|
|
 |
| |
House clearances are an invitation to abuse
• YOUR story about a hospitalised woman who had her flat emptied was extremely disturbing (Woman’s flat emptied as she lies sick in hospital, January 18).
The practice of disposing of goods left when a tenancy is given up (even where that relinquishment is through death) is an open invitation to corruption, either by those emptying a property taking the property for their own use or sale or from collusion between social workers and those clearing properties.
I am not saying it is the case in this instance but it would be possible for a corrupt social worker to deliberately suppress the name of a next of kin in order to allow the person’s property to be taken by the social worker and an accomplice given the task of clearing the property.
As to what happens, are we to honestly believe that items of value and utility are simply thrown away by those emptying a property? In particular, what happens to any money left behind, an almost certain occurrence in the case of a tenancy relinquished through sudden death? Is that thrown into a skip?
What checks are made on the staff who arrange and undertake such removals of property and money to ensure they are behaving honestly? The council needs to provide an answer to these questions immediately. I suggest the council minimises the risk of mistakes and corrupt practices in future, by including on their database of tenants details of next of kin or other person who will attend to their effects after death or an enforced ending of a tenancy such as someone becoming mentally incapable.
As for those with no next of kin or other person willing to act for them, surely their effects could be rapidly put to auction?
Finally, I wonder what the council’s legal basis is for wilfully removing and destroying private property? As a general rule, goods left on the property of someone else can become the subject of a rental fee but not destruction.
ROBERT HENDERSON
Chalton Street, NW1 |
 |
|
|
|
