🚀 go-pugleaf

The HOUSING CORPORATION is a very powerful quango that allows some memebers
with not the best reputation to operate in a very dubious way, this was the
case of Crystal Palace Housing Association in 1991 which went about
mis-representing leases to the public in the media and by any means it saw
fit, in order to sell its leases in difficult times as its portfolio was
going in to negative equity it presented these inferior leases to first time
buyers as a far superior product.

The Housing corporation member I am referring to has many names and has new
name now: Crystal Palace Housing Association, South London Family Housing
Association, SLFHA Ltd, Horizon Housing Group and now has started calling
itself AmicusHorizon Ltd.


*THIS WAS AN OPERATION OF ABOUT 70 to 80 PROPERTIES: 4 to 5 Million Pounds
of 1991 money! And values were falling, there was a crisis.


*The leases were mis-represented at the time of sale targetting specifically
people without experience, while the "professionals" who drafted the leases
and sales contract appear to have catered for this process of supplying
people without experience illegal information behind their legal advisors
back, because the lease / sales contract combine to disown anything
guranteed during the process of sale, leaving the public exposed to that
dishonesty:

"Calling first time buyers" they said in the Evening Standard 31-07-91
and
"Absolutely no requirement to buy the remainder" they also assured us
and
"Does the rent ever go up?" they asked in their own leaflets
"Yes it is assessed every year in line with inflation" they answered.

This pack of lies were masking a rent which is assessed in line with
inflation, but AFTER this adjustment come two massive increases of an order
of a third and a quarter (years 10 and 15) and a yearly increase in real
terms of 2% a sort of compound increase above inflation. This phrase is very
easy to explain in a minute flat, and there is no excuse for the now
AmicusHorizon Ltd. or their associates from a financial services company
peddling endowment pension mortgages on their premises not to have explained
these facts properly instead of denying them at the time of sale. After all
the Housing Corportation assured me that they had a duty to explain the
contracts so that we could make an informed decision!

So ten years later the dishonest sellers (CPHA now AmicusHorizon Ltd.) wrote
the following words to us: (from their letter 16-03-99) threatening that if
we didn't staircase our rent would go up in line with inflation and then by
2% and then by a third!

"As you are aware..." !! "In October 2000, the 2(b) applies... Obviously
this has some " CONSIDERABLE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS" to all "LEASEHOLDERS
WHO DO NOT OWN 100%" !!

(the implications to which they referred: 40 % rent rise indexed year on
year 2 % ABOVE inflation and something more or less the same a few years
latter according to this lease described above as with ABSOLUTELY no
requirement to buy the remainder!)

So here is what they were advising us now:

"and I suggest that you may wish to consider staircasing in the percentage
you currently own." !!

The sales contract dis-owns any mis-representations the dishonest landlord
made to us, even publicly and in the press!. Was this premeditated? Did they
read the lease and the sales contract? What advice did their solicitors give
them? The Housing Corporation says this is not against their regulations!
But the Ombudsman found some evidence of mal administration!! Fantastic
regulator the Housing Corporation.

All this I have documented.

So there you have the 4 million pound question, and which curiously is the
same one they have the courage to ask me: "and what did "THEIR" solicitor
tell "THEM"?"

And crucially: "Did "THEY" read the lease?" .. was this premeditated?

Was all this in deed a deliberate plan as it appears to be? I understand
that the then CPHA now AmicusHorizon Group actually was responsible for
chosing this type of lease themselves! for this 4 million pound plus
operation! (according to the Housing Corporation the landlord actively chose
this particular lease)

The Housing Corporation doesn't want to look in to this ! and it also told
me that I should have gone with a guy put by CPHA and who was peddling
pension endowment mortgages, possibly an ex employee of CPHA.. it was all
not very clear if he wanted to give legal or financial advice or both on
CPHA premises during their "Sales Seminar". The Housing Corporation also say
that my landlord ..didn't breach any Corporation procedural guidelines..
wow!.. what a regulator! and what guidelines! This financial services
company on the landlords premises criticised certain mortgage lenders!
Against whom he was SELLING his own products.. and was suggesting pension
endowment policies.. Isn't that financial advice?

Should public organisations, landlords, lawyers, etc have freedom to operate
as other professions can't (and shouldn't) when they sell something to the
public who have less experience and technical knowledge?

Should public bodies be allowed to compete with the private sector in this
unfair way protected even from Parliament by a Quango and criticising the
private sector which most likely was a ton more honest than them?

So much for the integrity of operations with public funds through the
Housing Corporation.
Misrepresenting leases in the process of sale should be a crime just like
any other way of deceiving the public. Actually it may be a crime.. there
was a law in 1991 against misrepresentations, but I am not sure..if it can
get past the protection of the Housing Corporation.

Even worse this is coning the public with public money. That is our taxes
being used without integrity through a Quango to deceive the public. This is
why the Regulator is not doing what it is supposed to. Is the new regulator
the Tenants Service Authority going to consider like the Housing Corporation
did in the past that mal-administration is one of its valid guidelines for
the sector?

Thank you for your attention and if you would like copies of the
documentation supporting these claims or you think that you may be able to
recommend a solution please write to me at adrianfoot@hotmail.com quoting
CPHA so that I know it is not junk mail.

Kind regards
David A. Foot