L&Q Court of Appeal case
Posted in:
Discussion |
Legal debate
08/01/2009 4:32 pm
Like a villain in a teen slasher movie the debate about whether housing associations are public or private bodies won’t lay down and die.
In the Court of Appeal next month L&Q Group will attempt to quash a High Court ruling that meant it should be considered a public body in relation to the allocation, management and termination of housing tenancies.
It’s a case that had fundamental implications for housing associations – hence L&Q’s decision to fight to the bitter end.
But is the group right to do so? Will the ruling really be as damaging to associations as feared? Or should they resign themselves to the idea that when it comes to certain issues they are little different to their colleagues in council housing departments?
Unsuitable or offensive?
Report this discussion
Author
Message
10/01/2009 11:32 am
London and Quadrant do not certainly see themselves as like Council Housing Department, because their aim is to be more like a private landlord than a social one – but of course they still want all the government funding as a social landlord at the same time!... In other words they want their cake and eat it... But the worse thing is they are not doing this for the benefit of their tenants...
Last December (2008) I attended my street asssociation general meeting, which is in an area where London and Quadrant has a fair amount of properties. Talking about maintenance issues and safety issues at that meeting the residents stated that London and Quadrant was the WORST landlord you can get... No one single resident present opposed this view.... Also some time ago London and Quadrant fought a court case against one of his residents (Mark Vella V London and Quadrant) to force their tenants to live with unacceptable and untollerable noise due to the poor (in-decent state) of their properties... This is what London and Quadrant is all about. It is not there for us tenants, who should be the reason why they exists and why their directors get their high salaries, but to fight to the bitter end to make any democratic and real service impossible to us tenants...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
20/01/2010 9:20 am
Well done Kass, another argument poorly thought out.
Mr Vella lost the case, the issue around this case was soundproofing in converted street properties, an issue for any landlord, not just L&Q, with this type of property. LB Lambeth had established the noise was not at nuisance level and the court case established that the property was not 'detrimental to health'. Nor was the issue that L&Q had allowed the property to get into an indecent state as you claim.
But please don't let the truth stop you, it doesn't normally.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
20/01/2010 9:21 am
Well done Kass, another argument poorly thought out.
Mr Vella lost the case, the issue around this case was soundproofing in converted street properties, an issue for any landlord, not just L&Q, with this type of property. LB Lambeth had established the noise was not at nuisance level and the court case established that the property was not 'detrimental to health'. Nor was the issue that L&Q had allowed the property to get into an indecent state as you claim.
But please don't let the truth stop you, it doesn't normally.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
20/01/2010 11:15 am
Anyone would like to comment about the L&Q v Vella case?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
20/01/2010 2:48 pm
Yes, I would like to ask dgeorgea - How long have you worked for L&Q?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 10:36 am
I don't, my involvement in housing is voluntary, and not with L&Q or Lambeth.
So the assumption that I know something of the case must mean I work for L&Q? Like everyone else here I have access to the internet, it is not exactly rocket science.
Kass quoted a case that he believed backed his case with very little information on the case so I chose to look to see what happened.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 11:10 am
"dgeorgea Thu, 21 Jan 2010 10:36 GMT
... I don't, my involvement in housing is voluntary, and not with L&Q or Lambeth..."
And what is is exactly you do in housing in a voluntary capacity?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 11:32 am
Kass your arrogance in questioning who and what others do is becoming tring to say the least. Irrespective of what someone does or doesn't do, their opinion or input is valid. You're "only" a tenant (cue outrage) your involvement in housing is only the same as milions of others in this country, i.e you live in one, yet that doesn't stop you....
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 12:07 pm
Harry Lime Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:32 GMT
What's all that got to do with anything, apart from you having a go at me in one of your outburst moods?
IF I do not know what a poster connection with social housing is, how can I understand from which angle s/he is looking at the issue talked about?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 12:11 pm
Can you answer a question without a question? Have you ever posted without it ending with a question mark?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 12:16 pm
Harry Lime Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:11 GMT
Yes, I have. Many times in the past if you check... and just now, to calm you down, look:
Not knowing what a poster's connection with social housing is, I would not understand from which angle s/he is looking at the issue talked about.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 12:27 pm
I still don't see the relevance of that, it suggests that someone has to be on the certain side of a fence depending on their employment or possible political views. All that will do is reinforce stereotypical views. Divorce someone's comments from what they do as a job.
I work in housing, but I also live in a house. I would absoutely support any move to maximise sound insulation, but I also know it's a snowball chance in hell's chance of attracting funding.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 1:34 pm
The Vella case was in 2005.
The defendant was LB Lambeth not L&Q.
The case could have involved all or any landlord as it concerned Vella taking the case to ask the court for the council to issue a Noise Abatement notice on L&Q.
The court (unfortunately) refused because the property was not derelict or verminous that it legally needed to be (apparently) for such a notice to be issued.
The law can sometimes be an ass and fail to keep up with modern living as the tenant, Mr Vella, has to like or lump the noise.
Kass' anger over the situation is well founded but directed wrongly, as its the law on noise pollution thats at fault and not any landlord or council.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 2:25 pm
Kass, I both work in social housing and live in social housing. To keep in line with all other 'so-called housing professionals' should I undertake a sustained campaign of self-abuse?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 5:09 pm
>IF I do not know what a poster connection with social housing is, how can I understand from which angle s/he is looking at the issue talked about?<
Normally I would have no problem answering that question, and have done so previously on this site.
However experience and reading on this site the above comment is a joke, since what you are looking for is angle to insult or discredit in your mind what I have said.
If you feel I have put an angle on the post then by all means feel free to quesiton it.
It was you, aware that a court case took place involving two of the three parties with extremely limited knowledge of what it was about or the result, decided to use it to put your angle on your argument, though it was totally irrelevant and did not back up what you were asserting.
As you pointed out this is an open forum and posters are free to post what they want regardless if others disagree with them. Even if the day before on the same thread you told another poster to post elsewhere on the forum, and continually demand to know what peoples connection to housing is and if they work for a social landlord, who they are.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
21/01/2010 5:09 pm
>IF I do not know what a poster connection with social housing is, how can I understand from which angle s/he is looking at the issue talked about?<
Normally I would have no problem answering that question, and have done so previously on this site.
However experience and reading on this site the above comment is a joke, since what you are looking for is angle to insult or discredit in your mind what I have said.
If you feel I have put an angle on the post then by all means feel free to quesiton it.
It was you, aware that a court case took place involving two of the three parties with extremely limited knowledge of what it was about or the result, decided to use it to put your angle on your argument, though it was totally irrelevant and did not back up what you were asserting.
As you pointed out this is an open forum and posters are free to post what they want regardless if others disagree with them. Even if the day before on the same thread you told another poster to post elsewhere on the forum, and continually demand to know what peoples connection to housing is and if they work for a social landlord, who they are.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
22/01/2010 10:24 am
What a bunch of silly comments starting to argue on a very simple question. To deny that knowing whether the poster is a lawyer in housing, a tenant, or specialist on asbo, an architect, or a housing minister, etc, is of no help or importance to the readers who are trying to form an opinion about what is being said is as idiotic as you can get.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
22/01/2010 11:29 am
On the contrary Kass, I just feel sorry for you assigning value to someone's views on that basis. After all, I remember you saying (on another thread, yawn) that you wouldn't accept a medical professional's opinion immediately without consulting others, so what's the difference? As I said, divorce the comments from what/who someone is. Try forming an opinion on your own, or judging someone's comments on just that, their comments.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
22/01/2010 11:45 am
"Harry Lime Fri, 22 Jan 2010 11:29 GMT
On the contrary Kass, I just feel sorry for you assigning value to someone's views on that basis...."
I have got to correct again. I do not have to accept or refuse opinions depending on the profession of the the poster or soley on the basis of their connection to social housing...
But if someone tells you are mentally ill, right?, is not of any interest to you knowing whether the person saying it is a qualified doctor or just an ordinary bloke?
It does not mean you believe the one or the other, but by knowing the qualification (or lack of it) of the person who told you you are ill you might find it helpful for yourself to decide whether to go and further check if you have an illness or just believe it's just someone joking about it.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
15/03/2012 11:05 am
Law Jobs
However, in order to successfully take a law job it is important that you have a record as a high achiever. In order to become a solicitor, for example, you will need to have achieved high grades at GCSE and A-Level and at least a 2:1 at degree level.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this reply
