By Jonathan Guthrie Published: May 8 2009 23:33 | Last updated: May 8 2009 23:33 There is anger in suburbia. Resentment seethes behind the neatly clipped shrubs and freshly painted front doors of housing developments across the country. Caught in the property crash, housebuilders have been offloading unsold private homes to housing associations funded by the taxpayer. Some owner-occupiers are furious and want compensation – they did not expect to live cheek by jowl with so many tenants of social housing. “I have ended up with a £180,000 council house,” said Scott Rutherford, 26, a facilities manager. He is one of a group of disgruntled residents at The Beck, a small development in Dudley, West Midlands. The six couples chatting in the living room of Richard and Mandy Gillard merit the old-fashioned label “respectable working class”. They are plumbers, welders, secretaries and truck drivers. They have had enough personal experience of estates where some locals exhibit what social workers term “challenging behaviours” not to want to live there themselves. They liked marketing literature for The Beck distributed by Barratt Homes that stated: “There is not social housing on the builder’s development.” Indeed, according to Lee Foster, 38, the scale of the development was reduced from 27 to 24 homes by Barratt, so that a proportion of social housing would no longer be mandatory under local planning rules. The couples mostly bought homes on The Beck in the latter half of last year, paying anything from £145,000 to £180,000. Barratt was a reassuring brand. Mr Gillard remembered the old television advertisements in which the Barratt man descended from the sky in a helicopter, dispensing affordable private homes like an airborne Margaret Thatcher. But last November he discovered that Barratt had decided to sell seven properties to Midland Heart, a housing association. The owner-occupiers say they have nothing against Midland Heart tenants. Well, just a few things. These include problems with rubbish, a noisy quad bike, damage to trees and “effing and blinding in the street”. But most of all, they feel that Barratt misled them. They want compensation for a reduction of up to 25 per cent in the value of their homes that they believe proximity to social housing has caused. Mr Gillard, 40, wrote a letter to Adrian Farr, managing director of the Midlands division of Barratt, threatening “bad publicity” and court action for misrepresentation. Mr Farr wrote back promising a vigorous response that might include a damages action for “false allegations”. The residents’ group concluded that it could not afford legal fees. Barratt dissuaded a local newspaper from running an article on The Beck. In a statement, Mr Farr told the FT: “When we started the development we intended it would be for private housing and our statements were consistent with that. However, long after private sales to our customers were completed, changed market conditions meant we agreed to make some homes available under the new government-backed scheme which facilitates housing associations buying from developers.” Carl Larter, development director of Midland Heart, said: “We take anti-social behaviour very seriously. If anyone has a problem with our tenants they can ring up and we will send a properties officer to investigate right away.” The Beck is not the only new estate where owner-occupiers are up in arms because a developer has sold an unexpectedly large number of properties for social housing. Mr Larter said that housing associations were making “hundreds, not to say, thousands” of cut-price bulk purchases from housebuilders across the country. Building, an industry magazine, has identified developments in Hampshire, Wiltshire and Wales where residents have threatened to sue Bellway. A statement to the FT from the housebuilder did not mention these schemes, but said: “By including affordable housing we are often able to complete developments promptly. This is a particularly relevant factor in the present market.” These are very British rows, involving money, fine distinctions of class and the visceral significance of home ownership. It may be prejudiced to object to low-income tenants moving in next door. But a lot more owner-occupiers are set to exhibit that prejudice if property prices stay low. Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009Resentment stirs on suburban estates
MORE IN THIS SECTION
Saturday, 9 May 2009
Posts
