NW providers merge to create mega association
Share
Two north west housing groups are to amalgamate to form one of the largest associations in England, with nearly 40,000 homes across 27 local authority areas.
Vicinity Housing Group and Contour Housing Group have announced they will join forces and create a new parent body bringing together seven stock-holding membership organisations.
Phil Gandy, chief executive of Vicinity, said: ‘Fundamentally our cultures, aspirations and long-term goals are a good match and we operate within a very similar framework of principles, with shared commitments to our federated structure and the clear local focus and accountability this provides for tenants.’
Mike Creamer, chief executive of Contour, said: ‘To put it simply, we will be better together; better able to deliver services to our tenants and better placed to face future challenges.’
The housing groups started discussions after announcing their intention to merge in October last year.
They will now consult with tenants and stakeholders and if the plan receives approval it will happen on 31 March 2011.
Vicinity works across Merseyside, Cheshire and Lancashire and owns and manages 17,500 homes. Its subsidiaries include Atrium, Beechwood Ballantyne, Cobalt Housing, Liverpool Housing Trust and Ribble Valley Homes.
Contour Housing Group owns and manages more than 20,000 homes in Lancashire, Cheshire and Greater Manchester, and its member organisations are Contour Homes, Hyndburn Homes, Peak Valley Housing Association and Contour Property Services.
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (2)
kass | 28/07/2010 5:30 pm
To the tenants who are satisfied with services of these two Housing Associations, I would advice to be very careful to say yes to any merger. Do not be fooled by BIGGER meaning better... It ain't.
Just ask other tenants who have gone trhough similar mergers how really better off they are before saying yes.
To residents unsatisfied wit hthese two organisations demand what extra powers would they have in monitoring a bigger organisation to defend their rights and services controlling their homes(EFFECTIVE AND PRACTICAL - do not be fooled by empty promises - demand everyting they promise in writing and signed by the chief executives).
And do not be fooled by their consultation being democratic and fair, before replying to any consultation demand to check how will residents be able to make sure what they say in the consultation will be applied.
If you are unsatisified with their reply simply boycott any consultation and inform of this the housing regulator or whoever should be checking mergers of this kind.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
outside housing | 29/07/2010 10:15 am
I agree with kass 100%. I know from experience of a stock tranfer in London some years ago that as far as the organisations involved are concerned the concept of "consulting with tenants and stakeholders" isn't always genuine. I do believe that when organisations get as far into the process as these two seem to have, they are at the stage of measuring offices for desk space, looking at physical moves and planning who to loose when posts are duplicated.
The "consultation will no doubt be weighted heavily and when staff knock on tenant's doors (as I witnessed in a previous "consultation") I would not be surprised to find tenants are strongly encouraged to vote for the merger.
The annoying thing is I imagine people like Phil Gandy and Mike Creamer are so lost in their own spin and perceived importance that they actually believe they'll be able to fool anybody into believing if the tenants and stakeholders disagree that it won't happen.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment