Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Some victims of increases: Right-to-buy former council tenants are to march over huge charges they face

Caroline Merrell
Saturday 23 April 1994 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

CASE STUDY No 1

THE WHITFIELDS, Pat and James, bought their council flat in Leyton, east London, five years ago for just over pounds 16,000. 'The service charge started off at pounds 250 a year. The next year it rose to about pounds 600,' Mrs Whitfield said, adding that she did not get any service for the money she had to pay.

'Everything is broken down and nothing is ever done,' she said.

Arrears on the couple's service charge built up to just over pounds 1,150. When it reached that amount, the mortgage provider paid the outstanding debt and added it to the original loan. The Whitfields pay extra interest payments on the mortgage.

But the council is now suing the Whitfields for a further pounds 153. They are contesting this claim and fighting for the restoration of the pounds 1,150. Theirs is one of the test cases.

CASE STUDY No 2

SHEILA HAWKINS bought her two-bedroom flat in east London with her husband 10 years ago for pounds 13,000, with a 50 per cent discount. She said she started off on a relatively low service charge, which then began to escalate.

Mrs Hawkins withheld the service charge because of problems with refurbishments. 'My flat was flooded several times because of the work that was being carried out by the council,' she said.

Mrs Hawkins has reached an out-of-court settlement with Waltham Forest Council for the pounds 250 nuisance costs caused by the extensive refurbishment of the building.

The council agreed to waive unpaid service charges of pounds 1,400, then mistakenly sent her a bill for some pounds 3,000 because they had not taken into account the settlement. After conceding its mistake, the council is to meet Mrs Hawkins to talk about an outstanding amount of about pounds 1,400.

'The experience has been horrific,' Mrs Hawkins said.

CASE STUDY No 3

RENE TURNHAM, a widow and old-age pensioner, bought her council flat in Fulham for pounds 13,000 just over 10 years ago and started off paying pounds 42 a month. The council then decided that her block - a mix of tenants and right-to-buy purchasers - needed major repairs including new windows and a roof.

Mrs Turnham has just received a final demand for what she owes - pounds 7,000. If she doesn't pay the outstanding amount, the council could start proceedings against her.

She said: 'We had a council property survey done when we bought the flat. My husband didn't feel we needed anything more.' The National Federation of Council Leaseholders is to plead with the Secretary of State on her behalf to challenge the service charge.

Hammersmith & Fulham Council said it had pounds 1.5m in outstanding service charges but was not actively pursuing tenants for the money pending the outcome of a court case being brought against another council concerning the responsibility for the cost of replacement windows in a council block. It added that all right-to-buy tenants would have been made aware of their responsibilities when they bought their homes.

(Photograph omitted)

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in