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

[ViolentPanda]

why the fuck to they want money off you? That really is just insane fucking bullshit. (not my most articulate comment but seriously....)

Could be one of several things:

1) Running tally per tenant of what Lambeth's action will cost each tenant if the co-op loses.
2) scare tactic utilising the above.
3) tactic telling each co-op member how much they'll be expected to "pay in" to court if they resist Lambeth and take their protestations forward.

 

[ViolentPanda]

<<waves>> Sorry, @ViolentPanda's pitchforks haven't got me yet

Damn those useless peasants! You give them one simple task...

 

[ViolentPanda]

ahha, get you, thx. Seriously nasty behaviour

But also absolutely predictable.

 

[ViolentPanda]

My case ended satisfactorily for me. But my blood still boils when I think of how Lambeth spent so much time and money persecuting and destroying our community.

One of the things that annoy me about the whole ongoing saga w/r/t the mansion blocks is the strong whiff of ideologically-fueled action that comes off of the council (despite any claims they make that this is purely an issue of realising "best value" from assets). 20 and 30 years ago, the council got pilloried by the media for acting ideologically, but it seems that if your ideology matches that of the media, there's little comeback. You can shaft people left and right, as long as you're pursuing some version of neoliberalistic socio-economics.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Guardian etc must be interested? For a council that is making cuts and whines regularly about having no money (though the regular glossy magazine they put through our door makes me a bit suspicious of that at the best of times) to be pissing money away like this is pretty shabby

Unfortunately, one of the "justifications" (more like "excuses" in my opinion) for this behaviour is that they're attempting to recover an asset that will enable them to put some money into council coffers against "austerity cuts". In reality, it probably (yes, I'm a cynic!) means money to keep Council Tax frozen at a more appealing rate to Nu-Brixtonites.

 

[leanderman]

If the tenants are paying rent I can't see why the council wants them out now ahead of the agreed time, and before there is any clear plan for the site.

It's irrational as well as inhuman

 

[newbie]

I think inhuman may be a bit strong, but Lambeth has always been irrational. And incompetent. My detailed experience of their legal department is from a long time ago, around the time squats were first getting shortlife licenses and the co-ops were forming. Over the years they've come a cropper on a number of occasions because the licenses were badly drafted, or poorly administered, or just forgotten about. I'm pretty sure at least one house became owned by the longterm occupier because the license was such a mess. I have no reason to believe that either the councillors or the legal department is any more competent now.

So I'd suggest getting someone good to look forensically at every possible angle on the license. Look to see if it's actually granted tenancies, eg because it's not legally in force and money they've taken can only be rent under the terms of the act, or some other technical detail.

fwiw the key barrister in those days, who helped numerous squats and shortlifes against Lambeth, was David Watkinson. He must have a lot of files, and a lot of background understanding. A glance down his list of cases shows he may still have the passion?

 

[Gramsci]

So I'd suggest getting someone good to look forensically at every possible angle on the license. Look to see if it's actually granted tenancies, eg because it's not legally in force and money they've taken can only be rent under the terms of the act, or some other technical detail.

This issue is now part of the case.

Our case is now not just about alleged fire risk.

Another reason the Council/ Devonshires give for getting the "occupiers" out is that the building is part of a larger regeneration project. So is needed to be emptied out.

The constructive role the Coop has played in the Somerleyton road project is not acknowledged.

What gets me is that Barratts and Tescos are treated with kid gloves by Lambeth. ( Brixton square affordable housing and the market traders car park).

 

[Gramsci]

Gramsci is everyone back in the building now then? I'd assumed you had to stay out until the court hearing.

At the first hearing the Judge would not hear the injunction. So it never took effect. The injunction would have residents barred from the building. Also it was done "ex parte". Devonshires sent out day before court the injunction papers. Ex parte means that you do not have to give defendants any notice. I do not know exactly what the Judge said but it appears he did not think this was proper procedure. Which should be to get possession order. Injunctions are held ex parte for cases like stalking and harrassment etc were it clearly is not good idea to have the defendant knowing about it.

Two Ward Cllrs after the first hearing were told about the attempt at an injunction. They were asked to get the Council to stop the injunction action. As a Labour Council should not imo use the law in this way.

Have had no feedback from Ward Cllrs.

Leaving everything else aside I am appalled at the way a Labour Cooperative Council thinks its fine to do this to people who are not harassing anyone.

I saw what this did to people. It strikes fear into people. The night before people were not sure whether the next day they would be barred , under penalty , from there homes.

Its appalling that residents have to rely on an unelected Judge to protect them.

 

[Gramsci]

Over in Clapham and Stockwell 'Shortlife', Lambeth are threatening £300+ per week 'occupation charge' if we fight possession in court (backdated to the termination of the license in 2011), then court costs are to be claimed on top of that... it's simple intimidation. Fortunately I'm dirt poor...

I agree its all about intimidating people. The Council acting like a bully imo.

 

[Casaubon]

fwiw the key barrister in those days, who helped numerous squats and shortlifes against Lambeth, was David Watkinson. He must have a lot of files, and a lot of background understanding. A glance down his list of cases shows he may still have the passion?

David Watkinson was my barrister, and I can't speak highly enough of him.
His experience in this sort of situation is huge, and it was his quiet drive and determination that powered my case through some very sticky patches.
If he's still working in this field I'd say it would definitely be worth getting at least an opinion from him.

 

[Gramsci]

Well DameTessa Jowell MP is very clear & silent... as is Cllr Rachel Heywood...
This is what they said at the CO-OPERATIVE PARTY ANNUAL CONFERENCE 2011

Thanks critical1 . I have been following your other thread about URH.

Interesting quotes. Googled Tessa. Here she is on the community:

Fifty years ago, the Labour movement was at the centre of community life – the local trade union, the Co-op shop, the worker’s education groups and the brass band. The change that we brought was not just embodied in what we talked about and stood for but also in what we did: the services we provided, the campaigns we fought and the gains that we made for our communities – not just when we were in power but also from opposition.
The formation of co-operative councils and our work as community organisers can rebuild those long-term relationships that will once again put us at the centre of our communities.

I do not know how Devonshires fits into Lambeth Coop Council.

Nor do I see how what is happening to Carlton Mansions is putting the Labour Council at the centre of community life and rebuilding long term relationships putting the Labour party at the centre of the community.

 

[dotdotdot]

Guardian etc must be interested? For a council that is making cuts and whines regularly about having no money (though the regular glossy magazine they put through our door makes me a bit suspicious of that at the best of times) to be pissing money away like this is pretty shabby

unfortunately, the Guardian's approach has, so far, been 'give the co-op council a chance', as though destroying housing co-ops and evicting people is a small teething problem...

 

[dotdotdot]

David Watkinson was my barrister, and I can't speak highly enough of him.
His experience in this sort of situation is huge, and it was his quiet drive and determination that powered my case through some very sticky patches.
If he's still working in this field I'd say it would definitely be worth getting at least an opinion from him.

I think David Watkinson recently retired. Jan Luba is someone to look at though, same chambers, I think

 

[el-ahrairah]

i just want to come on this thread to say that not a single cllr, nor MP, bothered to reply to any of my letters about this.

 

[dotdotdot]

http://www.lgcplus.com/research/sen...e=Latest-Local-Government-News&contentID=2249

Lambeth attracts DCLG fury for defying senior pay rules

23 May, 2013 | By Kaye Wiggins

Lambeth LBC has defied Eric Pickles’ rule that salaries and payouts over £100,000 should be vetted by councillors from all parties.


When Mr Pickles announced the move, he said it would make local authority pay “democracy-proof”.

But councillors at the Labour-run London borough have said it would bring “significant delay to the recruitment process” if full council had to approve the highest pay packets.

They have also said there would be a “delay in implementing redundancies in a timely fashion” if severance packages worth more than £100,000 had to be discussed at full council meetings.

Under guidance from the Department of Communities & Local Government, published in February, full council should be given the opportunity to vote before salaries or severance packages worth more than £100,000 are approved.

But Lambeth council papers say: “In light of the… limited discretion available to the council when setting senior pay it is recommended that [current] arrangements are sufficient so as to comply with the intention of [DCLG guidance] and should therefore continue unchanged.”

The paper was approved at a full council meeting on Wednesday.

Lambeth has 16 posts with salaries of more than £100,000.

UPDATE: Local government minister Brandon Lewis said in a statement: “The taxpayers of Lambeth should take note that the ruling councillors have failed to get a grip on the town hall rich list. The council should be held to account for giving the green light to greater secrecy and uncontrolled pay packets for top bosses.”

 

[editor]

i just want to come on this thread to say that not a single cllr, nor MP, bothered to reply to any of my letters about this.

Could you list their names here, for reference?

 

[el-ahrairah]

all the ones that someone quoted earlier - i took the names and email addresses from this thread.

 

[Gramsci]

all the ones that someone quoted earlier - i took the names and email addresses from this thread.

Thats really bad. The Labour lot have gone silent on this.

 

[shifting gears]

Could you list their names here, for reference?

I emailed:

Councillor Rachel Heywood
Councillor Matt Parr
Councillor Pete Robbins
Councillor Donatus Anyanwu
Councillor Parmpreet Tatla

And got fuck all back, save the stock email posted earlier from Rachel Heywood, which, for the record, stated:

" Our colleague Cllr Pete Robbins, Cabinet member for Housing and Regeneration, will be responding in more detail on the issues that you and others have raised about Carlton Mansions but Matt Donatus and I wanted to acknowledge the enquiries which have been sent to us in the meantime."

Councillors, collectively you're liars, charlatans, and worthless, lazy, corrupt wasters of space. Your indifference speaks volumes, and I will spread the word on your gross incompetence as far as I can.

I propose, again, someone starting a separate thread to monitor the councillors' behaviour, voting record, and general conduct with regard to their wards.

They cannot be allowed to get away with this sort of wilful disregard for the community.

 

[critical1]

They cannot be allowed to get away with this sort of wilful disregard for the community.

They all have to be held to account...

Critical1

 

[critical1]

I agree its all about intimidating people. The Council acting like a bully imo.

On the instruction of who.. Who do the officers take instructions from? Who does Lambeth Legal take instruction from?
follow the little rabbit and its trail of .... to find the

Spoiler

TRUTH

Critical1

 

[Gramsci]

http://www.lgcplus.com/research/sen...e=Latest-Local-Government-News&contentID=2249

Lambeth attracts DCLG fury for defying senior pay rules

23 May, 2013 | By Kaye Wiggins


But Lambeth council papers say: “In light of the… limited discretion available to the council when setting senior pay it is recommended that [current] arrangements are sufficient so as to comply with the intention of [DCLG guidance] and should therefore continue unchanged.”

On a general note I observe that Labour Cllrs do not question officers enough.

There is the old question whether an administration is officer led or Cllr led.

 

[critical1]

All of this is the norm for Lambeth, no wonder they have ignored and bullied us relentlessly, they've got so used to the whole stinking way of behaving, they can't even smell the huge pile of shit they continually excrete, how sad this makes me, so underhand full of dirty tricks, pains me to say, at least the Tories face you directly when stabbing you to death!!!

Critically
Critical1

 

[leanderman]

They cannot be allowed to get away with this sort of wilful disregard for the community.

They all have to be held to account...

Critical1

Agreed, in this case. But one person's idea of 'community' is very different to another's. it's not a clear-cut concept.

I'd be surprised if, in any one area, the whole 'community's ideas were aligned.

 

[Gramsci]

Agreed, in this case. But one person's idea of 'community' is very different to another's. it's not a clear-cut concept.

I'd be surprised if, in any one area, the whole 'community's ideas were aligned.

Community was aligned on keeping the Market traders car park.

Community was aligned on keeping the Rec.

In both above cases the community was aligned despite the best efforts of the Council.

And when I say the community was aligned I mean that both of the above were supported by a cross section of the diverse communities in Brixton.

 

[Winot]

Community was aligned on keeping the Market traders car park.

How do you know?

 

[Brixton Hatter]

i just want to come on this thread to say that not a single cllr, nor MP, bothered to reply to any of my letters about this.

Same here. Though one replied to say "Pete Robbins will reply" but he never did.

Fuck them all.

 

[TopCat]

I emailed:

Councillor Rachel Heywood
Councillor Matt Parr
Councillor Pete Robbins
Councillor Donatus Anyanwu
Councillor Parmpreet Tatla

And got fuck all back, save the stock email posted earlier from Rachel Heywood, which, for the record, stated:

They cannot be allowed to get away with this sort of wilful disregard for the community.

What are you proposing doing to hold them to account?

 

[Gramsci]

How do you know?

I took part in the campaign so saw that a wide range of people supported the market traders.