Carlton Mansions co-op, Coldharbour Lane, Brixton - history and news

[Vibrant-Hubb]

The people of Carlton Mansions and other Co-ops saved buildings the council had no interest in for thirty years. These people lived through riots and poverty and bad policing, literally on the "front-line" in Brixton and surrounding areas (a rather wonderful place to live if you were outside of majority culture - gay, runaway, artist, vulnerable, radical - but also tough and full of incident and some violence). Through this "resilient communities" were formed and now many of these long-termers are people with great local knowledge and social conscience who contribute in many ways to the local community.

These are people that Lambeth council owes a debt to, has a duty to support. Lambeth needs to wake up to this. Oval House doesn't want Carlton Mansions evicted. The building must be fixed up and these people allowed to live in peace in the homes they've fought for and clung to and pretty much built themselves out of wrecks of buildings.

In the 70s the authorites wanted to demolish everything. Now they want to keep the facades and ditch the people. Rachel Heywood and all of them, you should feel shame. Shame on you. Particularly as the new fire assessment concludes the risk at Carlton Mansions is "tolerable". It is in fact Lambeth Council that poses "Intolerable risk".

 

[equationgirl]

Why were the houses next to the mansions demolished? Was it for some for of regeneration plan that never happened?

 

[Brixton Hatter]

Why were the houses next to the mansions demolished? Was it for some for of regeneration plan that never happened?

A motorway through the centre of Brixton: http://www.urban75.org/brixton/features/barrier1.html

There have been "slum" clearances all over Lambeth - in fact all over London - since WW2 and especially in the 60s and 70s. Often these were not "slums" but actually decent housing....decent housing where the occupants were deemed to be living in "poverty" - hence the 'need' for redevelopment. There was quite a lot of stuff on this in that recent BBC2 documentary about how various streets in London have changed over the years (sorry can't remember the name.)

 

[cesare]

http://www.urban75.org/brixton/features/barrier1.html

There have been "slum" clearances all over Lambeth - in fact all over London - since WW2 and especially in the 60s and 70s. Often these were not "slums" but actually decent housing....decent housing where the occupants were deemed to be living in "poverty" - hence the 'need' for redevelopment. There was quite a lot of stuff on this in that recent BBC2 documentary about how various streets in London have changed over the years (sorry can't remember the name.)

The Secret History Of Our Streets

 

[equationgirl]

Fourteen 50-storey skyscrapers??? What was the architect thinking???

 

[Brixton Hatter]

Fourteen 50-storey skyscrapers??? What was the architect thinking???

A knighthood perhaps?

 

[Gramsci]

What the council statement fails to address is what will happen to this building after the co-op has been evicted?

It appears to me that the council want the building and see the tenants as an inconvenience to be got rid of.

The building will be left empty for up to two years until the Somerleyton road project goes on site.

Council do not deny this but in public statements are coy about it.

 

[Gramsci]

OMG I had forgotten how this looked back in the day, there was a really baaad barber at the bottom of Carlton mansions he terrified me as a child and hated dreads of any sort.. Arrgh bad memories.

Critical1

Its probably the same barber who was there for years. Someone in Coop took photos of him and his shop when he retired. He was one of the "Windrush" generation. Nice guy imo.

 

[Gramsci]

Hi Gramsci
I've been away and only just heard of your situation.
I feel your pain and rage.

FWIW, I'd advise you to get the best legal help possible.
Devonshire's are really, really unpleasant and aggressive (which seems to be what makes them attractive to Lambeth), and they hire similar barristers to represent them in court.
But, they make mistakes and push their luck, and can be beaten.

Let me know if there's anything I can do,

Casaubon

Legal help is in hand. Cannot say more here.

Devonshires do have a reputation. The use of an injunction was there idea as far as I now. The Council are still pursuing an injunction.

On May 22nd both a possession order and injunction is sought for each flat.

 

[Gramsci]

Not really been in here- so only saw this from Brixton Society a few days ago. Unutterably shit, Lambeth really are quite vile. Am writing strongly worded email right now- good luck

Thanks Manter.

Good to see you back on boards.

 

[Gramsci]

The Council tested a new idea last Thursday to house Carlton Mansions "residents" in Windrush square in tents.

 

[free spirit]

on a slightly more tongue in cheek tip than my previous posts..... if they're changing the use of the building from residential to commercial, does that not mean that it can then be squatted if empty without the new squatting laws being applied?

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

LJAG is pleased to announce that Lambeth council leader, Lib Peck,
will be talking at:

our agm on Wednesday 15 May

... on the subject of regeneration. This is your chance to question the new leader of Lambeth council and discover her vision for the borough.
Please come you are all welcome; this year we are proud to be holding our agm at

Sunshine International Arts, at 209 Coldharbour Lane (find it under the run of arches opposite Loughborough Junction station).

The event starts at 7.30pm and refreshments will be served.

Just in case anyone has a question or two they might like to ask.

 

[editor]

Here's the full press release. This could be an interesting discussion

Leader of Lambeth Council to speak at LJAG AGM

We are delighted to announce that Lib Peck, Leader of Lambeth Council will be coming to LJAG’s AGM to talk to us about regeneration. This is your chance to question the new leader of Lambeth Council and discover her vision for the borough.

The AGM will take place on Wednesday 15 May at 7.30pm and we’re thrilled that it will be at Sunshine Arts – the leading carnival arts studio, which just happens to be in Loughborough Junction.

The venue is at 209a Coldharbour Lane, in the railway arches opposite the station.

We will also be appointing trustees to LJAG, which is now a registered charity. If you would like to put yourself forwards, or see a copy of our Articles of Association, please email ljactiongroup@gmail.com to request a nomination form. Forms will also be available at the AGM.
If you have any questions about what is involved please contact Anthea Masey on 07799 621582 or email antheamasey@btinternet.com. You may find the essential trustee guidance from the Charity Commission useful.

http://www.loughboroughjunction.org/leader-of-lambeth-council-to-speak-at-ljag-agm

 

[ChrisSouth]

I was going to ask about that. Whatever happened to a fair use policy?

There's not really such a thing as fair use policy. There is a nebulous concept of 'fair dealing', but it's neither fair, nor dealing. Also, it's never been tested in a court of law, so no one knows how it works. If in doubt, don't use any material created by anyone else, unless you have their express permission.

 

[laptop]

There's not really such a thing as fair use policy. There is a nebulous concept of 'fair dealing', but it's neither fair, nor dealing. Also, it's never been tested in a court of law, so no one knows how it works. If in doubt, don't use any material created by anyone else, unless you have their express permission.

As a matter of fact, "fair dealing" is:

a) extensively tested in the courts; and

b) much more clearly defined in statute law than is US "fair use" - it specifies the kinds of use that are permitted, whereas the US sets out some general principles and leaves it to the person whose work is nicked to go to court to find out whether they've been met.

 

[Winot]

As a matter of fact, "fair dealing" is:

a) extensively tested in the courts; and

b) much more clearly defined in statute law than is US "fair use" - it specifies the kinds of use that are permitted, whereas the US sets out some general principles and leaves it to the person whose work is nicked to go to court to find out whether they've been met.

Yep. Here's the section.

 

[DrRingDing]

http://openhouse2013.com/

https://www.facebook.com/OpenHouseLDN

It's a friendly space, with events from mid afternoon until evening, dinner around 7pm, open every day this week, closing on Sunday. "Whether you’re a council tenant facing the bedroom tax or a squatter threatened with eviction, a private renter dealing with a dodgy landlord or a member of housing co-op fighting to survive – this space is for you. This affects all of us. The bedroom tax and housing benefit caps are starting to bite, squatting derelict buildings is being criminalised, the rents are rising exponentially, and many people are being forced from their homes by landlords, local councils, bailiffs and police. We can no longer afford for housing to be an individual problem. We need come together to organise around our collective housing needs, share stories and tactics. Together, we can build a movement of practical solidarity to resist social cleansing and gentrification, and reclaim housing and the city for the people who live in it. So come down to a skillshare on legal observing, a workshop on how to set up a housing co-op, a Q&A session on tenants’ rights, a talk on gentrification, a game of capture the flag, or just for a cup of tea and a chat." GET DOWN! See you there.

Have you guys been down to this?

You may get some support!

 

[Brixton Hatter]

http://openhouse2013.com/

https://www.facebook.com/OpenHouseLDN

Gramsci boohoo

 

[CH1]

There's not really such a thing as fair use policy. There is a nebulous concept of 'fair dealing', but it's neither fair, nor dealing. Also, it's never been tested in a court of law, so no one knows how it works. If in doubt, don't use any material created by anyone else, unless you have their express permission.

Take your point - but in the case of old GLC/LCC archive stuff taken for the public record it seems a bit draconian for the City of London to use a commercial contract and charge rates for a community use.

 

[Gramsci]

Back in court on Wednesday.

Thanks to all who have given support here in there posts.

The whole thing has put a great deal of stress on the whole Coop and Coop members.

As one Coop member said we have been deluged with scary paperwork from Devonshires. Including Devonshires asking for costs etc.

I have been talking to lawyer over last week to work out a defence.

Devonshires / Lambeth are going for an Injunction and Possession Order. The possession order concentrates on Carlton Mansions being part of the "Short Life" stock up for "recall" and "disposal". So Council argument is (I think) that they have right to empty the building whether there is fire risk or not.

Though latest paperwork from Devonshires ( been getting big bulging envelopes of it. I am starting to think its psychological tactic to scare people) has qualified the statement about "disposal" saying that the building is earmarked for a regeneration scheme. So I assume they mean they have right to get possession orders to empty it for the scheme rather than disposal by auction like other "Short Life".

So no acknowledgement that Coop took part in Somerleyton road project consultations.

Inside Housing have a piece on the Mansions.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

Back in court on Wednesday.

hope all goes well

 

[free spirit]

so they want to redevelop the area by first cleansing it of the long term community at the heart of the area.

sounds about right for council regeneration.

However, have the actually finished the consultation process yet?

If not then they should not be prejudicing its results by kicking you out - what if after the consultation ends, it turns out that the best thing for the project would actually have been for you to have remained at the heart of the regeneration?

Pretty sure you can string them up on that point.

 

[laptop]

Back in court on Wednesday.

Good luck!

Devonshires / Lambeth are going for an Injunction and Possession Order. The possession order concentrates on Carlton Mansions being part of the "Short Life" stock up for "recall" and "disposal". So Council argument is (I think) that they have right to empty the building whether there is fire risk or not.

That would depend on what the court reckons the lease the co-op has from the council means - which might not be what it originally said...

Though latest paperwork from Devonshires ( been getting big bulging envelopes of it. I am starting to think its psychological tactic to scare people) has qualified the statement about "disposal" saying that the building is earmarked for a regeneration scheme. So I assume they mean they have right to get possession orders to empty it for the scheme rather than disposal by auction like other "Short Life".

Not sure how that would affect the demand for a possession order - except as mood music for the judge - it's not like they're needing a Compulsory Purchase Order thingy.

 

[teuchter]

Regardless of whether or not Lambeth have the right to empty the property (for whatever reason) - as far as I can see, the whole way they have gone about it is rotten, shows no regard for the people who live in the building, and they should be ashamed of themselves.

Good luck in the court hearing today.

 

[quimcunx]

Good luck tomorrow!

 

[peterkro]

Good luck to Gramsci and the residents.It may be possible to make a case under the European human rights act, something that may stay the position for months if not years.

 

[editor]

Yes good luck from me as well. Lambeth should hang their heads in shame for the way they've gone about this.

 

[dotdotdot]

Good luck tomorrow!

In case it's of any use, Lambeth told a lot of us Shortlife residents, at the beginning of the recall of our homes, that all our houses were going to go to Notting Hill Housing, and that Notting Hill needed vacant possession of all properties.
Turned out, when Kate Hoey contacted Notting Hill CEO, that vacant possession wasn't needed at all... Lambeth had made it up.
Even after we had this confirmed, Devonshires were still citing it in court as the reason for getting possession.
Beware of everything they say!

Formal request for the Co-operative Party to Suspend Lib Peck, Pete Robbins and Steve Reed wp.me/p3uiFC-5Y

 

[Brixton Hatter]

Good luck Gramsci boohoo and all at Carlton Mansions with the court case today.

I'm still fuming about this. Lambeth are a disgrace.

Pete Robbins, Rachel Heywood and every other bastard councillor and official involved in this: may you drink for all eternity from the putrid, stinking puddles of Electric Lane.