From:
Kathy mcmullen
Date:
Mar 28 15:20 UTC
Short link
Does this situation demonstrate that the council as provider of housing for
difficult-to-house tenants is not up to the job of providing the required
services: support for addicts & the mentally ill, in accommodation where
support services as opposed to security is in place?
http://www.theargus.co.uk/display.var.2149844.0.0.php?utag=20747
Rather than an enquiry into this particular case, I think scrutiny of council
housing provision in its entirety is needed, locally. If homeless addicts are
placed in a priority category on the housing list, & provided with good
accommodation which they then trash, not only is this costly, financially and
socially, it deprives others of the housing, & still leaves the council with
the problem of housing problematic individuals if they are evicted & become
homeless again. This bundle of problems is complicated by the council having to
be both provider, landlord and regulator; not help either by the very low
council rents.
From:
Kathy mcmullen
Date:
Mar 28 19:19 UTC
Short link
If you contact your ward councillor they;ll explain the system to you. You
could also ask them if they have any solutions, improvements that would be
politically viable?
Kathleen
----- Original Message -----
From: <<email obscured>>
To: "Kathleen.McMullen" <<email obscured>>
Cc: "BH@forums" <<email obscured>>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: [BH-Issues] Council homes trashed
> Reading the article and then the comments certainly made me think about my
> assumption that Brighton and Hove residents were more tolerant than
> elsewhere in this country.
>
> The article did not mention if the clear up was going to be paid for by
tax
> payers or if an insurance claim could be made. Does anyone know if there
is
> any form of insurance that could be part of the council rent ?
>
> David Ruffett
> Manufacturing Planning Systems Manager
>
> +44 (0)1293 654 492
> <email obscured>
>
>
>
>
> "Kathleen.McMulle
> n"
> <kathleen.mcmulle To
> <email obscured>> "BH@forums"
> <<email obscured>>
> 28/03/2008 15:20 cc
>
> Subject
> [BH-Issues] Council homes trashed
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Does this situation demonstrate that the council as provider of housing
for
> difficult-to-house tenants is not up to the job of providing the required
> services: support for addicts & the mentally ill, in accommodation where
> support services as opposed to security is in place?
>
>
> http://www.theargus.co.uk/display.var.2149844.0.0.php?utag=20747
>
>
> Rather than an enquiry into this particular case, I think scrutiny of
> council housing provision in its entirety is needed, locally. If homeless
> addicts are placed in a priority category on the housing list, & provided
> with good accommodation which they then trash, not only is this costly,
> financially and socially, it deprives others of the housing, & still
leaves
> the council with the problem of housing problematic individuals if they
are
> evicted & become homeless again. This bundle of problems is complicated by
> the council having to be both provider, landlord and regulator; not help
> either by the very low council rents.
>
> Kathleen
>
>
> Kathleen mcmullen
> BN3 1JU, Brighton & Hove
> Info about Kathy mcmullen:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/kathleenmcmullen
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/5IabzspR7OcKn02nCMU2Fq
> -----------------------------------------
> To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
> To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>
> More info about Brighton & Hove Issues Forum:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bh
>
> E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG.
> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.1/1347 - Release Date:
27/03/2008 19:15
>
>