District Management Committees - Revisited.

Notes from DMC meetings through the years  : 
NB the DMC's where at one time until around 2001, sub-committees of the councils then Housing Committee. They had council tenant reps as chairs and registered members.

When the new statutory governance arrangements came in re The Local Government Act 2000- Part 2 s HERE   the dmc's where no longer council bodies, but the council allowed them to carry on - with the same name but as tenant bodies mainly as consultative groups, who like to claim they are advisory bodies to the council, which is debatable.

The council also allowed the tenant groups to allocate 2 pots of money from the Housing Revenue Account - to themselves to spend on good, works and services on behalf of the council.

 This set up continues today without their ever being any proper review of the dmc's.

" 6. DMC COMMENTS

It was noted that all five DMCs considered the motion from the Camden Federation of Tenants and Residents Associations concerning the withdrawal of budget from the Community Involvement Team. The motion was passed by Hampstead, Holborn, Kentish Town and Gospel Oak DMCs, but had not been supported by Camden Town DMC.

 http://democracy.camden.gov.uk/Data/District%20Management%20Committee%20-%20Gospel%20Oak/20010109/Agenda/$Minutes.doc.pdf 

9 JANUARY 2001 

11. DISTRICT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES BUDGETS

Consideration was given to a report of

the Director of Housing as attached at

APPENDIX E

The proposal to devolve budgets to DMCs was considered a good idea. Members felt that the local community often had a better idea about where money could and should be spent

 http://democracy.camden.gov.uk/Data/District%20Management%20Committee%20-%20Holborn/20010227/Agenda/$Minutes.doc.pdf

 27 FEBRUARY 2001 

13. CAMDEN TOWN DISTRICT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE BUDGET

Sharon Calvey (District Manager) tabled an updated Budget Report, together with an information pack asking TA Representatives to fill out the request form with their bids. This would then be submitted to the DMC on 12 September 2001 for ratification.

18. ORAL REPORT FROM THE CHAIR OF THE HOUSING COMMITTEE

The DMC received and welcomed an oral report from the Chair of the Housing Committee

1. Councillor Brian Weekes (Chair of the Housing Committee) stated that a special meeting would be held on 14 June 2001 to discuss

“ How to improve the recruitment of TA’s”.

2. Reorganisation of Camden Council in September

-

Councillor Weekes stated that Camden was behind schedule with regard to Democratic Renewal because they had resisted the  change for a long time. However, he said that when the changeover came into effect September, the law has required that decisions taken by the Executive Committee, should be made in public, which would give people the opportunity to comment and participate in the decision making process.

3 DMC’s

- would continue but in a different format.

More duties would be delegated to the districts. Consultation would be taking place on how the DMC’s would best operate.

Councillor Weekes stated that the changeover would be a whole new process, and would therefore not be entirely adequate at first. However, there would be plenty of opportunity to review and change what was necessary.

 http://democracy.camden.gov.uk/Data/District%20Management%20Committee%20-%20Camden%20Town/20010530/Agenda/$Minutes.doc.pdf

30 May 2001

Noise Nuisance Camden Council

Camden Councils advice on Noise [nuisance] for tenants
HERE

And some guidance for tenants on how to reduce the noise they may make. 

I am still getting a lot of noise disturbance from flat above me, still at night/early morning and it still causes me a lot of distress. Some things are better than they where but thats only due to me literally having to do battle with the tenant who if contacted by housing doesn't take much notice. I have approached tenant in the past about the noise but she doesn't seem to understand the affect it has on me or seems to even care. tenant still continues to bang things about, stomp about and of course I have to hear the loud noises tenant makes when having an orgasm when with one of her 'boys'.  

 I know that some noise is unavoidable and I accept that but what I don't accept is that even at night tenant still bangs things about and still walks very heavily about her flat. Tenant can't get out of bed at night without the stomping about. I don't accept having to and I mean having to as one can't not hear, her orgasms.

I don't understand it myself how someone can make so much noise unless its deliberately done to cause me distress and annoyance.  

 

Update 22 March 2019

Tenant was making a right racket earlier on in the day with the banging about but has quietened down this evening other than the 'accidental' dropping of heavy objects on floors of kitchen and living room. A handtrick for the bedroom, maybe- when Im having a lie down or trying to sleep? letting the toilet seat bang down, moving about of heavy things? and what is it with the toilet and water pressure [pipes run up through my living room and along ceiling and make a racket at times and I can't seem to get it sorted] and the banging about that is connected to it? 

update 23 March 2019

related to this is the present situation with the communal hallway not having any lighting [3 weeks now approx] due to the light bulbs downstairs and upstairs having blown and none of the tenants wanting to report it to landlord or replace the bulbs.

update 15 July 2019

Slamming shut the front door: its a nuisance here as well. At times though the front door expands and the door does need to be closed with more effort causing more noise but usually the door can be closed without much noise. 

still no lighting in the communal area. someone from the council said they would send someone round about it but ive not heard anything but oddly enough report a non existent water leak and people in the council seem quite willing to go along with it.

Mon 12 Oct 2020

Tenant above has been making a lot of noise these last few days ie heavy footsteps and banging of heavy things - the usual banging of her flat door which is opposite mine continues and slamming the main front door when she comes and goes. 

22 Sept 2022

Reading through this post I realised I should explain a bit more about the entries above to do with no lighting in the communal area due to light bulbs [blowing/not working] 

In regards to the communal stairs and landing areas that come up to where flats B and C are [mine and tenant upstairs who makes lots of noise], there where 2 dangling light sockets in the ceiling, which when one of the light bulbs blow, I was 99% the one who changed it for a new one. 

I got fed up with doing this so I stopped and waited to see how long if ever, C would do it which resulted in the communal stairs usually not having lighting [ though I think mostly the downstairs area had lighting. 

As it was flat C who usually had visitors at night I figured she would at least put a light bulb in for their safety [at least] but only once did this happen and she got the visitor to put the light bulb in. 

Hampstead Satanic Hoax

Anyone familiar with this HERE 

Police investigations launched into Hampstead Satanic child abuse ‘fantasy’ from March 2015 and have been following the case will know that a woman named Sabine McNeill is currently on trial on various charges to do with the case. I can't remember all of them, breaching a Restraining Order [Binding Over] a few times is included.


Though Ms McNeill is currently in prison [when not brought to the court for the trial]  she lived in Camden, near Finchley Road tube station. She was, maybe still is, involved with a group calling themselves the Association of McKenzie Friends who have become quite [in]famous in recent years namely to do with the Holly Grieg case and then the Hampstead case.

She says she worked for CERN and is into software design. She is then [im guessing] very intelligent - in some ways but seeming not so bright in others, as is I suspect the case with most/many very intelligent people. I've been down the 'not so bright' path myself and take no satisfaction in her being in the situation she finds herself in, particularly at her age. Maybe taking up knitting would be a less troublesome hobby? But maybe the lady would be bored doing something like that and needed a bit of danger, and intrigue in her life.

Anyway the Hoaxstead Research site I have linked to has been doing a daily write up of the proceedings [sounds exhausting]. Interesting stuff. The satanic hoax hunters seem a force to reckon with. 

Maybe there is a lesson to learn here: about getting too involved in other peoples horror stories, as I also have experience of.  

Sometimes the force of the pull is so great you can't fight it. You can be pulled in, ground down, then spat out. A hard lesson to learn.

You don't know what you are dealing with until its too late and you are hooked. Not that I'm saying one shouldn't try and help someone, others in need of help, just be careful and learn from others mistakes, and your own ones.
 
update 19 Dec 2018
I don't know if any of the reported cases to do with Camden based teachers had anything to do with the above case. A case reported in Jan 2014 HERE
" Ian Clarke, 56, of Fortess Road, Kentish Town, hoarded hundreds of films and images of the sickening abuse of children as young as one."

In an earlier case 27 Sept 2012, HERE a teacher pleads guilty to sexually abusing a child but isn't named, to protect the child. 

Townhall employee found guilty

Aug 2016 post about this HERE 

the below is taken from http://camdennewjournal.com/article/camden-council-worker-made-list-of-277-vulnerable-pensioners-for-fraudsters

Camden council worker made list of 277 vulnerable pensioners for fraudsters

Social services records used to make list of targets whose bank accounts were drained 01 December, 2017 — By William McLennan 

A TOWN Hall employee trawled through sensitive council records to make a list of 277 elderly residents which was passed to fraudsters who then tricked the pensioners out of thousands of pounds.

Charlie Heath admitted using his position to access the names and addresses of pensioners, but told Blackfriars Crown Court on Tuesday that he was acting on the orders of a criminal gang who had threatened him and his family.

The 23-year-old denied all fraud charges and said that, moments after printing off the list on May 23 last year, he had a crisis of conscience and threw it in a confidential waste bin at the council’s King’s Cross HQ. A jury rejected his claims and yesterday (Thursday) found him guilty.

The court heard that the list was discovered by police on June 1 in what was described as a “fraudster’s kit”, alongside the passport, bank cards and bank statements of a 79-year-old woman who had been conned earlier that day.

Mr Heath, who no longer works for Camden Council, told the jury that, after months of intimidating phone calls, he began to compile the list in March when the threats escalated.

He said: “They started to approach me outside of my work. They said they knew where my sister had worked. “I couldn’t leave my house. Every time I did people would follow me. I was scared to leave my house.”

He said he did not report it to authorities because he had “lost all faith” in police after they failed to prosecute a man who stabbed him in November 2015.

Mr Heath told the jury that he decided to give in to the gang’s demands after they attempted to break into his King’s Cross home on May 20 last year.

He said: “I couldn’t see my family hurt like that. On the Monday I went to work as normal and printed off these names. I then just left them and put them in the confidential waste bin.”

Asked about his last-minute change of heart, he said: “As soon as it left the printer I thought about the repercussions and I put it in the confidential waste bin.

“I was scared of the repercussions of what these people could do to these elderly people. I would rather get a kicking than someone else get hurt because of myself. I felt disgusted about it. At the last hurdle I decided it was wrong and threw it away.”

He added: “I have no idea how a list of names got from the confidential waste bin into someone else’s hands.”

The court heard that nine days later police officers travelling with sirens on through Forest Gate noticed a group of men running from a parked car. They pursued the men, arresting 20- year-old Shaheedul Abedin at the scene.

After carrying out a search, they found a brown envelope, discarded under a car, which contained the list of names and the passport, bank cards and statements of a pensioner who had been conned earlier that day by a man posing as a policemen investigating fraud.

She was also tricked into handing over £200 in cash. Everyone on the list was aged 78 or 79, the court heard.

Officers forensically analysed the list and found the fingerprints of Mr Heath’s neighbour, 22-year-old Sayim Ahmed, who was cleared of any involvement in fraud by the jury.

They also found prints belonging to Mr Abedin, of Tower Hamlets, and 20-year-old Kawsar Ahmed, of Lewisham. They were both found guilty of being in possession of an article for use in fraud. They denied the charges, but declined to give evidence to the court.

The court heard that Mr Heath worked as a data “archiver” assigned to the children’s social services department and had “no reason to access adult records”.

But when the list was discovered, a review of computer systems showed he had been able to access thousands of vulnerable adults’ details over a period of two months.

He will be sentenced later this month.

update
27 Dec 2017
Camden Council worker jailed HERE

Housing Repairs Fraud Probe

 Wonder whats happened with the below reported case?

Back in June 2015 the local rag reported that:
A FRAUD probe is under way in the Town Hall housing repairs department and a manager has been suspended. The Town Hall has confirmed the investigation but said they will not comment as the allegations are still being looked into. A council spokeswoman added: “We are currently carrying out an investigation, so we can’t comment at this point.” HERE

Then in Jan 2016 a further report by the CNJ HERE
POLICE have been called in at the Town Hall over fraud allegations in its housing repairs department.

The New Journal has learned that a member of staff has been suspended for up to eight months while an internal investigation has gone on.

The council is taking a lockdown approach on information relating to the case. Its press office confirmed that Camden is “assisting police with enquiries”, although a spokeswoman said she could “not comment” further on the nature of the investigation or its scale.

Insiders are now questioning why the allegations have taken so long to be investigated and why the staff member remains suspended without pay – even though no formal disciplinary proceedings have taken place. 
Some with knowledge of the case are concerned that the official has not had a fair chance to answer the claims. 

There are also questions about whether the investigation will reach up to the top of the council hierarchy.

“What lies behind the feet-dragging is anyone’s guess,” said a source. 

The council has been surveilling how repair work is booked and paid for, it has been claimed by insiders.

The Met said it could not comment on the investigation at this stage.

The council spokeswoman added: “Our repairs service is highly rated by residents and we expect the highest level of customer service and professional conduct from all of our staff.”

 --------------------------------------------------------------
An update of the above from Nov 2016 HERE  about the prosecution of a supervisor.

Showers and shower pumps.

First it was reported that a Manager had been suspended.

Then 'insiders' questioning why its taken so long for the case to be investigated - questions about how high up the investigation will reach. 

Then in the report of 16 Nov 2016 above, a named Supervisor was charged.

20 June 2017 Grenfell Tower

I was going to post a news story from the mainstream newspapers about this but stuff about what happened is changing daily and couldn't keep up. the following is from a website a local tenants group set up a few years ago and which is still active https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2017/06/19/grenfell-tower-the-kctmo-culture-of-negligence/

Grenfell Tower – The KCTMO Culture Of Negligence

 "The many who lost their lives in this catastrophe were our friends and neighbours. We tried to speak for them in life and we will continue to speak for them now. We share the pain of the homeless, the injured and the bereaved to whom we offer our heartfelt sympathy, condolences and solidarity. We also share the sense of anger and injustice that has troubled this community for years. That is why we started this blog and that is why we will continue as we started, speaking truth to power whether or not they choose to listen."  Continue reading HERE 

Since hearing of what happened, seeing pictures etc I can't find the right words to say anything other than how utterly tragic, sad and painful for many that something like this could happen. It shouldn't have.

Understandably  many are angry and upset, wanting truthful answers and justice for those who died in the fire and others how have been directly harmed by this. The emergency services have been as reported, outstanding. Its been a highly emotional and upsetting week for all included. Sending Love and Healing to all. 

https://www.grenfelltowerinquiry.org.uk/

Legal Action Threat for Water Charge Arrears

this post is joined with my post of Friday 10 June 2016 London Council Overcharged Tenants for Water

Land-lord Camden council has sent me a letter [received 15 June 2017] saying they will start legal action against me if I don't pay the arrears of the water charges I stopped paying around Dec 2016.

I think I have a good enough reason for stopping paying the water charges and continuing to not pay it until the landlord gives me and other tenants back the money they owe us because of overcharging us. Plus I think they need to set a new and lawful charge [ if they haven't done so already but they haven't said so].

The water charge isn't the rent, its a seperate charge to the rent yet they call it rent. Its a service charge.

I have ten days from date of letter [9 June 2017]. It says to call them if I have financial or other difficulties. I contacted them a while ago and explained why I haven't paid the charge. They didn't reply but sent the threatening letter instead. Business as usual for the housing department.

Plus all these years I have had to put up with the noise here and the landlord won't do anything about it that I'm aware of,  and estate officier comes to my flat makes 'promises' then goes away and I don't hear anything about it from her again. She could see what a state I was in. Was it just lies to try and butter me up?

Though I feel anxious at the thought of having to go to court and the risk it entails I need to hold my nerve on this.

I await the court case.

23 Aug 2017
Latest letter dated 15 August 2017 is NOTICE OF SEEKING POSSESSION [not to begin before 24 Sept 2017] which I sent them an email in reply to and am waiting for an email reply back. This letter came very shortly after a message from someone in the council left on my home phone answering machine. They haven't been helpful at all to me with the difficulties i'm having, which doesn't come as a surprise.

They will refer my case to the councils legal team if I don't coff up the claimed arrears.

This issue isn't only about me its about all unmetered camden council tenants as well as other london boroughs tenants.

As well as me having difficulties with the water charge payments I also have difficulties with communicating verbally with camden council and find it a lot easier to do so in writing. I would prefer to avoid court but rent support won't reply to emails.


25 August 2017
Came across the following from  http://www.dpglaw.co.uk/hundreds-thousands-overcharged-water/

"A High Court ruling has established that hundreds of thousands of tenants have been overcharged for water and sewerage. Lawyers say that affected tenants will be entitled to refunds running to hundreds if not thousands of pounds.

As reported by the BBC, the test case was brought by Kim Jones, a tenant of Southwark Council.

Along with 37,000 other tenants in Southwark, Ms Jones’ tenancy agreement required to pay charges for water and sewerage to her landlord. The amount Ms Jones was required to pay her landlord was significantly more than the amount the landlord was required to pay Thames Water.

The High Court ruled that this was unlawful because it breached the Water Resale Orders, which prohibit water and sewerage from being resold at a profit.

Whilst initially criticising the decision, Southwark Council has now announced that it will not appeal and will being repaying to tenants some of the unlawful charges.
Ms Jones’ solicitor, Gareth Mitchell, of Deighton Pierce Glynn, said:
“Thames Water has confirmed that it has similar arrangements with 69 local authorities and housing associations throughout its area covering 375,000 households. For households in occupation since 2001, they will have been overcharged around £700 to £1,000.

Southwark Council’s announcement that it will only make a partial refund to the 37,000 tenants affected within its borough is unacceptable. These are low income tenants for whom this is a significant amount of money. For many years, Southwark concealed from its tenants the true nature of its relationship with Thames Water. It is not only morally unacceptable for Southwark Council to retain these unlawful charges, the legal basis for their approach is doubtful and further litigation is very likely if they do not relent.

As for the other local authorities and housing associations affected by this issue, we are expecting them to make contact with their tenants over the coming weeks and to indicate what arrangements they will be making to repay the unlawful charges.

However, the impact of the judgment does not stop there.

The judge also decided that between April 2002 and April 2010 Thames Water should have billed the owners of rented accommodation for water and sewerage, rather than tenants. Whereas Thames Water’s evidence in the High Court was that throughout this period it had billed and recovered charges from tenants, rather than landlords.

Thames Water has not yet announced what arrangements it will be making to reimburse these tenants, all of whom were incorrectly charged hundreds of pounds each year during the 2002 to 2010 period.”

BBC London TV news report on 25 April 2016 (lead item) see: here. 

DPG’s Gareth Mitchell was also interviewed about the case on Vanessa Feltz’s breakfast show on 25 April 2016 at 07:35hrs (35 mins in); with Southwark council’s response at 08.21hrs (1 hour 21 mins in): here.
An article about the implications of the case will appear in the May 2016 edition of Legal Action.


8 Sept 2017
Rent officer has passed me onto the councils Financial Inclusion officers who sent me a letter and who I emailed and await their reply.

The Notice they sent to me is a sham.


4 Nov 2017
No word yet from the Financial Inclusion officers I sent an email to about the letter they sent to me.


7 Nov 2017
Someone from the Rent service phoned me yesterday and I explained a bit why I was with- holding the water charge and that I had replied via email to every letter I received but haven't had any email replies back.  I don't know what happens next will wait and see.


11 Feb 2018
Not heard anything about this since 7 Nov 2017. 

related to this: Housing repairs department - don't get me started on the shenanigans going on there.


30 May 2018 
Letter received and phone call from rent officer - 'am i going to start paying [my landlord camden council] the water charge' 'no, no' i says. I will though as suggested contact thames water and ask about a water metre and paying them directly for my water and get back to rent officer.

I'd rather pay  the water company and their shareholders than Camden 'council' and their ...... well whats the right word?

3 July 2018 
I haven't been able to contact Thames Water as suggested by the landlords agent, and which I agreed to. I tried really I did I just been pre-occupied with other stuff I'm trying to manage and its draining.  2 further phone calls Ive not replied to as I've lost the will 'to live' in regards to this. Take to me court if you must and we can argue it out there.

20 August 2018
Apparently I'm supposed to be receiving  an explanation [or proof or something] from the councils legal or finance department [I forget which what with others things still ongoing] as to why  the court judgement doesn't apply to Camden council - not heard anything yet.

1 Jan 2019
Another recent letter from  the  housing rent service within the 'supporting communities' directorate about alleged 'rent arrears'. They are going around in circles and don't know what to do i think. 

8 April 2021  

Camden council landlord has pulled a 'sneaky underhanded' move on me by contacting the DWP and getting them to start making weekly deduction from my  ESA payments. I'm not sure this is even legal/lawful so will have to look into it. 

After all they they have put me through and they pull this stunt, how very typical. 

21 April 2021

Ive found the actual court case where the overcharging by London councils [as landlords]  was decided 

Jones v London Borough of Southwark [2016] EWHC 457 (Ch) (04 March 2016) (bailii.org)

Its the appeal court - this means that the ruling should in practice [i think] apply to all London councils who where joined with the scheme. I have asked Camden council via my then ward housing manager about the overcharging - Nov 2016 saw the councils position as such:

 "We are still reviewing the situation ..... all water charges where set by Thames Water." 

Camden says its collects the charges on behalf of Thames Water - payments made to Camden Council are put back into providing services sort of thing. 

Thats the last I heard on the matter. If you scroll up this post you will see the entry dated 25 Aug 2017, taken from Kim Jones v Southwark -100,000s overcharged for water in London (dpglaw.co.uk) 

states that: 

" Whilst initially criticising the decision, Southwark Council has now announced that it will not appeal and will being repaying to tenants some of the unlawful charges.

Ms Jones’ solicitor, Gareth Mitchell, of Deighton Pierce Glynn, said:
“Thames Water has confirmed that it has similar arrangements with 69 local authorities and housing associations throughout its area covering 375,000 households. For households in occupation since 2001, they will have been overcharged around £700 to £1,000."

on 28 Oct 2020  Inside Housing  reports that   Court dismisses London council’s appeal over water charges ruling

Link to judgement

The Mayor & Burgesses of the Royal Borough of Kingston-Upon-Thames v Moss [2020] EWCA Civ 1381 (27 October 2020) (bailii.org)  

Friday 17 September 2021

I'm going through some of the minutes/documents from the 5 DMC's meetings that are up on camden councils website - to see if I can find any comments made by council about the water charge and I came across the below dated 6 dec 2017 

" The Housing Revenue Account Financial Advisor outlined the background to the water charges issues, emphasising that Southwark Council had been found in court to be acting as water reseller and therefore obliged to pass on any savings in the cost of water.

Camden had a different contract with Thames Water, receiving an administration fee for collecting water rates from tenants with no suggestion that tenants were being charged more as a result of this arrangement.

Councillor Meric Apak, Cabinet Member for Better Homes, advised that the Council’s position could only be tested if someone decided to challenge it in court. DMC members remarked that making a legal challenge was financial onerous, but important for testing that the Council’s position was correct."  [my emphasis] 

31 march 2023

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2022/2392.html  

1. " In these proceedings, the Claimant challenges the lawfulness of the Defendant's written guidance to officials ("decision-makers") who are responsible for deciding whether it is in a benefit claimant's interests to have deductions made from their subsistence benefit in order to pay sums which are owed by those claimants to utility companies. The deductions are known as Third Party Deductions ("TPDs"). The Claimant contends that the Defendant's policy approach to TPDs in respect of fuel and water debts, as set out in the written guidance, generates decisions, such as those made in her case, in an unlawful way."

I think the above can/does also apply to local councils [as landlords] and so-called rent arrears [that arent rent arrears but service charges as in water overcharging]. The DWP don't contact the person whose benefit the local council etc want money from, to ask any questions get the persons view on the mater sort of thing.