Squire and Partners in Lambeth
- Thread starter ricbake
- Start date
editor
hiraethified
I responded:
So it'll be the well off and privileged talking about what to do with the poor. Nothing changes really.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Actually it's odd we still have a Post Office in Brixton. Stockwell and Streatham have closed and the West Norwood one closed about 20 years ago. Camberwell has signs pointing to it but seems to have disappeared into cyberspace.
I reckon there must be a requirement for "occasional" Post Offices to provide work for staff who cannot be compulsorily retired for legal reasons (such as having had their sub Post Office contracts terminated). Serving the public is not really on the menu.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Who is he then?
I noticed he wrote an article in the Observe last October on the HDV/Heygate/estate regeneration issue. It had this picture of the Heygate, which looks almost like a rural idyl compared with now.
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
Apologies. I must be misremembering a failed attempt to close it then.
editor
hiraethified
Thanks to Squires, Brixton's post office got shifted and downsized to make way for their multi-million showcase offices that are full of artistic space. The new, smaller Post Office has now introduced the unwelcome concept of al fresco queuing as the queues often snake out into the street, momentarily spoiling the Kensington vista around their offices.
Thanks to Squires?!. Sorry, I forgot the Post Office were making decent use of that building previously.
editor
hiraethified
Perhaps you weren't aware that they had a far bigger space with more counters before Squires bagsied the already overcrowded space for themselves. Now people have to queue in the street because the new PO is substantially smaller.
Still, Squires near-empty ground floor is apparently award winning stuff now. So stylish!
shakespearegirl
just worked out taglines
Who made the decision to move the post office to a smaller venue? Squires? I really doubt that! You can dislike them all you want but I’m pretty sure the post office chooses their own spaces
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
They did have two letter boxes outside though.
ricbake
working out how
Squires and their backers bought the whole property, not sure what Lease the Post Office had on the space they occupied previously. Squires were in charge of the whole development and the Post Office will have ended up with what they agreed. Had they wanted more space, the configuration of Volcano Coffee and Kaboola could have been different but only if they were given options from Squires for more space.
The queue arrangement in the new space isn't much different from before, the Post Office Staff have lost a huge amount of back office space.
shakespearegirl
just worked out taglines
Obviously don’t know the terms of the post office lease, but if they were mid lease the Post Office would have been in a pretty strong position to negotiate the space they wanted. My experience in recently negotiating a commercial lease is it’s hard for landlords to break them within the agreed term.
editor
hiraethified
Given the amount of POs that have closed down in recent years I don't imagine they were in the strongest position when the property they occupied was bought, but this is all speculation from me and you. The old PO was shit but the new, much smaller one is probably worse with bigger queues that stretch out into the street and - in my experience - more pissed off customers.
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
It is precisely because the amount of POs that have either closed or reduced their number of customer service positions over the last few years that we know that the Post Office owners are actively engaged in a policy of branch closure/ staff reduction. It is therefore nothing more than wild speculation to suggest the Post Office was either forced by S&P to have smaller premises or that it is not what the Post Office wanted in the first place. Indeed, I'm sure the PO are delighted with the new premises- those in charge that is, not the stuff or the customers of course.
But the bottom line is that to try to place blame on S&P for an action that is an active policy of the Post Office and has been carried out on hundreds if not thousands of other branches across the country seems preposterous to me.
But the bottom line is that to try to place blame on S&P for an action that is an active policy of the Post Office and has been carried out on hundreds if not thousands of other branches across the country seems preposterous to me.
editor
hiraethified
Speculation is all we've got but gentrification inevitably puts pressure on land and rent, and Squire and their millions have hyper gentrified that stretch of Brixton and turned it into an awful vision of Chelsea.
That argument makes no sense
editor
hiraethified
If your business is struggling and you're having to flog off assets as quickly as possible, that rarely puts you in the strongest negotiating position.
How do you like the Chelsea Strip, by the way? Do you feel it's an asset for Brixton residents?
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
That might be so, but it still has nothing to do with the claim that S&P have forced the Post Office into smaller premises- a claim which remains the wildest of speculations, extraordinarily unlikely, and flying in the face of the Post Office's policy and actions taken about their branches for the last few years.
shakespearegirl
just worked out taglines
It doesn’t at all. If you are within a contracted lease and the landlord decides to sell/develop the site you are in a really strong negotiating position. The last thing they want is to get into a disputed with a tenant like the post office who will have humongous departments who deal with leases. If the post office didn’t want to be in the new space they wouldn’t be
editor
hiraethified
I didn't use the word 'forced' although it would appear that Squire's decision to parachute their staff in from north London and set up a vast showcase building was a contributory factor in the Post Office being shunted out of their previous premises.
You didn’t use the word “forced”, you used the phrase “having to” which is synonymous.
How does it “appear” that Squires decision was “ a contributing factor”
Sounds like bullshit to me.
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
In post 346 you said,
I thought your argument was that no one knows what the lease arrangements were when Squires acquired property. This post 354 seems to say something different. Why?
Last edited:
Gramsci
Well-Known Member
One of the problems with the term "gentrification" is shown here. The way Capitalism works is not like a top down State dictatorship as in say Stalinist states where one has a direct oppressor. Some one to blame directly.
The Squires development is good example in microcosm come to think of it. The Post Office ( and I know someone in it so get good idea what's been happening) has changed from a publicly owned service to creeping privatisation. Squires are beneficiaries of thirty plus years of Neo liberalism. Doing well out of the privatisation of publicly owned space like Scotland yard/ Kings Cross.
Are Squires directly to blame? No. Is the capitalist system that leads to Chelsea style bar/ restaurant replacing post office now relegated to smaller site to blame? In the larger picture yes. I would think that is indisputable.
The Squires development is good example in microcosm come to think of it. The Post Office ( and I know someone in it so get good idea what's been happening) has changed from a publicly owned service to creeping privatisation. Squires are beneficiaries of thirty plus years of Neo liberalism. Doing well out of the privatisation of publicly owned space like Scotland yard/ Kings Cross.
Are Squires directly to blame? No. Is the capitalist system that leads to Chelsea style bar/ restaurant replacing post office now relegated to smaller site to blame? In the larger picture yes. I would think that is indisputable.
