|
|
 |
| |
Just tell us what you’ve done with our money
• WHENEVER the subject of outrageous charges for major work comes up, one of Homes for Islington’s lines is “you got a very good deal on your property” (You’ve never had it so good, housing boss tells his critics, November 2).
This is untrue for a high proportion of leaseholders. My husband and I, like 70 per cent of leaseholders in our block, bought the flat in the open market.
HfI did not give us a penny as a discount. We knew we would have to pay our share of the costs, and accepted it without complaint. But we assumed we would be charged a reasonable price for work, be given appropriate information about how it would spend our money and that the work would be done to an appropriate standard.
None of this has happened in Aubert Court’s major works. You would not believe what they have done for £15,000 per leaseholder (well, you would once you see the management fees the contractors charge and the 11-12 per cent fee that goes straight to HfI).
The price that we think we are being charged by HfI for the replacement of our windows is more than double that quoted by three companies – and that is not taking into account discounts for doing the same work to 100 flats. We requested a breakdown of our £15,000 bill three months ago and we are still waiting.
I could go on, but it’s probably better to save our arguments for the Leasehold Valuation Tribunal – the only hope many of us have to know what they have done with our money.
ANA LASAOSA
Aubert Court, N5
• EAMON McGoldrick claims the average leaseholders’ bill is “only” £5,000 but fails to mention that it only relates to work covered under the initial contract, and any subsequent refurbishments will, of course, be charged for separately, or at a later date. This could result in a bill many times higher than Mr McGoldrick’s “average bill”.
If Homes for Islington’s whimsical figure includes those properties serviced by Partners for Islington, which are capped at £10,000 maximum, they would of course reduce the average billing considerably.
Mr McGoldrick’s assertion that HfI’s contracts are value for money, simply indicates that he paid very little attention to his father when pricing for jobs, and even less to many leaseholders who have refuted this claim. Since the main contractors merely sub-contract the work to firms which then sub-out in turn, with everyone taking a profit prior to commencing work, there is no money left in the pot to provide even a reasonable standard of work, far less obtain “value for money”.
HfI’s own statistics indicate that more than half of leaseholders have “bought on”. Therefore, they have obviously paid full market value and, rather than make a profit, will achieve negative equity if forced to increase their mortgages in order to pay HfI’s outrageous bills.
Properties in Wilmington Square and those valued at £1 million can hardly be classed as “ordinary council estate properties”, but then again, who knows, maybe this is the norm where Mr McGoldrick lives?
While Mr McGoldrick is keen on showing us how to pay the bills, he makes no reference to HfI’s excessive rate of interest on the final three-year period? Leaseholders don’t need instruction in how to pay, what they need is control of overpriced contracts, which deliver sub-standard work, and a fair and just billing regime, so bills are justified and acceptable.
As for his ludicrous statement that 75 per cent of leaseholders are satisfied. If this were true, why would 76 per cent of leaseholders recently have voted to pay an extra service charge of £20 to establish an independent leaseholders’ association to protect themselves from HfI’s wildly excessive treatment?
HfI does not subsidise the Federation of Islington Tenants’ Associations. Islington Council funds this organisation by grant, and HfI merely facilitates its delivery as a management agent. If HfI really cared about tenants’ welfare, it would simply enforce the contractual provisions entered into by all residents upon occupation, and thereby eliminate anti-social behaviour at a stroke.
Dr BRIAN POTTER
Chairman, Islington Leaseholders Forum,
Federation of Islington Tenants Associations
* I’M stinking rich! So are all my fellow leaseholders. Conversation on the Highbury estate these days is all about the relative merits of the Aston Martin or the new Lamborghini but the Maserati has its supporters. Decisions, decisions.
According to Homes for Islington boss Eamon McGoldrick, we’ve all made so much money on rising property prices that we can afford to pay HfI any amount they care to charge us.
And why not? Double glazing and a bit of pointing at £20,000 a go sounds like the bargain of a lifetime, especially when the new windows leak and cost twice as much, as they do on Spa Green estate.
But Eamon is simply trying to defend the indefensible by attacking leaseholders, many of whom bought on the market at very high prices.
RICHARD ROSSER
Islington Leaseholders Forum
Highbury New Park, N5
|
 |
|
| |
| Your Comments : |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
