Meeting documents

APPENDIX 3

Dear Sue,

We've been deep in discussion about Mount Beacon Lodge, having been a little disconcerted by the monthly figure of £1200.00 suggested by yourselves as a "negotiating position". We wish to state from the outset that we see ourselves as social landlords - a Housing Association - and emphatically not a commercial landlord. Indeed, we're a registered Friendly Society, and our constitution does not allow us to make profits. We would like you to consider us as you would Somer in these negotiations.

You are, I'm sure, aware that Mount Beacon Cottage - the connected "house-next-door" to the Lodge - is let by Somer H.A. to its tenants for £60.00 per week. This is the kind of rent level relevant to the Co-op. in all its properties.

The Co-op's rental income from Mt. Beacon Lodge is (round figures) £490.00 per calendar month, from the three tenant-members. We would not wish to alter this amount, it being in line with our other rents and commensurate with our goal of providing affordable housing, until our next annual rent review (when rents would normally rise to accommodate inflationary pressures but not for any other reason).

In what we hope will be our partnership with the Council on Mt. Beacon Lodge, we would see the breakdown of the rental income - very broad round figures, these - as follows:

£490.00 pcm to the Co-op., of which

£100.00 to improve the property (approximately £18000 over 15 years)

£180.00 to the Co-op (routine deferral of administration and running costs)

£70.00 to day to day and cyclical maintenance

£50.00 to the Co-op's Contingency Fund

leaving

£90.00pcm. payable to the Council.

In pressing you to accept this broad outline, the Co-op has asked me to make a few points.

1. Mount Beacon Lodge would remain the property of the Council - so would its value.

2. Its value will be increased incrementally year on year at no cost to the Council through improvements made by the Co-op.

3. The approximate sum for improvements - £18000 over 15 years - may seem low. Please take into consideration the fact that the Co-op will only be paying wages where especially skilled work is called for or legally necessary: all works of whatever kind will otherwise be done by members voluntarily. We are not unskilled; we have a great deal of experience; this is an enormous saving (and a main reason why Co-ops are so efficient and effective!).

4. There would be an income, albeit small, for the Council, where none exists now.

5. The Co-op would take responsibility for bringing the property up to Decent Homes Standard by 2010.

There are, of course many other points I could mention; at this time, however, it's probably of more use to " put some cards on the table". I would just like to add, though, that I think this is a new development of an old relationship between the Co-op and the Council. We've housed over 350 people in the B&NES area over the last 25years, people who lacked the "points" to be housed by the Council. Most of these people were housed in properties owned by the Council which were, for various reasons, unsuitable for normal "Social Housing"- we have cared for and improved the buildings in most cases, using the small grants available, our own limited resources, and - of course - our own, volunteer, labour. The Co-op members who did this have been an asset, then; saving and husbanding dilapidated buildings belonging to the Council at no cost to rate- or Council Tax- payers. This relationship could well grow in future years: bringing "over the shop" and similar properties up to Decent Homes Standard; housing low paid workers, volunteer workers, and key workers; assisting key worker or other groups to start their own co-ops - nurses, say, or teachers - we have a wealth of communicable experience in the field.

We look forward in hope to hearing from you soon. I remain

Yours in Co-operation,

Ric Jerrom

(Hon.Sec. Bath Housing Co-operative)