Go down


Post  ih8thece on Wed Mar 03, 2010 12:06 pm

The Regents Park Estate lacks a tenants forum. I would just like to communicate to other CE tenants.

I would really like to commend all the efforts of all the 4 estate committee members and CE tenants who are writing, demonstrating and fighting the unfairness of the CE corporation re. their greedy, profit-driven core values: COMMERCIALISM, COMMERCIALISM, COMMERCIALISM.

The 'Environmental Stewardism' and 'Integrity' are mythical propoganda...
Any other corporation would subject to examination under trades description and advertising standards, but they manange to twist the truth in the light of public accountability.

The truth is their management 'expertise' is outstanding - especially in the practices of fraud and internal corruption - Tenants on the NW1 Cumberland Estate were robbed out of £100,000 ( but if financial crime had not been investigated, the bullying and contempt would have continued to be denied all along the management line.
They even pay the Ombudsman scheme and change their rules about dealing with complaints. superficially it appears reasonable, but it is to silence the truth from tenants.


The CE recently sent out another letter this year to Cumberland Estate tenants explaining how to apply for housing benefit to pay the “affordable” rent. If the CE has to do this it means that:

1) Many tenants actually struggle to pay the rents and need supplementation
2) The rents are not really “affordable” (If tenants are employed, or on fixed/pension income).
3) The CE claim that they “subsidise” tenants and return rent revenues to the taxpayer, however - housing benefit, which subsidises rent, is also funded by taxpayers.

So in actual fact, taxpayers are subsidising the revenue that the CE is benefiting from.
It leads to question:
How many tenancys require assistance to meet rent?
How much rent is really being funded by the taxpayer?

The CE merely facilitate a circular exchange, while profiting in their legalised position of 'monarchy henchmen'.
They do not see themselves as civil servants because the CE Act 1961 places them in a uniquely a privileged position. The Crown Estate Act 1961 enables the current executives to do exactly as they will. They are completely unrestricted by Parliament or any government agencies and are only answerable to direction from the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State in a circular way: Section 1. Clauses: 3-5. ][url= ] [/url]
The position of power that they occupy; the accountability of their role as caretakers of land, integrity values, stewardism, that should be publicly questioned and examined. I hope that this sell off issue will lead to a Review of The Crown Estate Act.

In his book, "Who Owns Britain", Kevin Cahill describes the Crown Estate, (and the Church Commissioners), as 'A Financial Black Hole in Britain's Economy'. The board pay themselves hughly overvalued salaries and bonuses that are in excess of most peoples annual wage. It is obvious they wish to cut loose from the small percentage ofprofit and high running costs of social housing concerns.

The modern day homes-for-heroes is still a high priority need - 'affordable' housing for the present day heroes on the front line for society - firefighters, nurses, social workers teachers etc., whose wages limit housing options in the capital and who a vastly undervalued for the essential role they play. (Who would put out fires and render first aid if the CE's precious Regent St commercial property was ablaze?)

It is worth checking the Wiki definition of the Crown and C.Estate which describes the CE as a managing corporation for property that belongs, in effect, to the Nation State. It is not owned by the landlords. as many of the managing agents seem to think and communicate to tenants so.



Posts : 4
Join date : 2010-03-02
Location : Cumberland Estate NW1

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum