Gardens not accessible to social tenants

[FiddlesticksAkimbo]

Is this sort of thing reasonable?

Social and affordable housing residents are being denied access to the gardens of a multimillion pound West London development despite political promises to ban segregated play areas
www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/sep/27/disabled-children-among-social-tenants-blocked-from-communal-gardens

It seems reasonable to me, on the basis that if you don't pay for it then you can't expect to use it, but I'm interested to see what other people think.

The Mirror has done an article now too.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-grenfell-residents-barred-communal-20325922

I thought some of the social tenants had offered to pay a small amount so their children could play, but that was turned down? Shameful in my view.

The idea of segregation is vile, children should be encouraged to play together, it’s good for all of them.

Having said that, I had a temporary flat in a block with gardens when ds was small. Some people took care of it, kept it litter free and tidy, and others used it as a dog toilet or for smoking weed.

If they can keep it purely for children to play in, then it should be shared.

I can see why it's regarded as divisive but it depends on the kind of play area. You would not be expected to have a right to go into our very expensive health club of which my sons (not me) are members - there is a children's play area there, there is a nursery with lovely nannies too, there is a third area with balls and all sorts they can play on, private tennis courts, swimming pool and children's pool and outside a lovely children's play area. It costs an arm and a leg to join - I was paying for 8 of us at one point including 5 children and a nanny membership as I work full time and she wanted to take the children there . Now I only pay for the twins in holidays. I don't expect to have a right to go on there as I am not a member and local children aren't allowed in either. We do not get grubby nosed Victorian style poverty stricken street urchins peering in wanting to use the slide or anything like that and have loads of public parks which are perfectly good and public swimming pools around here. They aren't as nice but at least my £3600 a year council tax is giong on something for the less well off.

It is slightly more complex on the private estate of houses were I live as the roads are private but not gated and we let people walk on them and it would be complex to stop it as a golf club also has use and gates wout be a pain. [ I have just got back from enmptying the bin at the end of the road on this estate by the way - so I tore a hole in the bottom of the sack as it was full of rain water and I let the b rown water from all the dog waste bags drain away; then I put it into my car in a second bag - I pay for the bags and took it home. I am not suggesting I am Mother Theresa because I empty one bin but if we didn't let other people use this estate the bin would not get anything like as filled up as those who live around here have their own bins at home.]

And AGAIN Did the health club agree to admit people to get planning permission. NO so how is it comparable.

Well Xenia In this case its the private residents who are walking their dogs on the social housing side.

And as for your post about grubby Victorian urchins , its as bad as the one you came out with a few years ago which was "white flabby benefit claimants"

You are one of the first to moan about childhood obesity It will certainly be interesting to note which other names come up on the next thread about that.

I am far from being a bleeding heart liberal

Bit to shut this down they should provide fobs to the families with young children . Then do a Lessons learned for future developments

How shit to have your home burn down , people die horribly then finally get rehomed
To a beautiful development admittedly but where you know 24/7 you are a second class citizen . I bet they fucking wish they were back in equitable old Grenfell . Where people were all the same and the park
Was used by everyone

It’s horrible .

Set against that, the affordable housing tenants are incredibly privileged to be living in such a desirable part of London, where most of us could not dream of affording a one bedroom flat.

Well, not if the amenities (parks, shops etc) aren’t available or are too expensive.

I think the whole thing is a clusterfuck -

The inflated service charges typical of these sorts of developments.

The mixed message regarding who can access what.

The positioning of the playground, when any idiot could see this coming.

The fact that (apologies if this the other case, I can’t find the link now) the SH playground is crap by comparison.

And much more besides.

Set against that, the affordable housing tenants are incredibly privileged to be living in such a desirable part of London, where most of us could not dream of affording a one bedroom flat

It’s on the Harrow road . It’s really not that posh ! That’s how they can afford to build
It there . I google mapped it earlier too see what all the fuss was about

I have never referred to white flabby benefits claimants. I never use the word flabby. That must have been someone else.

My reference above to the Victorian age was saying we do not have that. I don't see why it's objectionable. I said it was something that doesn't happen (not least because in 2019 most people can afford soap!).

You have Xenia. I had it saved for a while.

Oh i apologize You are right It wasnt the word flabby that you used.

Xenia Thu 13-Sep-12 08:48:58
SOme people will always be poor and make up excuses and say impossible. Others get on with things and improve their lives. I hope we can remain a country where there are sufficient people with the personal values to make something better of themselves whatever it take. I accept and have said on iother threads that there is a problem once you start earning in a new business in coming off benefits althoug the new single benefit is going to make it easier - there was a letter in the Times about it last week - you can work for a year to get your self employed business going so things are imjproving thanks to this Government.

Just look at those who have moved here from abroad to see what is possible. I advise them all the time. They are wonderful, hard workers etc I hvae so much more in common with them than the fat lumpen negative white benefit claimants of the UK

A stop should be put to these situations. It's one apartment complex, there shouldn't be segregated facilities.

There's no easy instant solution though. There's a lot of parties involved, and my understanding is there are issues if the private tenants are seen as "subsidising" the social tenancies, and if the full service charges are imposed on all then the supposedly affordable or social housing becomes not.

Many newly-built or converted private rental properties are marketed as "luxury" and come with expensive service charges. But I don't think basics like a front door, garden, or even a parking space (if there are plenty of them) should be regarded as luxuries to exclude the social tenants from. Stuff like concierge services are another matter.

It will probably take legislation to address.

Blimey, Helena, you saved something from a thread that ran six years ago so you can use it eventually?

That's dedication!

I think so, but it's a pretty expensive monthly fee, and not covered by housing benefit. It would need to come from the tenants'own pockets.
You realise that most people in social housing actually work , just the lower paid jobs. Most probably wont be entitled to housing benefit.

Lumpen is a reference to Marx I think. I should get a Corbyn prize for that one. "Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels are generally considered to have coined the term lumpenproletariat. It is composed of the German word lumpen, which is usually translated as "ragged" and prolétariat, a French word adopted as a common Marxist term for the class of wage earners in a capitalist system".

Disgusting practice that should be absolutely illegal and no place in the 21st century. Even more disgusting to read the attitudes in this thread.

Maybe the kids of those who can pay for the garden shouldn't be in the same school with kids of those who earn less? They should pay for their bloody own education

www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/oct/12/victory-for-residents-of-london-estate-after-garden-access-row?CMP=share_btn_tw

Victory for residents of London estate after garden access row
Exclusive: developers and housing association reverse policy on mixed development

"Residents in west London who have been blocked for the past two years from using communal gardens on a multi-million pound development in west London have now been given access after a Guardian investigation.

Last month Guardian Cities reported that disabled children and former Grenfell residents are among social and affordable housing residents who have been denied access to a large garden, main entrances and the onsite car park at Westbourne Place in Maida Vale.

The developers of the site, Redrow, and the housing association Octavia, which run the affordable part of the site, blamed high service charges for the decision to restrict access to the garden. Octavia said at the time access would have involved expensive fees that would be set at the start by Redrow and could potentially increase over the years.

Advertisement

But the Guardian can reveal that residents have now been told that the new access rights will not involve an increase in the service charge, which raises questions about whether the issue was previously dealt with properly

Ahmed Ali lives in a socially rented home on the site with his wife and two children. His three-year-old son has a life-limiting illness which requires constant hospital visits and Ali has been trying to get access to parking and the garden since he moved in.

He said: “I am disgusted at how we have been treated. We were told it was because of the service charge but now we have been told that access may not require paying anything extra. We requested a breakdown of the charges previously from Octavia and we were never given that information. We even offered to pay for access and nobody responded. We feel let down by Octavia, who are our housing provider and we feel didn’t do enough to investigate this.”

Sign up for the Cityscape: the best of Guardian Cities every week
Read more
Last year the then chief executive of Octavia wrote to Ali stating that Octavia had made a “conscious decision not to ask for access to the garden … in order to keep service charges on this scheme down”.

Octavia later said that it would have liked everyone to have access but claimed it had never been on offer from Redrow. Two weeks ago Redrow said that it no longer owns the freehold and was therefore not responsible for what was happening on the site. This week Redrow attended a meeting with others, including Octavia and the local Labour MP Karen Buck – who had been helping residents who were trying to obtain access – to resolve the issue

Buck insisted that the gardens and play areas must not be segregated, whatever the arrangements are for service charges.

“What is pretty well unarguable is that there is a profound cultural sense across the development sector that there are two tiers of residents,” she said. “There are issues when this involves access to facilities like gyms but there has to be a line, where there are gardens and play areas they have to be mixed. There cannot be two tiers of residents sharing a physical space.

“Housing associations are clearly not in a position of power when they … need to be development partners. Maybe there is a reluctance to push this, but that is a structural problem. I know that Octavia are a good housing association.”

Buck added that the recent reporting by the Guardian on the subject of segregated housing had helped to change the atmosphere in which such decisions were made.

“The mood has clearly changed on this over the course of this year, there is no question that the combination of stories about this and the mayor’s public position has changed the context in which these decisions are made.”

Octavia said in response: “This week we have received a commitment that our residents will be given full access to all of the gardens and they can apply for a permit to use the car park if they choose to. This is a good result and we are grateful that all of the parties involved were able to come together to move this issue forward

Following the meeting on Thursday, Redrow instructed the managing agents for the private residencies, Pinnacle Properties, to reprogram fobs so that all residents had access and also told them to allow all residents to apply for car parking spaces.

Redrow said that nobody senior was available for comment"

You get what you pay for - if you lived next door to someone with a more expensive house and bigger garden would you complain that you couldn’t access it? Of course not. If you don’t like the play areas or lack of where you live, then move somewhere else.

@MadisonMontgomery

Read the thread, or at least the post above yours 😆

Its not free. They are paying rent.

Ffs it would be good if some people just READ before commenting . Mumsnet is rapidly turning like the comment section of the Daily Mail.

ZOMBIE