Brixton's Kaff Bar to close in July, as landlords triple the rent
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
Did you ask them?
editor
hiraethified
I asked the person who's just had to give up on four years of his hard work and lay off all his staff, and he seemed pretty sure that's what happened.
But if you can locate these mystery landlords, please feel free to present their side of the story.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
I'm finding this all rather bizarre. Three posters hinting or agreeing that there may be another side to the story, yet seemingly have either no evidence of such, or are choosing to not say. Ed says he's already tried to get a comment from the landlords and hasn't had any luck (which doesn't surprise me tbh) and yet he's not supposed to write a piece about its closure for what it clearly a much loved place (and the reasons as he understands them) unless he's managed to get a comment from the landlords first.
Sorry, very dubious indeed.
Sorry, very dubious indeed.
I don't think he said he tried to get a quote did he?
leanderman
Street Party: July 2
Kaff is a real loss.
I suppose the landlords are entitled to their building back but it is a dirty trick to demand tripled rent.
If they want to set up their own bar there - as has been suggested - why couldn't they just be honest about it?
If they don't want to set up a bar, they are being greedy.
I suppose the landlords are entitled to their building back but it is a dirty trick to demand tripled rent.
If they want to set up their own bar there - as has been suggested - why couldn't they just be honest about it?
If they don't want to set up a bar, they are being greedy.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Well I've no idea to what extent Ed may or may not have tried. But I suspect, that it would prove incredibly difficult to get anything out of them anyway - if my experience of trying to track and get responses from landlords to sort out problems (especially with empty businesses/problems/contracts) is anything to go on. And if its for a blog/media outlet, then the outcome might be 'no comment' or 'speak to our solicitors' from them anyway. Not that Ed actually has any obligation to do that if he wants to run a piece based on the information he has.
Not that's really the point - it's the repeated snide accusation on this thread that 'there's another side to this' which is then met with absolutely no evidence to the contrary being forwarded by those people doing so. And then to try and place some kind of blame or emphasis on Ed to do that work? Nah, put up or shut the fuck up.
But if the information he has is incomplete, because he hasn't tried to ascertain if there is another side to it then isn't that relevant?
Saying that you shouldn't try because it probably wouldn't work or that it would be difficult seems a bit defeatist.
I'm not suggesting that he should spend an inordinate amount of time on it but he could have emailed them maybe?
Blagsta
Minimum cage, maximum cage
Load of snidey bollocks. Put up or shut up.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Surely, where more than one person is concerned, there are usually two or more sides to a story?
I understood the implication to be that they had originally refused to renew the lease because one of the three landlords had said they wanted to start up their own business again, after it had failed in the recession. Kaff owner suggested he didn't believe they were up to it, although didn't say why. I'm not sure that's relevant anyway.
There is no clarity as to why things then changed to the triple rent scenario but there are several reasons this could be, including, just as a for instance, the possibility that he was effectively bidding against one of the three landlords (who would not have to pay his own share of the rent); or that he was refusing to leave and a rent rise was simply the easiest/cheapest/most effective way to achieve that (both speculation).
What Kaff owner did say is that the landlords were quite straight with him about not wanting to sign a longer lease at the outset. He asked, they refused, but he went ahead anyway. I think he said in his account that in retrospect that he probably should have thought harder about whether to go ahead. To me, this is the most important thing. What were the reasonable expectations at the outset when contracts were first signed.
I do recall when the place was on the market in the middle of the recession that I was surprised at just how cheap it was given is size and how low the premium was, if indeed there even was one. It was clearly a pretty desperate situation. Because of the price, I was almost tempted to give it a go myself. I'm not surprised if what people are prepared to pay for it has tripled since the middle of the recession when everything down that way was failing or closed.
So, I don't feel that I know what has happened. But I think that there is plenty of evidence in Steve's own account that we do not have the whole story. No one owes us that story. But neither do we have to accept the only account we do have as full and final.
Whatever the reasons, it's clearly pretty tragic for Kaff and everyone who worked there. Even though I don't buy into all the "real affordable community cocktail bar" stuff I did think it was a great bar and I think is a real shame that it has gone. I always recommended it to people looking for a good relaxed night out. It'll be missed for sure.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Well indeed but until someone offers up some evidence to that effect. As I say, I just found the tone and somewhat snidey and repeated questioning that 'there was another side to the story' and the implication that somehow Ed was either not telling it all, not trying hard enough to find out, or that he somehow shouldn't write a story on a blog (and he's not a newspaper journo FFS!) about a place he loved and based on the information he had to hand unless he also tracked down the landlords and got a comment from them too, was, well dubious.
It's not like its unheard of for landlords to be cunts pushing for the $, especially in areas going through gentrification (and more aggressively so under the current state of neo-liberalism and the backdrop of austerity).
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
God forbid anyone is unfair to the poor old landlords.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
God forbid anyone is unfair to the poor old landlords.
Won't somebody please think of the landlords
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
Won't somebody please think of the landlords
I bet they're raising the rent to pay for operations for lepers. And look at the thanks they get for it.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
It's not unheard of, I agree. Its also not unheard of for businesses to go under and offer stop gap leases. I don't know what the truth is here. I'm just not convinced that there wasn't a little bit of over optimism when setting up the lease.
I went to see a friend's shop mid fit out today. Looked good but I noticed a couple of "missed opportunities" design wise. He agreed but said he only had a guaranteed lease for two years (he was sub letting and his landlord's own head lease was due to expire so there was no negotiation to be had in the time frame) and, although he felt confident he would be able to renegotiate at the end, he had to plan for the possibility that he could be turfed out.
As it happens in his case, the head lessee (his landlord's landlord) is a charity.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
And if you ask, and no comment is forthcoming?
I'll clue you into what editors great and small told journalists in those circumstances;
"They had their chance, and they chose not to take it".
And off the story would go to the compositors.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
I do hope you're not a journalist, because you display a very poor knowledge of just how tightly any journo, be they print, broadcast or web, has to be able to justify a story before publishing. You can't just slam up any old blarney. You have to be able to prove reasonable steps were made to fact-check. This is just as incumbent on one-man-and-his-horse publications as on national dailies.
You don't publish until you've taken all reasonable steps.
What makes you think he didn't?
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
Read Kaff owners piece on BB
This is the problem- landlords . And things like Pop and the BID are not the answer whatever Cllr Hopkins says.
Its affecting independent business. I know one who is struggling with increases from landlord and reckons might have to move out of Brixton.
What are needed are controls on rents and better safeguards in leases ( for tenants not the evil landlords)
This is the problem- landlords . And things like Pop and the BID are not the answer whatever Cllr Hopkins says.
Its affecting independent business. I know one who is struggling with increases from landlord and reckons might have to move out of Brixton.
What are needed are controls on rents and better safeguards in leases ( for tenants not the evil landlords)
editor
hiraethified
Why not, exactly? Pricing was very important to Steve, and they served up the cheapest cocktails in town. They were also the first to sell the Brixton Buzz beer (and not make a single bean on sales), and they kept on selling everything we could send their way - and often gave us a bit cash on top.
They were also the first to offer up a prize for the striking Ritzy workers when I organised a raffle. And that's just my own experiences - several other organisations/individuals all have their own tales of how the place helped them out.
I agree completely. That's my point! All he did was talk to the one person who is likely to give a biased (conscious or unconscious) opinion.
editor
hiraethified
Feel free to try and get a statement from the landlords rather than whining here. I failed but perhaps you can show me how it's done.
Tolpuddle
Cooperative council-my arse.
On a purely practical point, I hope the owner has surrendered the licence, this would reduce the value of the premises as a new operator would have to re-apply and under the new policy might find it harder to get a late licence (assuming they had a late licence that is)
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
And you know that's "all he did"...how exactly?
You're making suppositions based on your own bias.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Along those lines, their use was always contrary to the conditions in their planning permission anyway - A3 conditioned not to operate past midnight or be audible from neighbouring premises. Any new venture should bear that in mind when setting up. They would need to prove the breach had been operating for at least 10 years unbroken to be safe from enforcement. Which a) it hasn't and b) would probably need Kaff's assistance to evidence.
That will have little bearing on whether they can get a licence, mind you.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
What ALL of us need to bear in mind is that very little of what happens is motivated by the concern of councillors for the long-term "health" of Brixton and its many communities.
A lot of it is motivated by box-ticking in order to access funding, and by political careerists attempting to make their mark. bear in mind that the likes of Hopkins, Bennett and Pete "no seat" Robbins are here in Lambeth as an unfortunately-necessary (for them and us) stage in their rise to sitting in the Commons. We might think or know that Brixton BID is a near-worthless imposition on local traders, but to them it's another bullet point on the CV.
These things are a solution to nothing. At best they function in some areas as a revival of the old Chamber of Commerce, and at worst as an unnecessary financial drain on the traders they're imposed on.
Which is exactly why they won't happen.That need would put a brake on regeneration and gentrification,and that's something that isn't welcomed by the Town Hall, nor by most of those who sit in Westminster, especially Treasury ministers.
You didn't fail. You just didn't try
