32 STEWARDS HOLTE WALK - Follow up/ Calrification request to information request ref: 13377428
Received: 16 January 2025
The previous EIR response (ref: 13377428) states, Section 4 of the Housing Act 2004 states that ' it would be appropriate for any residential premises in their district to be inspected with a view to determining whether any category 1 or 2 hazard exists on those premises, the authority must arrange for such an inspection to be carried out' It is evident from your responses that the Council did not carry out such inspections on any privately owned homes so they have not met the condition that all those premises it identified as having a 'Category 1 Hazard and at risk of fire/ fire spread' have been inspected, only a tiny fraction selected from council tenanted properties which the Council maintains. 1.Please confirm that the Council could not determine the current state of 460+ residential properties, with 460+ different owners and 460+ different maintenance undertaken.2.Please clarify if the council had any actual evidence, in these circumstances, to issue the owner of 32 Stewards Holte Walk or any third party such as our conveyancer, with a letter claiming these alleged issues were present in this particular residential properties.3.Can the Council provide evidence of all considerations and consultations it took regarding the 460+ private homeowners that led to the issuance of an assumptive letter that contained no factual evidence relating to the homeowner property itself, considering the following:*There has been a single fire in the London Borough of Barnet on a separate estate containing housing stock that was built in the 1960-70s*There is no evidence that the fire spread was down to the wall cladding*The house in question had a pitched roof that contained fire break walls that 'were in place but not entirely fire rated' which is just as likely cause of fire spread.These consultations should be evidence based as the council has a duty to take appropriate and proportionate action in cases where 'serious hazards are identified'. As no investigations have been undertaken in private residences, no actual hazards could have been classified as identified!4.Can the council confirm that this was not part of their considerations when deciding to issue 460+ private homeowners with a letter that did not factually evidence any identified hazards.The Council has managed properties for decades so I doubt issues that render a home unmortgageable would have escaped it's considerations. The Council also has its own Legal and Governance department which should have been consulted in these matters considering unmortgageable properties sell for approximately 27% less than mortgagable homes. Based on an average price of £500k per home, that represented an approximate total £168 million wiped off the collective properties so it is not an insignificant consideration to 'not be aware of' Ignorance can never be an excuse for negligence.5.Can the Council please provide the costs per property type provided by your consultants.6.Considering all of these letters were hand delivered to residents, can the council confirm why a more precise cost was not applied to each letter that applied to the remediations for the specific property.
Outcome / Documents
- Response (all information to be supplied) - application/pdf - Download