brizzlemint · 26/03/2019 03:42

www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/mar/25/too-poor-to-play-children-in-social-housing-blocked-from-communal-playground

At least one multimillion-pound housing development in London is segregating the children of less well-off tenants from those of wealthier homebuyers by blocking them from some communal play areas.

Guardian Cities has discovered that developer Henley Homes has blocked social housing residents from using shared play spaces at its Baylis Old School complex on Lollard Street, south London. The development was required to include a mix of “affordable” and social rental units in order to gain planning permission.

OP posts:
HelenaDove · 27/03/2019 17:29

One of the mums from the private development has been campaigning on this for three years.

So its totally the media exposure thats made them back down.

What with this and Dispatches this week its the only thing that seems to achieve a result.

PanGalaticGargleBlaster · 29/03/2019 06:59

So presumably most people on this thread in a position to do so would have no issue with opening up their front or back gardens for public use?

Alsohuman · 29/03/2019 07:12

It's hardly the same thing, our gardens aren't communal.

PanGalaticGargleBlaster · 29/03/2019 11:59

The garden being discussed is private, like your garden, does not matter if it is owned by an individual or by a group of people, it, like your garden is not a public space.

Alsohuman · 29/03/2019 12:42

It's not a garden, it's a play space originally designated for the use of all the occupants of the development. Then the developers changed their minds. It's nothing like your garden or mine. Fortunately, one of the private owners campaigned for three years to change it and she succeeded. Now all the kids can use it, as intended in the first place.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 29/03/2019 13:37

the developer has had a change of heart, and that the play areas will be open to everyone

That's absolutely fair enough; it's their money that built it, them who are receiving the service charges, them who have to maintain it, so it's their decision to make

Saps80 · 29/03/2019 14:10

They r currently breaking the wall down! Just shows it was wrongly done in the first place. If it’s a communal space for all then all should have access! It doesn’t belong to one set of people it belongs to everyone living on the development and per original plans that would have never been approved if the wall was there!

BogstandardBelle · 30/03/2019 07:29

So who’s going to be paying the service charges for the communal playground area?

Alsohuman · 30/03/2019 09:38

Does it matter?

BogstandardBelle · 30/03/2019 21:15

I’m interested from a policy development POV: i was a planner in a former life. I wondered how they are solving this from the legal side. Maybe the local authorities will take on ownership and maintenance of the park, if it’s now a public facility? Or if the non-social housing owners will have to use their contracts changed to reflect the fact that they pay fir a facility but don’t have exclusive use of it?

Yabbers · 30/03/2019 23:35

@BogstandardBelle it will depend on the deal over the land. If it is housing association, HA will pay. If it is Council Housing, LA they will pay. If the flats were sold privately, the flat owner will pay, unless the land ownership was passed back to the LA.

Hyacintharehighersincelasttime · 31/03/2019 17:58

disgusting

HelenaDove · 12/04/2019 16:19

amp.theguardian.com/society/2019/apr/12/social-housing-tenant-punished-speaking-guardian?__twitter_impression=true

"Social tenant says he is being punished for speaking to the Guardian

Thomas Reames says Southern Housing extended probation period after he discussed segregated facilities

A social housing tenant with a heavily pregnant wife who spoke to the Guardian about segregated facilities in his block has said he’s being punished by his housing provider for doing so.

Thomas Reames, 42, was to sign a five-year tenancy agreement with social housing provider Southern Housing but days after the Guardian highlighted social tenants had no access to lifts in his block, he was told his probation period would have to be extended.

A housing officer from Southern Housing told Reames he would not be able to sign his tenancy agreement for his home in Legacy House, Hackney Wick, as expected because of separate allegations that were brought forward after he spoke to the Guardian. Reames said that the housing officer warned he and his family would be monitored over the next six months to see if he continues to follow the agreement in his tenancy but that if the provider was still unsatisfied he could lose his home

Reames said the sudden change came as a huge shock to him and his wife, who are expecting their fourth child. “All the indications before that was that we were signing that tenancy agreement, but that’s suddenly changed,” he said. “It’s a huge shock to us and it’s upsetting as this comes at a time when I’m expecting my fourth child in a few weeks.”

On 1 April, Reames told the Guardian that pregnant and disabled social housing tenants in his block, which is dominated by privately owned flats, are forced to use stairs to access their floor because the lift was designed to stop only on private floors.

London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC), the planning authority, confirmed that after residents campaigned it is taking enforcement action over social tenants’ access to the lift.

Shortly after the Guardian article was published, Reames received an email that said due to a number of issues in the previous year, Southern Housing would be extending his probation period. Reames said the housing provider had not raised any issues with them in the previous 12 months

In the same email, Reames and his wife Taslima were told: “Please can you also ensure that your conduct over social media in regards to Legacy House matters is deemed as appropriate.”

Reames said residents have been trying to make Southern Housing aware of the developer’s planning breaches, the most significant being the lack of access to lifts for social housing tenants, but failed to get any support.

He added: “There now appears to be a campaign to attempt to bully residents into silence or encourage us to not chase up on these breaches or highlight them. Since the Guardian article on 1 April 2019, SHG [Southern Housing Group] commented to me on 3 April 2019 they are aware of the article and then on 9 April they instructed me not to talk about the breaches on social media, which quite frankly is disgusting.

Taslima Reames said: “As far as I was aware, I was expecting to sign this five-year tenancy agreement with Southern Housing, but after the article we were suddenly told about these complaints. It just feels like they are making something up to extend our probation period.

“I’m due to give birth in seven weeks and I don’t need this stress.”

Southern Housing is a major housing provider in Tower Hamlets, but the council declined to provide comment on the case.

Rabina Khan, a Liberal Democrat councillor in Tower Hamlets, said: “Who do Southern Housing think they are? The thought police? A social housing tenant exercises his democratic right to speak to the press about the social housing block he lives in then suddenly gets an email from his landlord informing him that he is being investigated for those comments?

She added: “What makes Southern Housing think they have any control whatsoever over what one of their tenants can say? Thomas has the right to speak to the press or anyone else for that matter.”

Chris Harris, executive director, customer services at Southern Housing, said: “It would not be right to discuss the specific details of a customer’s tenancy account. However, we can assure you that our communication with Mr Reames and Mrs Reames, which has been ongoing for some weeks, has nothing at all to do with any contact that Mr Reames may have had with the press.”

Harris added: “As an organisation, from time to time we remind residents that comments on social media should always be considerate as they are subject to the same laws that govern other forms of public behaviour. Southern Housing Group understands that frustrations about housing, neighbours and similar issues do sometimes boil over onto social media.

“We offer this advice as a matter of support and goodwill, although we recognise that it is not always perceived this way and perhaps we could phrase it better."

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread