Demolition Deptford #1 : Tidemill update

We're long overdue to report what happened at the Planning meeting on 27 September. It was not a good outcome for Deptford. Yes, there will be new 'affordable' homes built, but at the expense of demolition of both valuable green space and a block of homes where none of the tenants want to move.

Before the meeting, protesters made their feelings known with placards, drums and chants outside the town hall. But once inside the council chamber, those who'd never attended a planning meeting before in their life were quite shocked to see what a flimsy relationship Lewisham strategic planning has with any notion of democracy.

For starters, only 6 out of 10 councillors serving on the Strategic Planning Committee were present, just one of them with extensive planning experience (housing overlord and new Mayor Damien Egan's campaign manager Kevin Bonavia). Quite astonishing for a major and controversial application that impacts so much on the area. See here for 'apologies' (sadly, Cllrs Hall and Curran amongst them).

You can read the minutes here, but here's an additional viewpoint:

Speaking against the application in the short time allowed (and with only one week's notice of the meeting) was a small group made up of the campaign co-ordinator from Deptford Neighbourhood Action (DNA), a resident of Frankham House, two residents from Reginald Road, as well as GLA Assembly member for Greenwich & Lewisham, Len Duvall.

Speaking for the applicant were a 4-person team from Family Mosaic, supported by the Council's Strategic Housing team (remember, this is a Council-led scheme).

Not one representative from the development partner, Sherrygreen Homes, who stand to make such a huge profit out of building the scheme, selling off the private housing, was available to speak. The committee was presented with a cuddly, supposedly ethical housing association applicant, with no mention or sign of the hefty and unnecessary price Lewisham will have to pay to see its scheme proceed.

It was quietly revealed that Family Mosaic had ONLY JUST managed to secure the affordable element of the scheme by "merging" with Peabody Housing Association, a process that had started in December 2016 and completed in July 2017 – a cynical move that gave Family Mosaic access to the GLA grant funding it needed to fund the 'affordable' element on this site, without which the scheme would have collapsed. (And which enables Sherrygreen Homes to continue to make well over 20% in profits).

Perhaps unsurprisingly, with the Council's ambitions and reputation riding so much on a scheme that has been planned for ten years or more, there was some heavy mis-direction from the Head of Planning Emma Talbot and also the Chair Amanda De Ryk. For instance, it was implied that work could not go ahead on the sister scheme at Amersham Vale until this application was approved.

The Council's Strategic Housing team claimed they had consulted fully with the tenants of Reginald House and with the Old Tidemill Garden team. Speaking for the garden, the campaigners countered that the Council's position had not changed at all since the deferral last year. The Chair made much of the fact that Len Duvall had chaired the meetings as if to imply everything had operated democratically.

The fact that nothing about those meetings was democratic was not examined. There had been two meetings of note: one in which how the garden team should fuck off somewhere else (but nowhere else could be found); the other in which all the ideas from Tidemill Garden were incorporated into a slim strip of land like a sort of Disney Tidemill on a very small scale.

When the Housing Team claimed a letter had gone out only the previous week to tenants at Reginald Road explaining all the terms of their re-housing on the new site, elderly resident Pauline stood up from the audience with her hand held up to request to speak.

She was told to sit down by the Chair but members of the audience murmured her concerns – she had not received the letter. Councillors fussed over whether letters had been sent as 'signed on delivery'; the Housing Team admitted they had not and there was no proof letters had been sent. Nevertheless, the lie remained, unexamined any further.

Under "standing orders" (in which Councillors who are not members of the committee are allowed to speak) New Cross Councillor Brenda Dacres said that the Amersham Vale development was being "held to ransom" and there was no reason why it could not go ahead while the Tidemill site was reviewed. (Brenda has been supportive of the campaign against demolition of both the garden and Reginald Road homes, and pointed out that the new Tidemill school had no garden and had been using the old garden).

According to the rules, anything that Councillors say "under standing orders" is not supposed to influence the decision "in any capacity". So it would follow that Brenda's support should not influence Councillors.

Meanwhile, Cllr Joe Dromey sneaked into the meeting late (having arranged with the Chair for "standing orders" to be postponed until he got there because he'd been at another meeting), and spoke fully in favour of the development.

Note: As soon as Dromey was elected he was appointed to Mayor & Cabinet (his mum is Harriet Harman, his dad is Jack Dromey). No one in the Mayor & Cabinet seems capable of speaking against Mayor & Cabinet decisions (tho Joe insists he voted against the Millwall CPO). The committee wouldn't be influenced, right?

Dromey hadn't even been there to listen to the residents (his parishioners) speak about how they didn't want their homes demolished and how they hadn't been properly consulted or kept informed of what was going on. He's probably not sure where it is.

It's unfortunate for Deptford that two of its Councillors are part of the elite status quo (Mayor & Cabinet – the other being Paul Maslin) that controls everything in Lewisham, including the constituency Labour Party, and has so little regard for what happens locally.

The Chair (Amanda De Ryk, now known locally as Amanda 3rd Reich) ruled against any question of the committee looking at the possibility of the scheme being redesigned (as requested by Deptford Neighbourhood Action and Cllr Brenda Dacres) or examining the contractual arrangements with Amersham Vale that were supposedly holding up the sister project. Apparently, these nuanced aspects were strictly "not under consideration for this application". Nothing at all, in other words, was relevant for consideration except the improvement in affordable housing – which had only been achieved at the last minute by Family Mosaic doing a deal with Peabody.

It was Cllr Bonavia who swayed the vote, head in hands, pretending to find it a difficult decision to demolish a precious green space and 16 flats (even though his career depends on towing the party line in Lewisham in support of Damien Egan – new housing at any cost). The fact that he'd been told that only one resident in Reginald Road had shown support for their home being demolished seemed to be irrelevant.

Cllrs Suzannah Clark (Labour) and John Coughlin (Green) were the only ones brave enough to vote against. So the application was passed 4 to 2 (or 4 out of 10).

Note: NOTHING from Lewisham Homes on this matter. No defence of its tenants, no comment about how they chose not to use Decent Homes money to refurbish the outside of 2-17 Reginald Road (not that a refurbishment by Lewisham Homes' contractor MITIE would have inspired confidence since everything they did was awful and still in dispute). Happy to unload care of its stock onto Family Mosaic Peabody. Also too excited about being in charge of "infills" on estates in its care to understand what it means for its tenants to become part of a building site.

Ironically, on the very same night Jeremy Corbyn made his closing speech at the Labour conference; here's what he said about Labour's new policies on housing:



"Councils will have to win a ballot of existing tenants and leaseholders before any redevelopment scheme can take place."

Clapped by everyone, but obviously not a policy backed by Lewisham nor any other Labour borough currently engaging in regeneration of its own land and properties by selling off land at cut price and demolishing buildings they could have refurbished.

This led to the left in the local Labour Party tabling a motion (carried overwhelmingly, apparently) to ask Sadiq Khan call in the decision on Tidemill. The GLA have to review the application anyway – the question is whether enough social housing is being achieved, considering how cheaply the new owners are getting the land for (in Tidemill's case, a fraction of what Family Mosaic Peabody have paid for private land elsewhere in Deptford – e.g. Sun Wharf).

See also this new piece in The Independent that includes Reginald Road, questioning why Labour Councils feature so prominently in regeneration schemes where tenants don't get a say. "...they are opposed to giving residents ballots because it doesn't fit in with their paternalistic attitude or their culture of having absolute control. They have a big plan and they won't listen to any alternatives" (Sian Berry). 

Meanwhile, the Tidemill Garden campaigners have also written to the Mayor of London asking him to call it in, appealing to the loss of green space, especially when he has just launched the Greener Cities programme, hoping to make London the first National Park City, and has Tidemill as the first example of good practice.

An update by Old Tidemill Garden is also available here.

Also, all this this is about to happen on a bigger scale at Achilles Street in New Cross, with four blocks and several businesses at stake. Another great idea from Lewisham Planning Central that has no regard for the people living or working in the buildings it appropriates (and demolishes) in its grand plan (that ultimately makes loads of money for a developer).

(Post edited and updated 3 Nov 2017)

The collapsing ceilings saga continues...

Continuing the story of total ineptitude at Farrer House that we reported in late October, when roof repairs by MITIE were left exposed and rain flooded into the flats below...
 
We're not sure what's happened with Vincent and his family after MITIE's gaff on the roof of Farrer that caused one of his ceilings to collapse onto his young daughter while she slept in her bed. But their flat was not the only one affected. Yesterday, one of his neighbours at the other end of the block was hit on the head by a piece of falling plaster from the ceiling in her toilet. The whole of the ceiling and wooden supports are rotten and AJ can see the loft insulation through the hole. Apparently, the flat next door is in an even worse state.

The fire officers attending the roof flood at Farrer House in the early hours of 27th October stated that all the fibreglass insulation in the exposed roof area was soaked, was unlikely to dry out properly and would probably need replacing. What has happened since?

On 3rd November, the access door to the loft was open and a worker was overheard chatting in a foreign language on his phone in the pitched roof area...was he fixing things?

The new balcony walkway surfaces were still covered in flood debris outside Vincent's place and up the other end of the walkway...

The walkway ceilings were still bulging...

And, though nothing to do with the roof, a pipe was leaking and soaking a wall...just one of the many examples of MITIE's shoddy work and Lewisham Homes' poor management.

AJ already had a hole in her kitchen ceiling from roof work that took place prior to the flood. MITIE had made an appointment to visit her flat about that damage but hadn't kept it. By 12th November, AJ's toilet ceiling was beginning to grow mould. But all that had happened after the flood was a brief visit from the MITIE site supervisor the following morning. And a letter went out to Farrer residents from MITIE, apologising for the roof leak.

By 18th November, no one from Lewisham Homes had made contact and no interior repairs had taken place.

Yet astonishingly, on 2nd December, AJ was invited (as the 'block representative') by the Lewisham Homes Major Works Project Manager to attend a walkabout on 16th December (with Lewisham Homes surveyors Baily Garner) to "sign off" – or "handover" – all of MITIE's 'completed work' on Farrer House.

How can work be signed off when ceilings are rotting?

On 7th December, when a gentle tap with a broom handle indicated her toilet ceiling was liable to collapse at any time, AJ chased the Project Manager yet again and questioned whether a "handover" was really appropriate. If anyone was going to be working up there, a misplaced foot would bring the whole lot down, she warned. She emailed again when it started falling in on her head the next day. The reply she got was even more incredible.

The Major Works Project Manager replied that MITIE had been asked to provide the reports of their "pre-condition inspections" carried out before work began, and that "it was evident from MITIE's photos that the ceilings were already in a poor state of repair". In other words, MITIE was claiming that the damage had not been caused by their failing to protect the roof repairs, and Lewisham Homes appeared to be agreeing with them. 

AJ was astonished, as her ceiling had been more or less fine before the flooding. The Project Manager continued, "Following the roof leak, MITIE submitted a report of the damage, having visited the properties in question last week". But they had made no such visit to AJ.

Not in any particular hurry, the Project Manager said she would have a look for herself when she and Baily Garner came to do the "handover" next week. She added that "Leaseholders are insured by their building insurance".

So, it was not MITIE's fault, making interior repairs was not Lewisham Homes' responsibility, and AJ would have to claim on her own insurance. The Project Manager had, as usual, preferred to believe MITIE over evidence presented by the resident – and was also entirely wrong about the insurance situation...

******

Over many years, AJ had made several claims on her own insurance for damage to walls and ceilings caused by water penetration. Damp was being caused by the leaking flat roof and the canopy that covers the top floor walkways which leaked where it met the walls of the flats. Only Farrer's roof is designed like this, being the last building to be constructed on Crossfields in 1949 – other top floor walkways are covered by pitched roofs. During this time, the freeholder, Lewisham Council, has only ever made temporary repairs by patching or by clearing the flat roof's drainage gullies of leaves.

Leaseholders pay a contribution in their annual service charges to a buildings insurance policy taken out by Lewisham Homes which covers damage to the overall building and its communal parts. Leaseholders must also get their own building insurance to cover any damage they might be responsible for to the flats below or above them.

But in AJ's case, the interior damage was directly attributable to the lack of maintenance of the building's common parts (ie, the flat roof and the top floor walkway canopy) and should have been covered by the freeholder's own building insurance. When AJ first realised this, Lewisham Homes had not been invented and the estate was administered by the Housing team at the Council. AJ began referring the problem to Lewisham Council's insurance team. In 2001 their broker refused to pay out and wrote to the Housing department to tell them why. Although she was not supposed to see it, AJ managed to get a copy of this internal document, which said:

"the cause of the problem – the worn out flat roof – does not seem to have been addressed.  The insurers would now regard any further damage to Ms (AJ)'s property as being inevitable due to lack of repair. Patch repairs would appear to be ineffective and a new roof is required.

"Ms (AJ) is a leaseholder and under the terms of her lease the Council is responsible for maintaining the 'reserved' premises.  By not replacing her roof you are in breach of the lease. Again insurance cannot be used to compensate for breaches of contract.''

Lots of paperwork seems to have disappeared during the Council's handover to Lewisham Homes in 2007, including repair records and details of previous Major Works to Crossfields in 1997. Nevertheless, Lewisham Homes recruited many of its staff from previous Council departments, and the Housing staff should have known the position on insurance.

*****

The walkway side of Farrer House

A side view from Creekside shows the extent of the flat roof and tiled pitched roof

The top floor's walkway canopy

When Major Works began on Farrer last year and the roof was surveyed, AJ pointed out the problem with the walkway canopy which was sagging even then. Within days of commencing work at Farrer, MITIE painted the walkway canopy's ceiling. Water stains appeared soon after. On other blocks, the walkway ceilings were painted after "concrete repair" work had taken place – cracks were dug out around metal joists, the joists painted with anti-rust, the lot filled in and painted over. These concrete repairs were done to avoid all possibility of balcony walkways ever collapsing on people's heads.

Later on, when the subcontractor arrived on site to resurface everyone's balcony walkways, the flat part of the roof at Farrer was given a coating of the same waterproofing product.

Eventually, with all work supposedly completed, the scaffolding on the entire block was taken down. Then almost immediately and at enormous cost, scaffolding was re-erected to address the walkway canopy problem, which the surveyors Baily Garner had finally decided had to be completely demolished and rebuilt.

This work should have been anticipated at the beginning, during the surveys, or before estimates were even issued to leaseholders months earlier in May 2014. The requirement for such extensive structural repairs might have been picked up if anyone had ever actually bothered to look at the repair logs for the 8 year period since Lewisham Homes had been in charge.

******

So the omnishambles that is Lewisham Homes Major Works continues, despite MITIE having been given the push. 

MITIE are effectively saying most of the damage was already caused by Lewisham Homes' failure to repair, whilst seemingly failing to acknowledge it has been made significantly worse by their own neglect. Meanwhile Lewisham Homes were happy to pass to the leaseholder the responsibility for interior repairs necessitated by their own neglect to properly repair the structural fabric of the building.

When AJ mentioned legal proceedings, the Project Manager revised Lewisham Homes' position, declaring that they were responsible for repairing the roof and that they would "make an informed decision on how damage to individual property can be remedied".

No urgency, no mention of when. No word about renewing the loft insulation. In the meantime, some of the rooms in the top floor flats are almost uninhabitable. But that's OK. If someone is hurt, Lewisham Homes is liable.

Today, the second lot of scaffolding (which was erected for rebuilding the previously undiagnosed walkway canopy as well as tile repairs to the pitched roof) was being taken down.

With access to the roof now removed, it will be impossible to examine those roof repairs at the "handover" next week. It is likely that Baily Garner have already been up to have a look and signed it off anyway and the walkabout next week is just a formality, or even, as with other handovers, a bit of a sham. For AJ, there will be no reassurance that the problems have been solved.

That's why she nipped up there yesterday to have a quick look for herself before the scaffold was struck. She was worried by what she saw in a relatively small area and short space of time – blocked gullies, large poolings of water on unevenly laid waterproofed surfaces, big gaps between the pitched roof tiling and brickwork...and had the walkway canopy actually been rebuilt?

Still, when it all fails the next time, at least Lewisham Homes will not be asking her to claim on her own insurance to pay for the repairs. It only took 20 years to get that far.

Private Eye prints our MITIE story...

It's hard to get a story into Private Eye's 'Rotten Boroughs', so well done the resident who got them to publish a story about MITIE's shoddy work for Lewisham Homes in the latest issue. Click below to enlarge and read...

Flooding and gas leaks...a bad night for Lewisham Homes...

Farrer House ceiling. Already bad, just made worse.

In the early hours of Tuesday morning, residents at Farrer House were woken by the fire brigade. Two fire engines and ten firefighters had responded to a call from a very worried resident on the top floor who was afraid a fire would break out because rain water was pouring through his ceilings and sparking the electrics.

The roof of the top floor balconies is being rebuilt by MITIE, the contractors working in partnership with Lewisham Homes to refurbish the estate buildings with Decent Homes public funding. The exposed roof work had been left uncovered, resulting in flooding in the flats below.

The fire brigade disconnected the electrics, but were astonished to find there were no signs on site giving the number of the contractor in case of emergencies. They tried to contact Lewisham Homes and Lewisham Council to no avail. When they finally got through to someone, the response was that they were not 'overly interested' and no one was available to come out to deal with the problem.

Perhaps they were too busy dealing with the gas leak occuring at the Tanner's Hill estate, where the residents of 60 flats had to spend Tuesday night on camp beds in the Deptford Lounge after an emergency evacuation. On Wednesday a crisis team and even the Red Cross were in attendance at the Lounge during the day, but we hear that SGNGas had sorted hotels, meals and transport for the residents' second night away from home. We hope they are now all home safe, and look forward to hearing more about what actually happened soon (possibly in the local papers!).

Crisis team meets Red Cross, Deptford Lounge. Everyone gone already?

Red Cross outside library

It would appear the trauma suffered by Tanner's Hill residents cannot be blamed (as yet) on any one body in particular. But at Crossfields – where the tenant who has been keeping a bucket in one of his rooms to collect dripping water for several months now and has still not been offered alternative hotel accommodation for him and his family as far as we know – the blame is easy to aportion.

Collecting water on the fourth floor

The Background

Crossfields residents have been complaining all year about the appalling sub-standard levels of work being done by the contractor – further compounded by their lack of supervision and monitoring of workers, and the absence of a Lewisham Homes Clerk of Works to check work in progress.

Worse still, the schedule of works drawn up by the surveyors Baily Garner (and approved by Lewisham Homes) seemed mostly cosmetic or the results of a prediction of what would be required to maintain the buildings some several years hence, as if no funding at all would be available in the next 5-20 years. There appeared very little relation to any problems that the buildings might actually have as experienced by those living here.

Lewisham Homes claimed consistently early on that the Repairs team were consulted on the schedules but have since admitted (behind closed doors) that the bids had had to be prepared very hurriedly to gain access to funding, and Repairs – who would have a record of persistent reported problems – were not consulted at all.
 
One such historic problem is damp, but tenants who complain about mould on their walls and ceilings are constantly told the problem is condensation – they must avoid drying washing indoors without ventilation, for instance. However, it is often caused by unrepaired guttering or leaking pipes close to walls. Problems usually occur on the ground floor, especially in corner flats with more than one outside wall, but can affect the first floor if the problem is a leaking gutter. Historically, these problems have been ignored by the Repairs Service.

The water penetration on the top floor at Farrer is caused by a leaky flat roofed canopy and has been going on for years. Residents affected by the damage caused have been made to claim on their own insurance on an annual basis to make their own decorative repairs since the problem with the roof has never been fixed properly by Lewisham Homes.

How long? So long...

Getting worse, the pink room...

Already bad, the blue room

Dry, Warm and Safe

Decent Homes funding is awarded to local authorities to bring homes up to standard – the aims are to make homes dry, warm and safe. The roof issue at Farrer was pointed out to both Lewisham Homes and the contractor at the beginning of the works last summer, but little attention seemed to be paid. Scaffolding went up and unnecessary cosmetic items like jet washing brickwork went ahead despite protests that creating a 'Wow factor' (to quote a Baily Garner employee) had nothing to do with making the flats 'dry, warm and safe'.

A proper survey was not carried out until after cracks in the canopy ceilings had been dug out and re-concreted and then re-painted – only to be ruined a few days later by water penetration. The flat roof was then treated with an application of 'polyurea' which was also used to seal the walkways. (Incidentally, water penetration into the seams where the walkways meet the walls of the flats has also been a cause of damp interior walls, but the main reason the walkways were treated was to stop water deteriorating the concrete supporting the balconies to avoid the rather paranoid Health & Safety issue of them collapsing. The gaps that cause interior damp have only recently been filled with mastic when the problem of water egress into the flats below was finally acknowledged.)

Work finished on Farrer House and to everyone's relief scaffolding came down before summer ended, but the roof problem and water penetration remained unresolved. The survey revealed structural damage that meant the entire balcony canopy would need to be rebuilt, something that must have been known about before scaffolding came down. The scaffolding went up again – and leaseholders were issued with a further notice to pay extra costs (a further £4-£5k each) that included a second round of very expensive scaffolding as well as the work itself.

A second round of scaffolding for Farrer House, plunging homes into darkness once more.

It is likely that MITIE, in their relentless pursuit of profit, are also now cutting corners with these new repairs...From their compound on Crossfields, they are not only sending out painters to splodge paint on the same pipes for the fourth time or supposedly qualified brickies to mortar 'refaced' bricks at the last minute before an official inspection, they are also working on cocking up other estates in the area.

Despite employing unskilled and unsupervised labour that has meant most jobs have had to be redone several times, MITIE will probably still be laughing all the way to the bank with public money. A painter was recently overheard complaining to his foreman that he was being made to paint some pipes for the fourth time – the reply was "Don't worry, the government is paying".

Meanwhile Lewisham Homes have obfuscated and failed to listen to their residents throughout – communications have been dreadful and their Complaints Procedure has proved not fit for purpose (see Residents Scrutiny Committee Review: Major Works Resident Liaison Review July 2015).

Residents Scrutiny Committee - Resident Liaison Review

Both tenants and leaseholders have been unhappy; tenants have not been kept informed as to why scaffolding was up for over six months and can't see any real improvements made to the outside of their homes (the exterior environment was not part of the works and is as shabby as ever), but leaseholders, who have to pay for the works, have been most vocal. The RSC noted that Lewisham is failing to monitor satisfaction with external works. Whilst they closely monitored tenants' satisfaction with internal works (tenants were given new kitchens, bathrooms, loos and front doors which they did not have to pay for) they paid more attention to the happy outcome and less to the trauma of the process (and here). Tenants were obviously happy with outcomes, but much less so about the process. With external works, no measuring has taken place at all except to register leaseholders' complaints, many of which remain unrecorded because they've fallen into a vacuum of incompetency.

The MITIE compound at Crossfields was established in April 2013 to cater to the tenants' internal works and takes up 16 parking spaces. The TRA was promised it would be gone by February 2014.

Official complaints lodged have been answered by the Project Manager from the Customer Relations (Complaints) email address, and email responses from the Director of Property Services were also written by her (sent from his email address). The RSC noted that "...(there is) an expectation that Lewisham Homes will closely (monitor) contractors to ensure quality and cost control...the perception is that this is not happening...the perception is that Lewisham Homes has become defensive and is 'terrified' of complaints" (p63). So they should be.

Problems were supposed to be referred to the Resident Liaison Officer, but he worked for MITIE, so that was the last person people wanted to go to with complaints about the contractor, especially as he often got things wrong – missing keys (by putting them through the wrong letterboxes), badly made and missed appointments (by putting notes through the wrong doors), numerous pandering promises that he couldn't keep, and an over-cocky attitude to residents who had been picked out by the cabal in the MITIE compound office as 'trouble'....

The vigour with which the freelance Lewisham Homes Project Manager (only appointed after complaints had reached unmanageable proportions) has defended the contractor's shoddy work has also disappointed those who thought she might have been employed to act on residents' behalf – as if Lewisham Homes were the employer and the contractor was not fulfilling its obligations. But the arrangement is not as straightforward as that: it's a 'partnership' with seemingly no one responsible while the work is going on...or indeed after. Don't worry, the government is paying.

Vincent's ceiling in the pink room the next day

Too little too late. Bye bye MITIE?...

The inclusion of a couple of Lewisham Homes 'accountants' on a recent walkabout to 'sign off' work (where Baily Garner have previously acted in this role, signing off their own work) gave the attending resident block rep the impression that more scrutiny is now being applied to achieve 'value for money'. It was even suggested that leaseholders' bills might be reduced from the original estimates. This might seem like a recognition of the poor work done by MITIE, but complaints about the original estimates so poorly drawn by Baily Garner (seemingly unchecked by Lewisham Homes) might have led LH to shift blame to their partner contractors. Such is the nature of partnerships. Don't worry, the government is paying.

MITIE have no particular expertise other than outsourcing cheap labour (mainly for prisons, security and cleaning) and already have a reputation for defrauding local authorities. They were not among the contractors mentioned the last time leaseholders were consulted about anything to do with major works three years ago, bringing into doubt the validity of the Section 20 notices served by Lewisham Homes last May.

Previous LH managerial responses to complaints (especially from the freelance Project Manager) have been that leaseholders must go through the costly and time consuming business of challenging everything via Leasehold Tribunal (ie "La,la,la, not listening, you can argue about that when the bills come in!"). Those are challenges that Lewisham Homes, backed by Council lawyers, historically win.

But while there may be optimistic standards to be met at 'handover', absence of task monitoring by both MITIE and LH throughout has caused work to go on long after it should have finished. The only monitoring has been as a result of leaseholder complaints. In fact, 15 months after MITIE began external works – and 18 months after leaseholders were ambushed by Lewisham Homes with the first news in three years that Major Works would take place and that they would each have to find sums of up to £13k to pay for them – only two blocks out of nine have been 'passed' as completed.

This means MITIE are likely to be with us well into the new year, patching up their mistakes and cocking up as yet unfinished work and working on other estates from their compound on our estate. They still have to finish what they started in the north area despite the good news that their partnering contract has not been renewed. Only two tiny references to this can be found in the July 2015 Lewisham Homes Board Minutes (only visible by visiting October's meeting papers).

p60, Lewisham Homes Board Minutes, July 2015 (October papers)

On p146 it is noted that "all outstanding and future internal Decent Homes works will be undertaken by the in-house Repairs Service...". Gawd 'elp us! Presumably Repairs will not be managing the millions that were put at MITIE's disposal via Decent Homes funding, and repair budgets will be as squeezed as they were before – which resulted in the running down of the Council's housing stock that required the injection of Decent Homes funding. The opportunities presented by that funding have mostly been wasted through bad management and partnering with MITIE.

Ceiling collapses on your daughter's bed...whatever...

At least public cash would no longer end up in MITIE shareholders' pockets and workers might be paid a living wage and not get picked up outside Wickes by gang masters every morning. But some may lament the contract extension with Baily Garner, who still have three more years to nonchalantly do irrelevant desk studies that bear no relation to the real state of the Lewisham stock. They are earning less than 2% of the final value of Major Works, which surely makes it within their interest to ensure the final costs are as high as possible.

For Decent Homes funding they advised their client to bid for the most astronomical figures they could get away with, and then once awarded, they were given the freedom to sign off on the works they themselves had prescribed. In the obvious absence of any direction from Lewisham Homes, they prescribed Health & Safety measures designed to last 20 years to stop the buildings falling on anybody but did not prevent killing them with damp, whilst ordering a cosmetic facelift to brickwork without even knowing this is a Conservation Area.
 
Oh yes, let's have the Wow factor and jetwash everything to buggery, scrape the skin off the bricks and blow out all the mortar, so they all have to be refaced and repointed. What's that? Damp? Ugh, you mean people actually want to live here?

Good riddance to the worst scaffolding firm in the world!

On Tuesday this week, 1st Scaffolding returned to the estate to "strike" the scaffolding they began putting up at Wilshaw House on 18th August but never completed because they were 'sacked' three weeks in. During those first three weeks they made as much noise as it is possible to make on a building site (which we are not). As we reported almost a month ago, they were given the push when MITIE, who had employed them, 'discovered' the firm was not licensed. Apparently, Ist Scaffolding have enjoyed a long term relationship with MITIE but no one has ever actually checked their credentials. How many other estates have had to endure their behaviour?

A dispute followed, with residents kept in the dark about what was happening. At the end of October, Lewisham Homes' newly and specially appointed Major Works Project Manager informed a small  TRA meeting (and no one else) that the preference was for Ist Scaffolding to return to finish the job rather than take it down. This would mean that the other (much quieter and more professional) scaffolding firms that have since been employed on other blocks would not have to rebuild it. It would be quicker to finish what had been started than to have it taken down and rebuilt. But this was not to be.

Having had unalarmed half-finished scaffolding up on their block for the past THREE MONTHS with no work actually taking place on it, Wilshaw residents will now have a brief respite before another company begins building platforms around them again – with a further predicted EIGHT months to be spent in the dark. In the intervening period, scaffolding on seven out of Crossfields' nine blocks has been completed. Wilshaw was supposed to be the first, but now they will be the last.

If that was not bad enough, Ist Scaffolding's return on Tuesday at 8.15am meant more intolerable noise for residents as the men shouted their way through the dismantling job, led by their foreman – the loudest of them all. They banged and clanged as they literally threw pipes and planks to the ground. Complaints fell on deaf ears. The MITIE Resident Liaison Officer did not consider the noise a problem and was only concerned to know if the men were swearing or not. He has obviously never read Lewisham Council's Guidelines on Best Practice. Never mind that these cowboys were laughing like hyenas (the foreman especially), removing their hard hats (daring the rest of the crew to throw poles at them), singing pop tunes loudly and badly, and generally taking the piss.

Despite the complaints, 1st Scaffolding continued in the same vein the following day, from early in the morning till around 3pm. No attempt was made to shut them up, and they could be heard from the main road.

On Thursday morning, there was quiet, with no shouting and no pole clanging. One might have assumed they had finished the job. But no, the foreman and a much smaller crew were on site again to take down the last bits of scaffold. However, this time they were being watched by four or five management types. It seems that finally someone at Lewisham Homes or MITIE had taken notice, and it was great to see the gobby-mouthed foreman going about his work quietly, lifting poles and planks without banging them, and with his mouth clamped firmly shut for once. (However, MITIE / Lewisham Homes insist it was a different company doing the 'strike').

Unfortunately, they have left all their poles and planks piled up all around Wilshaw House – the recently dismantled ones are now added to the ones that never got put up that have been taking up valuable parking space for months. When they come back to pick it up, no doubt they will use their loud fume-emitting unsilenced diesel HGV with the engine powered hoist – because they are too lazy to lift the stuff themselves or use pulleys like the other scaffolding companies. Strange that the other companies do not have to leave their stuff here overnight like this lot. In most cases, they bring what they need and use it, only using a small space to store overnight.

Perhaps Ist Scaffolding are exceptionally cheap – this could be why they were MITIE's firm of choice to work here. We were told a few months ago by Leasehold Services that there is a set fee for the scaffolding – so MITIE were possibly making a dirty fat profit out of Ist Scaffolding, and the more professional firms now being used are eating into their dirty fat profits. MITIE's role is to outsource, to sub-contract, and they can't even get that right. But do MITIE get thrown off the job? No. They are "partners" with Lewisham Homes. More on that another time...

Update 19th December:
Lewisham Homes / MITIE gave 1st Scaffolding till 2nd December to move their stuff out of around 25 parking bays. If they didn't meet this deadline, MITIE would move it for them. The deadline was not met. MITIE promised to remove the stuff themselves on Wednesday 10th. That didn't happen either. Five weeks after the Wilshaw scaffolding was struck, the poles and planks were finally removed today (or at least most of them!).

Crossfields Major Works: Scaffolding debacle

As part of 'Decent Homes Major Works' the external refurbishment of our estate began on 18th August with the erection of scaffolding on Wilshaw House, one of the nine blocks on Crossfields. It was originally scheduled to go up on 28th July (if not before).

The scaffolding company, 1st Scaffolding, were very noisy. Three weeks later they were 'thrown off' the site for breaches in Health & Safety. In that time they had only managed to cover less than half the building. By this Monday, the half erected scaffolding will have been up – unalarmed – for NINE weeks.

No Decent Homes work has taken place on the block during this time, so affected residents have had to tolerate a reduction in light for two months for no reason at all. 

Lewisham Homes estimate that scaffolding on each block will be up for around 6 months whilst works take place. However, at Tanner's Hill, scaffolding has been up on Deloraine and Heston Houses since February – nearly 8 months. The most recent 'schedules' have Wilshaw House scaffolding commencing yet again on Monday 20th along with its neighbour Holden House.

Where Wilshaw were supposed to be the first block to receive the 'gift' of major works, it appears they will now be the last – without any explanation for the intervening time.

The only information given to Wilshaw residents was contained in a newsletter published by contractors MITIE (a massive out-sourcing company) in late September. It said "We have recently been in discussion with our scaffolding supply chain partners concerning their work practices, in particular their attention to specific details concerning health & safety. Therefore we have now sourced other suppliers to continue in their place." 

In the meantime, the scaffolding has not come down because there is a contractual dispute that has gone into litigation. We're not sure who's involved with the scaffolding company in this – MITIE or Lewisham Homes. The two have become an interchangeable mess of middle and senior managers saying different things. LH have out-sourced to out-sourcers MITIE, but seem to defer to them. Lewisham Homes defer even more so to surveyors Baily Garner, who earn 1.34% on the total cost of the works (last reckoned to be £36m of central government funds across the borough) and have therefore, unsurprisingly, specified unnecessary work that has gone unchallenged by LH.

A different scaffolding company arrived on the estate on 15th September and began work on Farrer House. Before finishing Farrer, they also worked on Browne House which was the first to be completed. Scaffolders are now working on Castell, Frankham and Finch and have been remarkably quiet and efficient. The contrast between the two companies has been huge – and much noted by residents who have hardly noticed the second company's presence whilst they stealthily cover the whole estate in scaffolding.

The noise made by 1st Scaffolding in the first week was so disturbing that some residents complained to the site office. The nuisance noise was from one scaffolder who never stopped talking/shouting and the vehicle they used to hoist their materials. One complaint was met with "That's scaffolders for you" from the MITIE resident liaison officer. That response was so poor that the complaining resident consequently shouted and swore at the scaffolders themselves, resulting in Lewisham Homes raising an Anti-Social Behaviour complaint against her whilst no action was taken against the scaffolders.

The issue of Wilshaw House scaffolding was raised at a meeting on 11th September, convened by Lewisham Homes' Director of Housing to discuss leaseholder's queries on the Schedule of Works. Leaseholders reported that they had heard that morning from their caretaker that the scaffolders had got the push and that new scaffolders were starting work on another block the following Monday.

The regional head of MITIE, Rod Sutherland, replied: "They have not been sacked. I have slowed the works down because of your queries". 

It was then suggested (and laughed about by some senior managers) that the caretaker was indulging in idle gossip. In fact, he had got the information from the MITIE site foreman and it was true. 

As well as shouting continuously onsite, 1st Scaffolding used a diesel hoist to lift poles and planks (the new company uses pulleys). The hoist was run 30 minutes at a time at intervals whilst they unloaded their materials. It appeared to have no silencer on its exhaust and was pumping diesel fumes into residents' homes. Both the shouting and the diesel hoist vehicle were breaking the guidelines outlined by Lewisham Council's Good Practice Guide, which also states that noise monitoring should be undertaken by the contractors (which it obviously wasn't). There was supposed to be a Scaffolding Inspector on site, but it was three weeks before 1st Scaffolding was asked to leave.

No actual work has started anywhere on the estate yet.

Update: Friday 24 October

No news on the Wilshaw House scaffolding which is still up. Work started on Browne on Wednesday.

We've been told there's a set fee for scaffolding. Some residents have asked for reassurances that just because it makes no difference to the cost how long the scaffolding stays up, works should not be delayed or prolonged because of this, and should be managed so that it is up for the minimum amount of time. The reply given was "the documentation presented to MITIE for tendering purposes required them to charge for scaffolding based on its dimensions alone. However scaffolding companies commonly charge based on dimensions, erection charge, dismantling charge and weekly hire charge. Consequently there is an incentive for MITIE to leave the scaffolding in place for the minimum period necessary to complete the works and have it accepted."

There are only a few items for which scaffolding is required – roof works, brick cleaning, brick and masonry repairs, renewing (undamaged) sealant around windows. Even if these are done first, it seems other works (which don't need scaffolding) must be completed before all works can be 'signed off'. On other estates, inadequate work has had to be done again in order to be fully signed off (usually where residents have intervened), and 'snagging' seems to take a long time. So Crossfields residents can expect to remain in the dark (with a 35% loss of light for those on the lower floors) well into the middle of next summer, if not next autumn.

Update: Monday 3 November

Wilshaw House scaffolding has now been half up and unalarmed for 11 weeks with no work taking place.

The TRA was told last Thursday that Lewisham Homes/MITIE are waiting for 1st Scaffolding to get the appropriate certification required in order to either come back and complete the job or take it down. The preference is for them to complete the job  – but only on the balcony sides of the block. Another company will erect the platforms at the back. That way it will take less time than if 1st Scaffolding take down what they've put up and then another company has to re-erect the front as well.

What beggars belief is how long this company has been allowed to operate without appropriate certification (CISRS or CSCS) or membership of any scaffolding associations. We found out weeks ago that 1st Scaffolding did not have NASC membership (the National Access and Scaffolding Federation is the main scaffolding association in the UK). In other words, MITIE/Lewisham Homes do not check.

 

Recycling on Crossfields

This has been the general state of our recycling bins on a Sunday before Lewisham Council's recycling team come to collect at midday on a Monday. Full to the brim and spilling out. These three are positioned at the main entrance to the estate and look extremely unsightly. They are also seen by members of the public who regularly pass through the estate.

Back in July, we had a chat with one of our caretakers, after the recycling team had failed to empty one of these bins. They won't empty any bins which have been contaminated with food, and won't take black plastic refuse bags (which are likely to have food in them).

There was obviously the need to re-educate everyone on what not to put in the bins. The vinyl stickers on the side of the bins do not tell people what cannot be put in the bins. The large upright sign says 'no plastic bags, garden waste, trade waste or general household waste', but it doesn't specifically say 'no food'. And there hasn't been an up-to-date leaflet through the door for nearly two years despite new people moving into the estate over that time.

Our caretaker said that he'd asked for two more recycling bins because there just weren't enough. On average, one bin is shared with 37 households. Although flat dwellers pay the same amount in Council Tax for the service as houses, they cannot control what their neighbours put in the bins. If a bin is not emptied because of one neighbour's ignorance, there are even less bins available for the following week.

The leaflet that never got delivered

He was particularly concerned because he'd been told that the Council's Refuse & Recycling Team intended to lock the bin lids in the near future and this would result in people leaving plastic bags of stuff by them rather than inside them. He said there had been a leaflet warning of the plan to lock the the bin lids sent to every home quite recently.

If there was, we hadn't received it. We later discovered that there had been a leaflet sent out recently but we only knew one person in Castell House who had received it. From a quick email poll of a few residents in different blocks, we discovered that hardly anyone had got the leaflet. Something was seriously wrong with the Council's distribution contractors. The recycling leaflets most likely ended up in the recycling bins!

The caretaker had also requested extra litter bins (which are emptied by Lewisham Council's Sweeping team) because they have to clear up a lot of litter that doesn't get binned. This is actually the Sweeping Team's job but they're only about once a week. These bins also have to cater for the public passing through, not just the estate's residents. But so far his requests had fallen on deaf ears.

So we got in touch with Lewisham Homes at the end of July. We wrote to top management, and asked for: two more recycling bins; a leaflet distributed to every household saying what can and can't be put in the bins; new vinyl stickers that include what can't be put in the bins; plus more litter bins; and an explanation for why the caretaker's requests have not been heeded.

Management passed our email to Estate Services who then passed it directly to Lewisham Council's Refuse & Recycling Team. We thought this response was rather passing the buck, since Estate Services manage the caretakers who have to go round cleaning up after the Council's Refuse & Recycling Team, plus their previous requests for more bins would have gone to their managers in Estate Services.

Click to enlarge

So we persisted with Estate Services but also rang the Council Refuse Team about the leaflets that had seemingly not found their way through most people's letterboxes. "What leaflets?" they said. "Give us your address so that we can send you one". No, we said, you have to leaflet everyone on the estate. "We'll call you back" they said, but didn't.

However, Lewisham Homes' Estate Services got back in touch within a couple of days to sort it all out, and two weeks later they reported back with the news that they had organised for more bins, stickers and the possibility of new leaflets, which would this time be delivered by the caretakers (for extra cash) to ensure they were actually delivered.

The new recycling bins have now arrived and been placed in more convenient places for those blocks which were previously not very well served. New leaflets are on order. More litter bins are due. Result.

The only query left is why the caretakers' requests were not taken up when they first voiced them months ago.

Another Major Works 'surgery' for Crossfields at the Lounge tomorrow 9th July 5-8pm

This third 'surgery' is apparently being held for 'stragglers' who haven't been to any of the two previous 'surgeries' about Major Works at Deptford Lounge. It has not been generally advertised to all.

As previously reported, leaseholders on the estate were a bit upset at the lack of information they have received from their landlord, Lewisham Homes, about proposed Major Works – aka external building and decoration works to communal areas. The first 'surgery' was held almost a month after estimate bills were issued, with only a week left before the 'consultation' period was to end (July 2nd). The last notifications about such works were in 2010.

It has since transpired that leaseholders did not receive the correct information with their bills. Firstly, a document which usefully outlined Ways To Pay (and when) and gave useful contact numbers was omitted.

Secondly, a fully detailed and itemised Schedule of Works for each block was not provided. Instead, a 'summary' was included that in many cases was too small to read (see below), was too vague and contained builder's jargon (though not as much as the more detailed version). Other estates have received all this detail in the first instance, but Crossfields people were invited to comment on paying out up to £13,000 with only the flimiest of information to go on.

People are required to call up or email to get the full schedule of works for their building, but were not invited to do so. Which is why so many questions were asked at the first meeting. Those who knew to ask for more detail have since received a document dated 25th June (prepared, then, a month after the estimated bills went out).

Notes were taken by Lewisham Homes at the first 'surgery' (that had turned into an impromtu group meeting), and were supposed to be sent out to all leaseholders. These have not yet arrived some two weeks later. A promised 'walkabout' has still not materialised. We are now told this will not happen until about 360,000 quid's worth of scaffolding has gone up.

The scaffolding needs to go up in order for them to determine what work requires doing to the roofs – something that can't be done with a cherry picker or a pair of binoculars, apparently. The scaffolding will then be up for 6 months or more –  a fait accomplis. (Our roofs were renewed less than 20 years ago and should be under guarantee).

Although slightly postponed, two blocks have now received notice that scaffolding will go up on 21st July. The other blocks have no idea when the scaffolding will go up around their own buildings. A notice was put up in stairwells on the two blocks yesterday, and today notices were hand delivered to all the flats by the Resident Liaison Officer who is installed onsite. However, no one knows there is a Resident Liaison Officer, since her details have not been provided on any documentation and notices.

Only on enquiry was one person told today that work would not start until the roof (and gutters, presumably) have been inspected and further consultation with residents has taken place. Another resident rang LH today and was told the switchboard was jammed with calls and to try again tomorrow. Another resident had been told that consultation ended on July 2nd.

News of what has happened at Tanner's Hill Major Works is now filtering down to Crossfields residents and they are shocked to see what has been done there. Here are what our stairways currently look like – in need of a good clean and perhaps some regrouting (some blocks have different colours):

The 30s/40s era tiles are mainly in good condition and people like them. It is the stairs that are the problem but there is no easily identifiable indication in the specifications that the stairs will actually be resurfaced. (In any case, it has been a long running issue that the stairs should be sorted free of cost because the wrong surfacing was applied originally that means they are impossible to clean with a mop and one bucket of water). The surrounding paintwork is also in good nick – it just needs a good clean, but is nevertheless scheduled to be re-painted. This is what MITIE have done to the tiles at Tanner's Hill:

Slightly damaged tiles have been filled in with concrete, then covered over with anti-graffiti paint in a nasty swirly stucco paint. Graffiti is not a big problem on our estate (and probably not at Tanners Hill either). Lewisham Homes need only to check their records to see how much graffiti has been removed in the past five years, and compare the costs.

The coving on the balconies has long required repainting, as have the wrought iron railings in the stairwells. (The railings have mostly deteriorated through the use of a very strong detergent that is used to clean the stairs but is never washed off). Here's an example of our balconies at present, and the 'repainting' they've done at Tanner's Hill...(not actually paint, but some horrible textured concrete!). Huge professional fees have no doubt been paid to the consultants, Bailey Garner, who deemed this necessary.

These are just a couple of issues that are worrying Crossfields people, leaseholders and tenants alike – from things that don't need doing to the greatly exaggerated cost of a tin of paint and an hour's labour to paint 7 sq meters (three times as much as it could be). Plus six months in darkness due to scaffolding, for the privilege of a facelift that nobody asked for at a time when no one can afford it. Lewisham Homes charges 10% on the total costs of the work, in some cases an extra £1300 per flat. That 10% is paying for their gross mismanagement on a project which is making a fortune for MITIE.

Update: We since discovered that the stairwells and balconies at Tanner's Hill had this work done before MITIE began work on their buildings. However, Crossfields leaseholders' Schedule of Works still lists "Balcony copings: painting to rough-cast" (rough-cast is non-smooth paint), and all the stairwell tiles were to be covered in more tiles then painted with an anti-graffiti paint, producing a similar result to stairwells at Tanner's Hill.

Since we complained and got the Conservation Officer involved (Crossfields is part of a designated Conservation Zone) these items have been modified. The tiles will now not be tiled over and painted.

Consultation on Major Works: Wednesday 2nd July

Tenants are invited to attend a 'surgery' on the proposed major works for Crossfields: Wednesday 2nd July 5pm-8pm at Deptford Lounge

Although tenants will not be asked to cough up for any external works to our communal areas, they may be concerned that MITIE are doing the work, having only just recovered from the internal works – which have met with a large degree of disatisfaction and a great many complaints. As one Castell House resident writes, "Why has Lewisham Homes seen fit to employ again, a contractor whose recent internal works on the estate left so much to be desired? Shoddy work, unprofessional behaviour, bodged work, half finished work, no respect for residents or their homes, mess repeatedly left in communal areas, not turning up on time, leaving early before a job was finished, losing house keys, leaving front doors open in unattended flats…"

Last week a 'surgery' was held for leaseholders. The invitation arrived along with a big fat estimated bill and a rather vague specification about what the Major Works were going to be. A 'surgery' consists of Lewisham Homes and MITIE people sitting behind desks and attendees queuing up to ask questions they probably can't answer. Since a lot of angry leaseholders descended on the 'surgery' at the same time, they demanded that a meeting was held there and then on the spot, since they had a lot of questions – and they all had the same questions! The acting head of Leasehold Services and a senior bod at MITIE were most displeased but were forced to go along with it.

Leaseholders have been presented with estimates for the works in varying amounts from £7,500 for each leaseholder in one block to nearly £13,000 in others (strangely the higher amount is for the smallest blocks). So obviously they are hopping mad, especially as the many of the works specified seem not to require doing at all or in some cases relate to items that leaseholders have been paying to have repaired during routine maintenance (but that never get repaired properly).

Where preliminary surveys are required (drains, for instance) the survey and the works resulting from it are lumped into one extortionate figure – regardless of what the survey may uncover.

Very few questions were answered at the impromtu meeting at the 'surgery' but the combined action of the residents resulted in the Lewisham Homes project manager agreeing to do a 'walkabout' in the near future around the estate with some leaseholder representatives to determine exactly what work is actually required. The date for the commencement of works (which will involve the erection of scaffolding) was also postponed, and leaseholders await an amended and more detailed specification.

Crossfields residents are not the only folk unhappy with MITIE. At Tanner's Hill and on other estates, they're up in arms and fed up to the back teeth with MITIE and Lewisham Homes. For example, blocks in Tanners Hill have had their stairway tiles recovered and then painted when there is nothing wrong with them (they just need cleaning – something Lewisham Homes seems to have no understanding of). More details on any borough wide group action soon.

Meanwhile, a Wilshaw House resident uncovered a report on MITIE's activities up north. Last year, Birmingham City Council were trying to claw back £19m they had let slip into MITIE's hands for work that was never done...God forbid Lewisham Homes should make the same mistake....