General Chat

They were already earmarked for social housing before the fire.

No way would I ever live in an apartment
If I had been living there :-D

It would be ground floor or nothing for me :-( :-(

When, exactly, was 1.5 million ever affordable?

As to whether the people going into these 'affordable' flats should have access to the facilities. Well, I would say that, if anybody deserves access to a pool and spa etc. they o.

If that was aimed at me Von I never said they shouldn't be allowed there. I was stating I think the article might be trying to get people to say that.
I have no problem at all with them living there, that said if someone is there and has paid the full price they might...even though I'm sure the people moving in will look after the place respectfully and be grateful ect.
I think to be fair to them they will though stand out like a sore thumb, but if that's what it takes to get them housed then so be it.

I read the same story in a number of different online publications Caroline. Most strike a neutral tone.

Usually in blocks such as this you pay a HUGE annual resident's fee to cover the costs of concierge services, maintenance of public areas, building maintenance and use of all the nice facilities plus private parking if available.

For goodness sake where is your compassion.
:-0 :-0 :-0 :-0

Have you seen some of the other accommodation that these residents people have been offered. It's disgusting the way they have been treated. :-(

Reading the article it seems like it's trying to get people annoyed...in so much as they don't show you where they will be living just hey look at these really expensive places. It's a difficult thing to comment on as we have no idea what's actually being offered whether anyone wants to move to them, how much rent they'll be charged etc etc. Also if they're not being allowed to use everything on offer will they feel bad like second class citizens? It's the old free school lunch kids standing out in the crowd isn't it?

Haven't a clue Bro re rents applicable or council tax payable about £2400 p.a. I think.

I am bemused, it seems to be an ill thought out quick remedy.

Of course I don't have a solution but then I'm not a)on the ground b)a person of influence.

They also should at pay the same rent as they were paying in the tower.

i agree with you and what of the long term. Some occupants may wish to move on. Will other "poor" homeless people be offered these flats or will they be sold off.
I hope they don't make tenants feel like fish out of water, i know i would.

Thanks for replying Kath and Maddie

I know that included in the building scheme there were to be a number of social housing units.

Common sense tells me that these units would be somewhat separated from the privately owned ones.

The tenants of Grenfell Tower said that they were a community, you will not get the same sense of community in such a high value development.

Of course the tenants should be rehoused but don't shove them somewhere out of their comfort zone. Just how intimated will some of them feel when rubbing alongside wealthy professionals?

hate to think of the counsel rates they will have to pay. Has anyone asked these people if they want to live in such accomadation and whether they can afford it .As much as i would say wow look at that reality would soon hit home when the media etc have moved on :-(

I agree with you. Not much thought has been put into this decision. How many of the residents who have bought their apartments are going to be pleased by this decision. Not many of them would have expected even the affordable homes to go to council tenants I'm sure. Nothing against council tenants but it is more likely to cause friction than harmony.

We bought an ex council house nearly 50 years ago and some people thought it was wrong then.

I hope all of the Grenfell Tower residents are successfully re-housed but if some are given these apartments then I would hope all of the others are given homes of a similar quality - although where the money is coming from I dread to think.

Kath. x

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/21/grenfell-tower-families-to-be-given-68-flats-in-luxury-apartment-complex


Now I may be wrong but if the council have purchased these apartments, which it appears they have, where is the economic sense? How many empty houses (of which there are many) could have been purchased and refurbished for a fraction of the cost?

How much rent are the tenants going to pay? There is not a hope in hell the council can justify this. It's a knee jerk reaction and I can see it coming back to bite them hard.

Please feel free to correct me on any points.