Broken Promise On Housing

February

13

by admin // in Housing

2 comments

The Echo’s John Geoghegan has a good report on the last Meeting of the District Council Review Committe, chaired by Lib Dem June Lumley.:

A HOUSING provider has built no new affordable homes in Rochford district despite promising to build 50 a year since 2007.
.
Members of Rochford District Council?s review committee heard the revelations at a meeting on Tuesday evening.
.
Councillors expressed their disappointment at members of Rochford Housing Association, part of national housing provider the Sanctuary Group, for failing to meet their promised targets for affordable housing.

The full report is here.

As June says:


‘the promise to deliver 50 homes a year was a key factor in the council choosing the association to take over its housing stock.’

About the author, admin

  • What is the council going to do about this ?

    I am on the waiting list for Rochford Council only to be told that I had little on no chance of ever getting any social housing as I privatley rent !!

    Set backs like this just make it much harder for local people to ever be able to afford to live locally around there families.

    I work full time but will never be able to buy a house by myself and Social Housing is the only way to go?

    I have said for years that Rochford Council is very difficult to get social housing from unless your over the age of 60 where getting into shelter housing is more realistic….

    Places like Dagenham have a points system where anyone can bid for a property once they are accepted onto the list.

    The sad fact is that I rent privatley but have to claim Housing Benefit in order to be able to stay in an ex council flat !

    The council should do something about this situation as you are going to have young families moving away from there families as they cannot afford to live near to them….

  • Did anyone ask why this only came out in scrutiny? No regular monitoring? With two major developers in Appeal on refusals this could become something that their barristers question.

  • {"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}
    >