Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Another Illegal Conversion. Information and Help Required.
All
I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed but no.69 Effingham Road is being gutted at the moment. It was bought very cheaply (for 270k) earlier this year by a company registered in Cyprus (suspicious already). The address given is care of a financial services company in Enfield that has no web presence whatsoever.
I wandered past the other day to quiz the builders. Peaking inside, I could see that they were almost certainly preparing the carcass for a separate downstairs and upstairs. There were 2 builders on site. The first initially said they were keeping it as a house but when I quizzed him about the dividing frames, he said that they were 'partitioning' it. The second builder then started to get a bit more heated and defensive, initially saying they were keeping it as a house but when I pointed out that they were clearly dividing it up, changing tack to say that was what it had always been like. The more I questioned, the more defensive and aggressive he got, saying things like, "what difference to you anyway?" etc.
While I can't be 100% sure, this seems pretty much a guaranteed dodgy conversion. I'm also sure it was a single house before.
Have you seen the works? Do you know if it was a house or bed/sits or separate flats before?
I will be lodging a complaint with planning first thing Tuesday and would please urge everyone to do the same. The more complaints planning get, the harder it will be for them not to action swiftly.
I'm not sure if anyone else has noticed but no.69 Effingham Road is being gutted at the moment. It was bought very cheaply (for 270k) earlier this year by a company registered in Cyprus (suspicious already). The address given is care of a financial services company in Enfield that has no web presence whatsoever.
I wandered past the other day to quiz the builders. Peaking inside, I could see that they were almost certainly preparing the carcass for a separate downstairs and upstairs. There were 2 builders on site. The first initially said they were keeping it as a house but when I quizzed him about the dividing frames, he said that they were 'partitioning' it. The second builder then started to get a bit more heated and defensive, initially saying they were keeping it as a house but when I pointed out that they were clearly dividing it up, changing tack to say that was what it had always been like. The more I questioned, the more defensive and aggressive he got, saying things like, "what difference to you anyway?" etc.
While I can't be 100% sure, this seems pretty much a guaranteed dodgy conversion. I'm also sure it was a single house before.
Have you seen the works? Do you know if it was a house or bed/sits or separate flats before?
I will be lodging a complaint with planning first thing Tuesday and would please urge everyone to do the same. The more complaints planning get, the harder it will be for them not to action swiftly.
Tags for Forum Posts: casework, effingham road, illegal conversion
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by VIX on
-
Yes. It's really good evidence and if anyone can look at the council tax banding this should state the same, that it was a family dwelling.
Looks like the developer is going for the 'convert now, apply later' tactic. That way they generate lots of rental income until the council get to close it down, which can take years.
Obviously some of these greedy scumbags haven't realised that people are wising up to their game...if only we could get planning enforcement to do the same simple investigation work, then these developments would be nipped in the bud a lot earlier. Sounds to me that enforcement are dragging their heals as usual-why is this? After all aren't they supposed to be on our side?
Ive heard that No 71 Effingham Road is under investigation too-would this not be right next door?
As many people have said already, log it with David Lammy, his team won't let it slip through the net.
-
-
Re: It was bought very cheaply (for 270k) earlier this year by a company registered in Cyprus (suspicious already).
Has anyone, or can anyone, look at the land registry details and see if the owners are simply buying and selling the same property back to each other. When properties are sold cheaply and converted this can often be the reason. Ive been told it's an easy way to launder money. I not sure how this is done, I just know that this HAS happened in one conversion case. Why else would you put your house on the market only to sell it back to family?
-
Permalink Reply by Steve Hatch on
-
On the point of money laundering... Estate agents face a two year prison sentence if they fail to spot or report money laundering activity, or even fail to report suspicion of MLA.
We also have to check and keep on file two forms of i.d. from home owners before placing their property on the market.
As a second wave of defence the solicitor also does the same, as do mortgage lenders.
I have posted a link to the Office of Fair Trading document on this below.
http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/general/Money-la...
For the record, I also agree... We have far too many of these dodgy conversions already, and the many associated problems they cause.
I may well be very unpopular with others in my industry for saying this (which incidentally has never bothered me), but I totally agree with previous posters in this thread, keeping up the pressure on planning etc is the only way.
Keep up the good work I say. Why should Anette, and so many others within the community have to endure the backlash of having such a high concentration of these dwellings that are rented back to the council or some housing association?
There are of course certain properties on the ladder which will always attract these investment type buyers, but with rigorously enforced planning, many of these will perhaps look elsewhere for their investments.
It shows just how strong the community is, and HOL is a great vehicle for this.
-
-
[i seem to have loaded only part of this post]
Re rouge estate agents...MLA
I just took a look at planning apps for 3 Odsey Villas, another conversion being looked into. Couldn't find the whole file online. PS have been used as whitnesses. Funny how they have been used as evidence in this conversion, and claim they have spoken with British Gas to prove the house was already converted. No hard copy to view on line i.e. the actual correspondences. Local residents have claimed it was one home.
Paul Simon estate agents was involved in the 'sale' of the bedsit conversion next to us.
I wouldn't trust PS estate agents at all.
I would say they are the least popular estate agents in the area. We had to walk away from a property they had on their books in 2007, as they were so bent, they had us bidding against ourselves [15k+] and their Saturday girl called and tipped us off as to what her boss was up to. I would never advise anyone to use them.
Can someone else take a look and see what they think about the planners report. I found it very easy to find on line. It just looks to me to be a pattern forming, family names, estate agents, planners etc.
-
Permalink Reply by James on
-
Obviously it had been illegally converted at some point, but I know for a fact 3 Odsey Villas was being used as two flats before its refurbishment as I live next door. Was worried about it becoming bedsits, but luckily has been kept as it was.
-
-
Hmm very difficult to quantify... It definately puts the majority of people off, so I would argue that this affects demand.
This is something I find very frustrating when trying our best to help a family move, as I have said before our job is to strike a balance of obtaining a decent price for their home and enabling them to move forward and achieve their personal goals.
It is so unfair when a clients marketing and subsequent sale is hindered by a badly run bedsit/conversion, especially as they may have endured anti social problems along the way.
As I have said before I understand the need to provide social housing, and affordable housing but in my professional and personal opinion, the area has way more than a fair share of these properties. I am sure this would be easier to accept if the majority of them were better run and regulated.
-
-
I guessed that would be your answer.
As a question to anyone following this thread:
Would it not make sense that hard working home owners should have the right to claim damages against the owners of such conversions, or even the council when one 'pops up' next door to them and nothing timely is done about it if at all?
Some kind of fine based on their total money gains based on how long the operation has been going, and how long neighbors/local community have suffered before it is returned to a single dwelling.
Isn't it about time the victims got something in return for having to constantly keep the pressure on the council to take action and the disruption to their lives with visits by police, noise teams and ASB officers [often years of distress]
I'm sure if the fines were heftier these gits would think twice before doing these conversions.
-
Permalink Reply by Stuart on
-
A further update.
1. I have managed to have a look through the letter box when the builders weren't there and it seems that in fact, contrary to my initial impression (and cue eating of humble pie), the property has been converted into 2 flats (and not into 4/5 bedsits).
2. Following Matthew's posting, I went into Bairstow Eves and had a good chat with a chap there called Richard who was involved in the sale and had seen the property when it was on the market. He was very helfpul and gave me a copy of the particulars. They don't offer much help either way. Apparently the property was in such an appalling state that BE did not take any internal photos! Richard said that it wasn't clear whether it was being used as one house or two flats. However, he did say that it seemed to be set up as 2 flats - there was a kitchen upstairs, two sets of meters etc. The problem was the property was in such a poor condition (and the owner wasn't living there any more) that he couldn't tell if it was being used as 2 flats or not for definite.
3. It was marketed as a 3-bedroom property with "excellent potential as a family home or investment". The particulars do say clearly that there is a "kitchen" and a "bed 3/kitchen".
4. Richard said that when the current owner was buying it, he asked for certificates of lawfulness/planning permissions etc. and was told clearly that there were none but decided to proceed anyway.
5. I have checked on the council tax valuation site and the property was registered two flats up to 1993 and thereafter as a single property.
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
That the place is two flats does not preclude the possibility that each room could be rented out individually.
My house was in a similar state and had been left as two flats (now made back into one house by us) but my neighbour told me that many people came and went, and judging by the number of debt collection letters we get all in different names she was clearly correct.
PS marketed the house as two flats as an investment even though they knew that an enforcement order had been placed to convert back. They told us it was not a problem to keep it as two places.
-
-
RE:
I have checked on the council tax valuation site and the property was registered two flats up to 1993 and thereafter as a single property.
Don't eat the humble pie just yet!
The conversion is over 15 tears ago. They have no permission to change it back into two flats with a loft extention without planning permission. So it's a case of buyer beware.
Also just because it now looks like two flats through the letter box, don't be fooled, as two flats can double into four bedsits overnight! Somehow they will squash tennents in so they get their excessively high rental income.
Look out for the rear extention coming sometime in 2010! ; ))
-
-
If they converted it back to 2 flats more than 4 years ago, they will get a certificate of lawfulness (regardless of the conversion to a single house in 1993).
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
