Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
The most vicious charter of penalties against tenants that we have ever seen:
Haringey Council's failed private sector lettings agency Move 51° North had the most vicious charter of penalties against tenants that we have ever seen:
1. Pre tenancy charges - a minimum of £302
2. Deposit - a minimum of 6 weeks rent
3. £50 per letter issued by the landlord for alleged breach of tenancy
(no more than one such letter to be sent every 7 days)
4. Interest to be paid on rent arrears
5. Check-out charges of between £110-300 at the end of tenancy
yes, you have to pay to leave
6. £35 charge for changing the date/time of the checkout appointment
7. Surcharges for payments by debit card
8. Payments by credit card or in cash are not accepted
...and, "If you should have any questions we would be happy to help, please speak to a member of the team."
There is no mention of the amount of the charge for speaking to these people in person, but I for one, cannot afford to give them a call.
This is in a borough where Only council housing at really-affordable rents can meet the needs of tenants on local average incomes, and where 48% of households have no savings, or are in debt.
We can only say that we have been warned, about the dire future which the social cleansing Haringey Cllrs Claire Kober and Alan Strickland are preparing for us.
"Claire Kober and Alan Strickland, shame on you for turning Blue!"
Paul Burnham
Haringey Defend Council Housing
haringey_dch@outlook.com
07847 714 158
http://move51-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/Tenant%20Fees.pdf
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
In London, the contract is one sided. People compete for somewhere to live. Many will sign anything they are so desperate.
-
Permalink Reply by Ian on
-
you can't get something for nothing. make it attractive for institutional investors, no stamp duty on property purchased for renting, reduced taxation etc. make it attractive so they can make profits. Who pays, subsidised by other tax payers or the institutions will have to charge more than private landlords to cover cost of full time employees, maintenance contractors etc. What happens if the company goes under, the government will have to bail them out with more tax payers money. behind the scenes the institutions don't like micro businesses so they will lobby to clear the way of such competitors that they cannot compete with without government support. The same issue why you don't see british gas, Eon and the other big ones involved in home extentions, kitchen refurbs etc. Again you could create a case to regulate sole traders out of this space with concerns around safety, workmanship etc.
-
Permalink Reply by Paul Burnham on
-
The real problem is homelessness and housing related poverty. To tackle this requires public sector interventions in the housing market. Move 51° North was supposed to be just such an intervention, but in practice it was not. Most tenants on people in housing need just can't afford to pay charges like the ones shown here. Such charges are a barrier to housing, and they perpetuate poverty, homelessness and social exclusion. What a wasted opportunity Move 51° North was.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
So let's make it a bit shit like it was 20 years ago eh?
-
-
and London is great, diversity, life style, more active job market, entertainment, its all here. Good reasons to move to London to work and then enjoy all it has to offer. Supply and demand.
-
-
Just who is benefitting from this supposed subsidy of great restaurants, a healthy job market and things to do? Well the employees get to "do things" but the landlords get to "do things" and live off the earnings of the employees too. You should not be able to benefit from both the capital gain in a property AND have someone else pay a rental that completely covers your mortgage payment. Something is wrong.
-
-
its a business John, I keep telling you. where you don't pay tax on the interest payments such as interest only loans that does not go towards paying off the capital of the property. all that is happening is that the powers now don't like the idea of ordinary people benifiting from property capital gains and rental income from the housing market. They now want this type of heavy finance and control within the hands of the 1%. You obviously are happy with power being taken away from the masses and placed into the hands of the 1%. We must all be beholden to large companies for all our needs. Another small step towards totalitarianism.
-
-
1. The corporations will also get tax relief and incentives, whats the difference
2. What if rents from these corporations are more than private landlords?
3. Many private landlords offer high end accomodations. Will corporations offer high end properties for high end renters?
Sounds like you are envious of private individuals getting ahead because you are not but happy with corporations having all the pie because they are not your peers.
-
-
Some interesting numbers from Shelter
http://england.shelter.org.uk/campaigns_/why_we_campaign/housing_fa...
-
-
interesting numbers Michael, you can see that councils are still selling with the right to buy scheme and privately rented housing out numbers housing association and council housing put together. That's a lot of numbers and cash within the privately rented space that large companies would like to get their hands on with a little help from government policy by knocking out private landlords. Social housing & corporation housing will rise over the next 10 years with privately rented diminishing. Privately rented is big business in the hands of millions of micro business and its a business move to recover this space for the corporations.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
