More than 1,000 homes across London have been unfairly labelled ‘obsolete’ by the Mayor and local councils in bids to demolish them.
The Mayor’s funding guidance allows grants to be claimed for demolition only if the homes are defined as ‘obsolete’, but Sian Berry was shocked to find out the scale and inconsistency of the use of this exception.
And while the exception was only to apply if councils can prove the home is obsolete, Sian's research reveals City Hall has been collecting no evidence whatsoever from councils in their bids for funding.
Last year, the Mayor of London admitted to Green London Assembly member, Sian Berry, that since 2021 he had given out new housebuilding grants to demolish and replace 1,008 homes defined as ‘obsolete’.[i]
This is despite specific grant conditions in the new 2021-26 GLA Affordable Homes Programme guidance, to prevent the Mayor’s funding going towards demolition in all but exceptional circumstances.[ii] In 2021, Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, said in response to questions about the new conditions: “The reality is there will be very little available to buy homes for demolition on estate regeneration schemes.”[iii]
Sian Berry said: “Putting more than one thousand homes in line for demolition is far more than a rare exception to the new policy. London has a long and sorry history of dodgy estate demolition.[iv] Now, despite the Mayor’s promises, this loop lets it continue on the same kind of scale.”
Our investigation
Sian and her team in City Hall set out to investigate why so many social housing providers are using this loophole in the new policy to claim public subsidy for their demolition schemes. Her team asked each council area named in the Mayor’s response to her original question, whether any of their own estates were included in their applications, and what their justification to the Mayor was for defining homes as ‘obsolete’ if so.[v]
She also followed up with the Mayor to ask him what reasons he was accepting from Councils using this loophole.[vi] In one of his answers he said: “In identifying obsolete homes councils and social landlords were guided by the definition of obsolete homes available in GLA Affordable housing capital funding guide. No further criteria or information on this was collected at bidding stage for the Affordable housing 2021-26 programme.”[vii]
The definition of ‘obsolete’ was therefore being left by the Mayor for councils and housing associations to decide for themselves.
The GLA’s Homes For Londoners: Affordable Homes Programme 2021-26 Funding Guidance document published in November 2020 states that: “Funding will not be available for units that replace homes that have been, or will be, demolished. Where homes have become obsolete the GLA will consider funding these replacement homes in exceptional circumstances, and only as part of a scheme that will increase the number of homes overall.”
The GLA’s Capital Funding Guide states that: “AHP 21-26 grant can be used for new homes which are replacing existing homes, only where those existing homes are obsolete. An obsolete home is defined as one where an affordable home is no longer considered by the landlord to be capable for letting for long term tenancies for reasons pertaining to condition, type or building standards, regulations or safety. The replacement of obsolete homes will only be funded when they are part of a project that also delivers a net increase in affordable housing. The GLA will only provide funding for replacement of obsolete homes on an exceptional basis.”
In total, six out of the seven councils claiming grants for their own schemes responded to Sian’s information requests about their definitions used:
- Three councils (Barnet, Camden and Ealing) simply cited the GLA funding conditions, which effectively leave it up to councils themselves to define what ‘obsolete’ means, and did not give details of their assessments.
- Two of these councils (Barnet and Camden) said they mainly relied upon resident consent for defining their homes as ‘obsolete’.
- Three councils (Enfield, Hounslow and Lewisham) gave more details, citing problems including with stock condition, safety or the size and accessibility of homes.
- Three councils (Richmond upon Thames, Westminster and Kensington and Chelsea) told us they had not claimed the grants, meaning that housing associations in the boroughs had made the applications. The Mayor has refused to provide any details of which housing providers have claimed these grants, and it is not currently possible to use freedom of information rights to get answers from housing associations.[i]
- Lambeth Council refused to provide any information in response to freedom of information or councillor questions.
On the ground, Sian and her team have been visiting estates affected, and it is clear that the definition of ‘obsolete’ doesn’t always relate to the design or original construction quality of homes.
South Lambeth
The South Lambeth estate is believed to contain homes within the 112 grants claimed by the council to subsidise the demolition of ‘obsolete’ homes. Sian has visited the estate a number of times to discuss the plans with residents, and seen how one block being retained under current plans was built at the same time and in the same style as the surrounding blocks now slated for demolition.
One of the GLA’s stated reasons for homes to be defined as ‘obsolete’ is that they are no longer suitable for long-term lettings. On the South Lambeth estate this means that, although many of the homes intended for demolition still have secure tenants and leaseholders living in them, when vacancies arise they are not being filled in the same way. Residents were able to point to homes that had instead been left empty for months or years or had been taken up for squatting.
Agar Grove
In Camden, the Agar Grove estate faced a similar situation, and the project there is already underway. The council is retaining and refurbishing a tower that was constructed at the same time as surrounding demolished blocks. This project displaced large numbers of the original tenants to other council homes, and prevented long-term council tenancies being issued on the estate. Temporary property guardians instead lived in the flats, sometimes for several years, without being classified as long-term tenants.[ii],[iii]
West Kentish Town
Sian also recently visited the West Kentish Town estate in Camden, which contains more homes the council has defined as ‘obsolete’ in its grant applications.[iv] Here a recent ballot of residents confirmed the council’s plans for complete demolition of these homes, and the council has given this ballot as its main reason for defining the homes as obsolete, rather than evidence of their construction or physical condition.[v]
Despite this, communications from councillors became focused in the run-up to the ballot on claims that estates in the area were never intended or designed to last, with local councillor Marcus Boyland telling a meeting:[vi] “Some of the estates in my patch – so I’m Gospel Oak, and the borders of Haverstock – were only designed to be up for 15 years, 20 years. I mean literally designed for that. They were kind of second-generation, kind of post-war and cardboard buildings, almost really.” However, on another Camden estate in Dartmouth Park, a group of council homes in blocks built using the same pre-cast concrete system ahead of West Kentish Town are not being proposed for demolition.[vii]
Camden residents have also uncovered evidence of a long-term lack of investment on the West Kentish Town estate. Their questions to the council have uncovered that, of the £22 million collected in tenant rents since 2002, only £4 million has been invested in improvements and maintenance on the estate.[viii]
Andrew Dow, West Kentish Town resident: “When I get out of my front door, I see stairwells that have got mildew on them. I see communal parts that haven't had a lick of paint in all the ten years I've been here. And I think most residents would agree with me that they haven't had value for money… It would be much easier to fix problems that are here now rather than try to solve the problems by completely eradicating the place in a time frame that everybody knows is not going to run to schedule, which means that some residents are doomed to live here for another 15 years in damp and mould-infested flats.”
It is a scandal that so many homes are being condemned to the wrecking ball unfairly by councils and housing associations, when most of the problems residents are facing with cold and damp homes are down to simple neglect and lack of maintenance, and when problems with access or services could be tackled through refurbishment.
It’s a scandal that the Mayor of London is willing to subsidise these demolitions through a back-door route that he claimed to have closed.
I genuinely thought the new grant rules would help to stem the tide of demolition London has suffered and incentivise more projects focused on refurbishment instead.
To see the Mayor condemn over a thousand homes in just the first year of these new grants feels like a betrayal of an important ‘retrofit first’ principle we had agreed was better for Londoners.
Notes to editors
[i] MQ 2022/1007, Mar 2022 https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/defining-obsolete-homes-grant-purposes
[ii] See documents here: https://www.london.gov.uk/programmes-strategies/housing-and-land/homes-londoners-affordable-homes-programmes/homes-londoners-affordable-homes-programme-2021-2026
The GLA’s Homes For Londoners: Affordable Homes Programme 2021-26 Funding Guidance document published in November 2020 states that: “Funding will not be available for units that replace homes that have been, or will be, demolished. Where homes have become obsolete the GLA will consider funding these replacement homes in exceptional circumstances, and only as part of a scheme that will increase the number of homes overall.”
The GLA’s Capital Funding Guide states that: “AHP 21-26 grant can be used for new homes which are replacing existing homes, only where those existing homes are obsolete. An obsolete home is defined as one where an affordable home is no longer considered by the landlord to be capable for letting for long term tenancies for reasons pertaining to condition, type or building standards, regulations or safety. The replacement of obsolete homes will only be funded when they are part of a project that also delivers a net increase in affordable housing. The GLA will only provide funding for replacement of obsolete homes on an exceptional basis.”
[iii] For these statements see: Transcript of London Assembly Housing Committee meeting, Oct 2021. Page 8. Also during the meeting, the GLA Head of Housing Strategy said: “The only exception will be if the landlord can prove that the home is obsolete.” https://www.london.gov.uk/about-us/londonassembly/meetings/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=302&MId=7042&Ver=4
[iv] Sian’s research found that in the 18 years to 2021, London had seen a net loss of 13,500 homes. News from Siân Berry: social housing loss hits 13,500. Sian Berry AM, Jan 2021
[v] MQ 2022/1007, Mar 2022 https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/defining-obsolete-homes-grant-purposes
[vi] MQ 2022/2022/1868, Jun 2022 https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/defining-obsolete-homes-grant-purposes-2
[vii] MQ 2022/1869, Jun 2022 https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/defining-obsolete-homes-grant-purposes-3
[viii] MQ 2022/1870 Jun 2022 https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/defining-obsolete-homes-grant-purposes-4
[ix] Council information on Agar Grove project: https://www.camden.gov.uk/en/agar-grove-estate#dfmo
Estatewatch page on the Agar Grove estate: https://www.estatewatch.london/demolished/agargrove/
[x] Case on Camden Town regeneration estate opens new debate over rights of tenants in 'void' council homes. Camden New Journal, May 2017 https://www.camdennewjournal.co.uk/article/im-being-evicted-for-having-a-baby-claims-property-guardian-tenant
[xi] Camden Council cabinet decision documents on the future of the West Kentish Town estate, Jul 2022 https://democracy.camden.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=3685
[xii] Response to written question to Camden Council, Jul 2022 https://democracy.camden.gov.uk/documents/b29301/Written%20Council%20Questions%2004th-Jul-2022%2019.00%20Council.pdf?T=9
[xiii] ‘Cardboard’ council estates only designed to last 15 years, claims Labour’s party whip. Camden New Journal, Mar 2022 https://www.camdennewjournal.co.uk/article/cardboard-council-estates-only-designed-to-last-15-years-claims-labours-party-whip
[xiv] Dartmouth Park estate Reema system. Friends of West Kentish Town website. https://westkentishtown.org/2020/05/24/dartmouth-park-reema/
[xv] Information request responses from Camden Council, Jan 2023 and final calculations using maintenance data) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1npYGNFfrTNfwODrBZOpwt0RTNqvZKNZS/view?usp=share_link
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wWo2cMj3w9j1Ug9ibYt5dWv5jPrKL5vT/view?usp=share_link
Results of Freedom of Information requests to councils: