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

[Frumious B.]

What I'd like to know is whether the council ever believed the fire risk to be 'intolerable'. Or did they choose to exaggerate it to get an injunction? Plus, do they have an ulterior motive for wanting the building to lie empty for 18 months?

 

[leanderman]

What I'd like to know is whether the council ever believed the fire risk to be 'intolerable'. Or did they choose to exaggerate it to get an injunction? Plus, do they have an ulterior motive for wanting the building to lie empty for 18 months?

It does look like a ruse.

 

[agricola]

Until the redevelopment in 2015, it's much better to collect rent from the tenants than kick them out and pay a fortune to secure an empty property.

It isnt their fortune, though.

 

[nagapie]

Maybe it's time to hit the counsellors with a barrage of emails again. As it has been established that the building is no longer an intolerable fire risk and Lambeth have said that they need to be out not because of that but because of the new development, why are our council taxes being spent on this costly exercise? Last time any responses were all about the fire risk so what will they have to say now?

 

[Gramsci]

Who was there from Devomnshires?

Well not sure if I really want to name Devonshires lot.

I got the impression today that there heart was not in it. As it was before in last two court appearances.

They are being directed by certain officers in Council. Who want the Coop out.

One officer said that possession orders for Carlton Mansions were going to be got sooner or later anyway.

The injunction proceedings , that were being justified by the "intolerable" fire risk, have been dropped. Its about getting possession orders now.

I have started to learn that a lot of what happens in court is a performance. Had a chat with the solicitor afterwards. Said this adversarial system is not my thing. Its not the way I like doing things. The barristers do not attack you personally. Its there job to give u hard time in witness box. They also act up for the Judge.

It is fascinating to watch. In afternoon I was supposed to be first up as witness. Never happened as both the Barristers and Judge had long discussion amongst themselves. We were just onlookers.

Barristers have different styles but its a different job to that of solicitor.

But resolving issues like this in an adversarial system is not imo a very good way to do it. Not exactly Coop Council.

The Council all along have refused any form of mediation.

 

[Dexter Deadwood]

Brixton is being destroyed by corporate spivs.

 

[Gramsci]

Maybe it's time to hit the counsellors with a barrage of emails again. As it has been established that the building is no longer an intolerable fire risk and Lambeth have said that they need to be out not because of that but because of the new development, why are our council taxes being spent on this costly exercise? Last time any responses were all about the fire risk so what will they have to say now?

That would be welcome if people emailed Cllrs again.

What Cllrs need to be told is that the Council:

Agree to let works be done that have been estimated by surveyor.The Coop has offered to fund the estimate of £16 800 plus vat.

and secondly The Coop has already agreed in open court, as its put in legal jargon, to go when the new development needs to start on site. So this should make it clear to Cllrs that possession is not an issue.


In court they were arguing that the estimated works to bring risk down from "Substantial" to "Tolerable" were not the point. They have refused to continuance this as an alternative . Council say they will not pay for it nor will they let anyone else stump up the money to do it.

Judge took a different view. He wanted a new expert who could comment on costed works. Turned out today that the new one appointed is the one that the defence had put forward to the Devonshires/ Council some time ago. Which Devonshires/ Council turned down.

The Judge will look at the "proportionality" of the decision of the Council to evict. The interesting legal issue here is that the defence is arguing an Article 8 human rights defence. Judge wanted written "skeleton" argument about this. It is merging "Public law" and human rights. I do not understand all of it. Its pushing the envelope. But that is how law develops. Have asked solicitor to see if that can be explained more.

The Council/ Devonshires are also trying to start to bring up issues that are not to do with the FRA. They are trying to move the goalposts.

 

[teuchter]

I don't know much about how these things work but it seems to me that if the court case is about an injunction to get you out because of intolerable fire risk, and the council are no longer pursuing this injunction, then the case is over and they should stop wasting everyone's time, and go about getting possession by normal means.

 

[Winot]

Have your side said anything about costs Gramsci? Because it sounds to me as if the other side is in danger of having to pay your legal costs on the fire issue.

 

[Gramsci]

Have your side said anything about costs Gramsci? Because it sounds to me as if the other side is in danger of having to pay your legal costs on the fire issue.

Costs were not mentioned. Not an issue yet. It is something hanging over us defendents if Council win.

 

[Gramsci]

I don't know much about how these things work but it seems to me that if the court case is about an injunction to get you out because of intolerable fire risk, and the council are no longer pursuing this injunction, then the case is over and they should stop wasting everyone's time, and go about getting possession by normal means.

And a committment has been made to court that people would leave when the building works need to start on the new development. So possession is not an issue now.

 

[Crispy]

EDIT: oops wrong thread

 

[Casaubon]

Thanks

Do feel like the cat with nine lives.

Thought it would be make or break today.

imo Council did not come out of this well today.

Well done Gramsci.
In my experience the council never come out well from any court proceedings. Their incompetence and moral bankruptcy don't endear them to judges, who seem to give judgement in the council's favour only when all options have been eliminated, and the council's legal case is proven beyond doubt.
I never thought I'd say this, but the (civil) justice system was pretty good to me, and others on Rushcroft Rd. Mind you, since then the current government has restricted access to 'justice' in many ways.

Living with this sort of shit hanging over you is horribly stressful. I hope you're all bearing up OK.

 

[Gramsci]

Well done Gramsci.

Living with this sort of shit hanging over you is horribly stressful. I hope you're all bearing up OK.

Thanks Casaubon.

It is horribly stressful. Chatting to another Coop member and she said that felt like crying over weekend. Its just the relief of getting through another gruelling two days in court. Only after its over do you realize how much it takes out of you. Felt very tired all this weekend. Its hard to think straight.

This is supposed to be a "Co-operative Council".

 

[Casaubon]

Thanks Casaubon.

This is supposed to be a "Co-operative Council".

Yeah, 'Co-operative Council'.
If you were being persecuted by a stereotypical 'evil property developer' it would be sort of understandable.
The council is meant to represent us, instead they're using huge amounts of our money to persecute a very long-standing group of residents who've formed a stable, constructive population through all the 'difficult' years. Now, your loyalty to the area is being repayed like this...............

I can't find words to express the contempt in which I hold the council, its elected members, and officers.

 

[teuchter]

The co-op members should be due some kind of compensation from the council, really, especially if the court decides in their favour.

 

[Brixton Hatter]

That would be welcome if people emailed Cllrs again.

Done

Really pleased things seem to be moving in your direction.

 

[Gramsci]

The co-op members should be due some kind of compensation from the council, really, especially if the court decides in their favour.

What the Coop would like is for the Cllrs in charge to halt the aggressive legal action. So far the Council officers in charge of this have directed Devonshires to refuse any form of mediation or looking at any alternative to eviction and boarding the Mansions up.

What I now see is that Devonshires are being told to pursue this action aggressively by officers.

 

[Gramsci]

Dear Urbanites,


At last court appearance the Council said they would be seeking vacant possession on basis of the Mansions being needed for redevelopment of the Somerleyton road project. This was separate from the fire risk which the Council first used to get vacant possession.

The Council confirmed date for the start of works is July 2015. Legal advice was that this reduced our chances considerably.

Once the legal process was started by the Council they were not going to let up. Every attempt at compromise was rejected.

The Council side were offered possession and date to leave at end of this year. Which seemed reasonable. This was rejected.

There has been legal discussions going on that I have not been able to post up about until now.

The Council side were also threatening people with costs which were becoming significant.

The eventual settlement made meant that costs would not be pursued by Council. It does mean that we could be out soon.

The last year has taken its toll on people. My health has suffered. Its been a lot of stress on Coop members.

I have seen over the last year the , so called , Coop Council break up my community.

Someone remarked to us recently that they were impressed that the Coop members had not fallen out with each other. The community kept together despite what was being done to it.

To make it clear not all the Council were trying their damn-est to get people out. Some in Council wanted us to stay on.

The Coop had made it clear to Council that they would not hold up the Somerleyton road project. It was when Coop left and how that was the issue.

Despite all this the Coop has stayed involved in the Somerleyton road scheme consultations. The Council officers involved in the Somerleyton road project have always welcomed the Coops input.

What saddens me is that over the years personally I have always tried to work with the Council. As has the Coop. I did not seek this confrontation with the Council.

The last year has been a culture shock. The Council, as an arm of the state, can throw a lot of resources and power against one if it decides. Our chances were always 50:50 at best.

I would like to mention that OvalhouseDB have always put a word in for the Coop to stay on until the Mansions was needed for development. The Coop has also had support from Ward Cllrs.

I would like to thank all those who have given support over last year.

 

[Belushi]

Really sorry to hear that mate, I know how much work you put in, for the co-op and the wider community.

 

[colacubes]

I'm so sorry to hear this Gramsci - you personally and the coop as a whole deserve a hell of a lot better than this. The council should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[teuchter]

Gramsci have you made any attempt to get this story picked up by a newspaper or anything? Things having been "settled" now, does that make doing that any easier? I think as many people as possible should know about what's happened here.

 

[Gramsci]

Gramsci have you made any attempt to get this story picked up by a newspaper or anything? Things having been "settled" now, does that make doing that any easier? I think as many people as possible should know about what's happened here.

I have a journalist who is going to do a piece on this. Will not say where here as I know Council look at this site.

Unfortunately Ben Morgan who worked at SLP has now left. He was always good on Short Life.

The other problem is that some journalists want a dramatic story. ie one asked me when bailiffs are coming (like at Rushcroft Road). Its unlikely to come to that. At the moment anyway.

 

[buscador]

Sad news. And appalling that the council seem to have gone about their business in such a vindictive manner, making your lives so difficult.

 

[Gramsci]

Sad news. And appalling that the council seem to have gone about their business in such a vindictive manner, making your lives so difficult.

The way I see it now is that the Council has two sides. The cuddly consulting the community side and the hard nosed we have made our decision and that’s that side.

Being "Short Life" was always playing cat and mouse with the Council. Been under threat before.

 

[nagapie]

The cuddly consulting the community side

I've personally never found anything cuddly about their consultations, rather how meaningless they make the word by making all their consultations exercises in how to remove anyone else's voice or power.

Good luck, Gramsci, I hope you are able to stay in Brixton. After all I still don't know what you look like as I was standing behind you at the Effra Social

 

[Gramsci]

One of the Coop members put this up on FB

There are currently 3 cats living at Carlton Mansions. They don't know they're facing eviction. They didn't have to go to court 3 times like the humans. I wonder how they'll feel leaving their lovely urban woodland. It's a tragedy that we must all leave this place.

 

[CH1]

I have a journalist who is going to do a piece on this. Will not say where here as I know Council look at this site.

Unfortunately Ben Morgan who worked at SLP has now left. He was always good on Short Life.

The other problem is that some journalists want a dramatic story. ie one asked me when bailiffs are coming (like at Rushcroft Road). Its unlikely to come to that. At the moment anyway.

Ben has moved to the Standard. He might still be interested.

 

[Gramsci]

Ben has moved to the Standard. He might still be interested.

I have been in contact with him. He does not have so much say there in what is covered.

What gets me about all this is that we have consistently said that we were not opposing the Councils right to possession. The Coop has been trying to stay long enough to finish the consultation for the Somerleyton road project. It would be much easier to do all the architectural surveys with us in situ. We have recently given access to the Council appointed architects to see the inside of the Mansions. Despite the other part of the Council trying to get Coop out.

 

[blossie33]

So sorry Gramski
You did as much as you could have possibly done in the situation, it must be so utterly frustrating.