Skip to main content

Birmingham offers fourth option for Council Tenants

There has been considerable debate about how to fund improvements to council housing.

Three options are generally made available by government:

Stock Transfer - where all the housing stock moves to an RSL (Registered Social Landlord - aka Housing Association)

ALMO - Arms Length Management Organisation - where the goverment gives the council about £4,600 per property if they set up a remote structure for managing Housing.

PFI - Which is where a contract for managing properties is created.

The fourth option is whereby the stock continues to be managed by the council potentially involving tenants as part of the management.

What Birmingham is doing which is unique is to offer tenants a positive retention option that can be funded. Housing Finance can be a bit confusing. In essence by recycling money that comes in from the sale of housing land we can fund the 4th option. (Which is required to make up the missing £165 Million.)

Essential things in housing, however include:
  1. Efficiency - if you are not efficient then you need more resources
  2. Dealing with bad behaviour - the same issue regardless of tenure actually
  3. Getting enough stable housing - some primary schools have a 20% turnover each year of children through unstable housing.




Comments

Bob Piper said…
John, are you saying the ODPM is allowing Birmingham to retain all of its capital receips for the sale of housing 'land, as opposed to the sale of housing, to use for housing repairs?
Bob Piper said…
John, is it as simple as that? The ODPM allows the retention of capital receipts on the sale of housing land? It sounds so easy I cannot understand why Councils (of all persuasions) continue on the PFI/Stock Transfer route.
John Hemming said…
Only if the land does not have houses on it.

RtB keeps 25% of the capital receipt.

Popular posts from this blog

Standards Board and Ken Livingstone

The link is to the case where Ken Livingstone appealed the decision of the Adjudication Panel for England.

The Standards Board and associated Adjudication Panel have done a lot of damage to democracy in the UK. The courts are, however, bringing them into more sanity.

The point about Ken Livingstone's case is that it was high profile and he also could afford to appeal. The Standard Board has a problem in that those subject to its enquiries face substantial costs that they cannot claim back.

This is an issue that needs further work.

In essence the Judge found that what he said brought him into disrepute, but not the office of Mayor. We do need the machinery of the SBE and APE to concentrate on things that matter rather than people being rude to each other.

Problems with Outlook Express - emails lost dbx corruption

In the light of the enthusiasm shown for my post relating to the OCX control that must not be named (and probably Microsoft's most embarrassing error of recent years) I thought I would write someting about Outlook Express.

Outlook Express is the email client that comes as part of windows. I use it myself, although I have my emails filtered through a spam filter of my own devising written in java. It takes email off a number of servers using POP3 (Post Office Protocol TCP Port 110) and sends it using SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol port 25).

I have recently spent a few hours dealing with the problem that arises when .dbx files get corrupted during compacting.

Outlook Express (OE) stores the emails (and other things) in files with the suffix .dbx. Each folder has its own .dbx file. They are stored in hidden directories. This makes it harder to deal with things when OE goes wrong.

It is very important to back up your stored *.dbx files as otherwise if you have a disk crash/stol…

Statement re False Allegations Campaign

Many people will know that my family and I have been subject to a campaign of false allegations by Esther Baker for the past 4 1/2 years. Yesterday there was a court judgment Baker v Hemming [2019] EWHC 2950 (QB) which formally confirmed that the allegations were false. Esther Baker, who had brought a libel claim against me, dropped her defence of Truth to my counter-claim and was taken by the judge as no longer trying to prove her allegations. Due to Baker's various breaches of court rules and orders, she has been barred from further repeating her allegations even in the court proceedings. Further claim of mine in libel against Baker are ongoing. There is a good summary in the Daily Mail here.

This demonstrates the challenge in fighting false allegations in today's Britain. A substantial campaign was built up to promote allegations which had no substance to them. Various Labour MPs and in pa…