Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Connaught House - Save our homes
21 FAMILIES WHO LIVE AT CONNAUGHT HOUSE, MUSWELL HILL ARE BEING MADE HOMELESS
The Metropolitan Police are planning to make 21 families homeless by reclaiming the land for profitable redevelopment.
AS YET THEY HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN PLANNING PERMISSION MEANING THESE BUILDINGS COULD LIE EMPTY (& OPEN TO VANDALISM) FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE.
By doing this, they will be ripping the heart out of the community that live here.
Some of the residents, having lived here for over 20 years (and brought up children and raised families), have been informed by Crown Housing Association and Haringey Council that they have no legal obligation to re-house them, thus making them homeless.
In the current climate, where Social Housing is already under extreme pressure, virtually non existent; is making another 21 families homeless, the best solution? Are the financial needs of the Metropolitan Police greater than those of people's lives?
BAILIFFS ARE DUE THE 2ND WEEK IN MARCH! (11th)
Local groups are getting involved, as well as Occupy London and Save Barnet Library.
Please come down and give your support.
LOCATION: Connaught House, Muswell Hill, N10 3LH,
They also have a Facebook page: Facebook: Save Our Homes
Tags for Forum Posts: Connaught House, community, eviction, homes, local, police, protest
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Milda Rami on
-
They can have whatever they like but for me this signifies that they are not the neediest people in the society. I don’t know how social housing is distributed, but if its based on income, could it be that some of theirs was not declared? Just speculating.
Again, this is my opinion ONLY, but I think social housing is for those that are in desperate need of assistance and I believe there are plenty of those in current economy. People who can't afford a roof over their heads don’t buy multiple cars.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
It's not based on income. That was the original conception when Victorian philanthropists decided to build charity housing for the worthy poor. That changed post war when social housing was seen as just another form of tenure. Only recently has there been a return to thinking that social housing is for people who some how can't make it in the big, bad world.
The allocation of social housing is based on need and that's how the 1.6 million social housing properties are allocated in England (there we almost 3m until the right to buy came along).
People are quick to stigmatise people in social housing as benefit scroungers but seem equally indignant if some one in social housing actually has a job. They really can't win.
I grew up in a council house in the north east. Both of my parents worked as did most of my neighbours. Was it wrong in someway they they thought they should work AND believed that social housing was an alternative for anyone?
PS - they refused to exercise their right to buy as they felt it was morally wrong to make a profit from a home that had been built from tax payers money. -
-
-
Reply by Michael Anderson
It's not based on income. That was the original conception when Victorian philanthropists decided to build charity housing for the worthy poor. That changed post war when social housing was seen as just another form of tenure. Only recently has there been a return to thinking that social housing is for people who some how can't make it in the big, bad world.
Well if that is the case and social housing is indeed 'just another form of tenure', what is wrong, immoral or scandalous about tenancy being terminated at the end of the lease?
My former landlady decided to sell the property so we had to move out at the end of the contract with just over a month notice.. It was sad as we loved the place but we found another house in the area, albeit with higher rent (so double sad here!).
The residents in question had a considerable notice from what I can see and yes it must be devastating for them but this is the life of a renter, I'm afraid.
-
-
Permalink Reply by 17zs7uljro7ay on
-
Sorry, I was at work (that place that some people never go to).
I prefer to concentrate my energy wherever I see clear injustice, be it corporates who don't pay taxes or individuals who want to live in Muswell hill at the expense of the government.
From what I understand they have been given 5 year notice and most have already been relocated. Not really much of a case, is it? As you might know, as a private tenant (which thankfully I am not any more), you get a mere two months notice and you pay over the odds for a s..t hole.
So, I repeat, there is no case here, lets focus our energy on more deserving causes, whether it is boycotting Starbucks or avoiding the poverty trap by trying to give all children a decent education.
-
-
This is an injustice as much as the injustice happening in other estates.
Wandsworth closed down playgrounds and clubs for children, along with selling off five acres of school grounds to private developers. 40% of Council homes sold off are now in the hands of millionaires, renting them out in the private market.
Southwark sold off the Heygate Estate and moved 1100 families to other places. They were promised the right to return, but that has now been changed. All to profit the company Land Lease who did not even pay market rate for 44 acres, it's actually costing the taxpayer £9 million. People in Southwark are now realising that their council homes are being threatened and starting to fight back.
These 21 families have had their homes stolen, because they did get involved in the housing pyramid scheme.
We might not succeed, but we will certainly keep showing people the madness of what is happening. Once the housing bubble bursts we shall see what happens.
-
-
I hope the housing bubble burst soon. Our children deserve to be able to buy a house and get on with their life rather than be slaves to mortgages forever.
I will be the first to celebrate when that happens.
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
We had to. We managed. Housing was always more expensive than we hoped and we expected to be paying a mortgage for the whole of our working lives.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Colinloves on
-
Maybe if you had the correct facts. But you dont.
"individuals who want to live in Muswell hill at the expense of the government."
Please tell me where about in the thin air, did you pick that out from?
They are NOT private tenants. They are social housing tenants.
One family is being evicted on Monday. Will be out on the street, along with all their possessions. ONLY then, will the council give them some emergency housing....which will be some nice 5 star hotel (now that will be something that we will pay for).
What happens to their possessions, is just down to them. If they cant afford a place to store them till.....gods knows when......Then thats their hard luck.
Indeed, we have gone back to the 1920's
Expect to see more people and furniture on the streets
-
Permalink Reply by tania on
-
Thank you Rakehell, finally someone with an understanding of who the real corrupt scroungers are?
-
-
Maria, How do you know that people aren't applying for these jobs? A random example of what the job market is like at the moment below.
http://www.nwemail.co.uk/hundreds-apply-for-jobs-at-new-walney-stor...
-
-
Cough! looked in local paper 4x jobs & 2x full pages of personal services offered, hmmm, who is it that said you always know a recession when you see the personal services advertisements take over the newspapers, plenty of those jobs going, guess maybe thats the intention to put people under financial stress.
-
-
Why don't the Connaught Rangers get Banksy to do a pair of his nocturnal doodles on the gable ends? All of Harringay and Haringey will rush to their defence and Our Lady of Muswell, Kountess Klaire Kober, will slap a preservation order on it and send the Met packing. Banksy always works a treat. Just make sure she doesn't export the gables to Miami.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
