saltdean hit back

Dear David
I am concerned that it is proposed to change the letting policy for the council owned brick built beach chalets without prior consultation with existing beach chalet tenants.The first that the tenants based at Saltdean knew of the proposal was via The Argus news story of Wednesday 1st December this year which in effect deprived them of the opportunity to address your Culture,Recreation&Tourism cabinet member meeting on 7th December.
Whilst I fully support the potential for new tenants to enjoy the benefits of renting a beach chalet I believe it is unneccessary to alter the existing tenancy arrangements to allow this to happen.A clause already exists in the present  arrangements to evict those tenants who do not maintain their chalet to the standard that the council demands of them.Take the example of those chalets situated at Rottingdean.The vast majority of them have not had their doors painted annually to the councils specification.If the council enforced its clause relating to maintanance I believe that immediately twenty eight chalets could be offered up to new tenants.
Whilst it may be the case that elsewhere in the city the chalets are little used even at the height of summer it is certainly not the case at Saltdean where many of the chalets are regularly used throughout the whole year.In fact a vibrant community exists amongst Saltdean beach chalet tenants which has very positive benefits for all residents of and visitors to Saltdean.
It was beachutters who successfully campaigned a number of years ago to ensure that beach provision at Saltdean was not lessened when the beaches were reconfigured,it was beachutters who campaigned to ensure that we did not lose toilet facilities at the seafront,it was beachutters who campaigned to ensure that we did not lose disabled parking facilities and it is beachutters and friends who regularly undertake litter picks on the beaches at Saltdean to clear broken glass and rubbish to help to make sure that those beaches are safer and more pleasant for everybody to use.
Please do not penalise this community of interest and remove their tenancies when a mechanism already exists for you to achieve your noble aim of allowing more local residents to enjoy the benefits of the beach chalets.
Indeed to my knowledge there have been at least six changes of tenancy amongst the twenty Saltdean beach chalets in recent years due to deaths and tenants deciding to not renew their tenancy.
Thankyou for your time in reading this
Kind regards

crap press release dated nov 29th

Moves to cut beach chalet waiting list

A novel plan to share out Brighton & Hove’s limited supply of beach chalets is being considered by the council.
It would mean 100 existing brick-built chalets being offered for limited periods, instead of being rented indefinitely by individuals.
The council is stressing the scheme would not affect Hove’s wooden beach huts which are owner-occupied and can be bought and sold on the open market.
A council report says the move would address the current situation where over 100 people are languishing on a waiting list – some for over 10 years.  At the same time, says the report, the council gets regular complaints that many chalets appear unused, even in the height of summer.
Officials are suggesting chalets could be offered with leases for a maximum period of five years.  Anyone who has held a lease for over five years may keep it for a further two years.  People holding a lease for under five years may keep it until that period elapses.
A decision is expected at one of the regular meetings led by cabinet councillor for culture David Smith, on December 7.
It is also proposed that rents would go up by 10 per cent.  Officials say prices would be comparable to those in other resorts yet earn the authority an extra £50,000.
Current prices range from over £700 a year for chalets with water and electricity to about £400 for basic chalets in less favoured positions.
There are groups of brick-built chalets in Hove, Madeira Drive, Ovingdean, Rottingdean and Saltdean.
Waiting lists would be closed to non-residents – they presently include a handful from outside the city.
Once a tenancy expires the person would be able to return to the bottom of the waiting list.

Cllr Smith said:  “These are publicly-owned assets so it seems unfair to have residents effectively permanently excluded from them in a queue which never moves.  It could be that charging more would make people more committed to using them - or giving them up if they don’t.”

more from the argus

i made a comment, too --
 THE TORIES :  they will also start advocating evicting council house tenants so that someone else can 'have a turn'........

MADEIRA DRIVE 23 chalets: more from the argus

MADEIRA DRIVE 23 chalets: more from the argus

more on the proposed eviction

I have garnered support from the ward councillors and opposition spokepersons and I have had a "question" tabled (and accepted) for the 7th December 2010 meeting in Hove Town Hall at 4pm.
A tenant in Rottingdean also asked about the consultation process.
I have ask for support from Simon Kirby MP.

this is my question --
What real evidence that,  such as the annualised numbers on the list for each of the 5 chalet areas involved,  they are “little used”  and what research is there as to the reason for that apparent “little use”  and what difference would it to the finances of the council to alter the tenancies in this way and   why has there been no consideration of applying any new lease to new tenants only,  retaining the original lease for current tenants,  much like employers use “natural wastage” to get rid of dead wood? 

Comment from a tenant:
item 42 is a typical composite motion -- the 10% rent hike is bad enough but to wrap it up with an eviction notice is the worst Christmas present of the year --
do please try to get it un-packed and the lease proposals kicked out....

another comment:
why not build more chalets elsewhere if there is a problem of "closed waiting lists"?
as to alternative options for the Council: yes, there is a rationing issue but, you are right, it would be easy to construct more elsewhere......
but the model brakes down a bit when it is not simple needs like housing per se...just like council tenants being kicked out if their income is too high......? or residents parking list ("sorry, you have a permit now, but you lose it after one year and join the queue at the bottom...")

letter to argus - FYI

Dear Editor
 re: Shake up -- Dec 1st article page 17th

I am a long-standing tenant of a beach hut on Madeira Drive and have just heard,  by chance,  that without being  consulted,  or even informed,  there is a proposal to be put before the Council on Tuesday 1st Dec.  that most tenants,  including me,  will be evicted for no apparent reason in two year's time.

I am a pensioner with a disability and I use my hut most days all year round.  I find it essential for my health and well-being.

It will be a devastating blow if it is taken away from me.  I see no justice in this proposal.

Of course there is high demand for the few remaining beach huts,  as well over 100 around West Pier and the Undercliff have been done away with in recent years.

yrs
Martin Farnham

ALERT -- COUNCIL TO EVICT US ALL

ALERT -- COUNCIL TO EVICT US ALL

WE NEED LEGAL ADVICE THAT THERE IS LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION THAT THE TERMS WOULD NOT BE VARIED UNILATERALLY ?

or else we riot.........................



argus report that

2. RECOMMENDATIONS:
2.1 That the Cabinet Member for Culture, Recreation & Tourism approves the
introduction of a fixed term tenancy for a period of five years for beach chalets.
2.2 That the Cabinet Member for Culture, Recreation & Tourism approves the
proposed 10% increase in the annual rent for chalets.
2.3 That the Cabinet Member for Culture, Recreation & Tourism approves the new
procedure for beach chalet waiting lists.
...................................
3.5 The chalets are let by way of a tenancy agreement for an indefinite length of time
and subject to an annual rent. They cannot be sold on by the tenant or inherited.
The agreements can be determined by either landlord or tenant on two months
notice.
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Proposal
3.10 As the chalets are let on a tenancy for an indefinite length of time this would
enable the waiting list to become active again. To enable a phased introduction
of this change tenants who have occupied a chalet for more than five years could
be given two more years of occupation from April 2011. Tenants who have
occupied a chalet for less than 5 years will be allowed to continue for a full 5 year
period.
3.11 Thus in April 2013 the majority of chalets will become available for rent and the
waiting lists can be reopened. The chalets will then be fully maintained by the
Council including the doors (locks will remain the tenant’s responsibility).