Hants - Exposed!
Whose home did you destroy today, dad?
an example to us all
See it on You
SITES - how
it COULD be done - how it SHOULD be done
the new houses? Plastic-coated, like
nylon wig, with front doors from a
a railway that we
not ask for
Affair - it makes
it all so clear.
24th May 2017
you read any further, be
aware that these are PRIVATE home-owners
being offered derisory valuations for their
homes, and being forced into rented
accommodation. They are NOT council house
tenants being forced to move.
THEY STAND TO LOSE THEIR HOMES. Imagine
yourself in the same position.
Imagine a letter through YOUR door this
morning, from the local council,
informing you that you have to move. You
won't get enough for a new home.
won't be supplied with a replacement home.
Not good, is it? Now read on.
real politics, don’t look to parliament...
INSULATION ON THE LAST REMAINING HOUSES -
Polystyrene blocks with all the the flammable
qualities of the tiles you
have been told are not safe on your ceilings,
are being fixed to WOODEN-WALLED
The ONLY buyer for your home now is a HOUSING
ASSOCIATION - LOOK OUT!
buy the new houses? How
long will they last?
MORE dodgy-dealings with
Explained.... or, how to try and
take people's homes from them,
then tell them you are doing them a favour.
"AFFORDABLE" HOUSING - what a joke.
GENTRIFICATION, and not just in
EXACTLY THE SAME
HERE, FOR THESE UNFORTUNATES
doubles - as you try to keep
Homes for people without money
can anyone be proud of achieving THIS?
government is the last refuge of the timid
Alan Plater -
Wimpey, Destruction - sound familiar?
of Wimpey 'Homes'
“If people still have concerns,
they should go and discuss them individually with
the Partnership.” which
is rather like asking the executioner for a
pardon....(and means we can trade you off, one
homes, being emptied, and left....the 'SOLD' signs
added later are just an attempt
to make this disaster look respectable.
what our homes are worth, according to this court
£6000 homes sold for £42,000.
History....... or,who sold them - who
Our Homes!!!!!!!!! - others are fighting
around the country, and are in
the same situation as the people in Rowner. PUBLIC
for being honest!!!!!!!!!!!
Whose idea was it that we should lose our homes? Who
decided we would only be
told half the story? Why should I lose what I've
worked 25 years for? See LATEST NEWS.
Try watching 'The Beiderbecke Affair',
by Alan Plater. It's all happened before, and it's
Don't forget, if you own your home, you
are sitting on the land, which is the most
expensive part. If PHA pay you £100,000 for
your home, that has cost them
£100,000, and you cannot afford another one
in the area. If a new one costs £80,000 to
build,(or LESS!) it has cost
them £80,000, and you still have a home.
Think about it. Self-build? That has been
totally ignored in this scheme. That is
because it is all about PROFIT, not
benefitting the residents.
Here in Gosport,
Hampshire, it was announced out of the
blue,to 'about' five hundred private
homeowners, that their homes are to be
destroyed in the name of 'Rowner Renewal', but
in reality, there are over 1000
homes under threat,from
the Tesco Express shop southwards.We
were NEVER consulted as to
whether we wished our homes to be destroyed.
It has proven impossible to extract any
useful information from the people
responsible. What is planned for the area
south of the Tesco Express shop? How can
this be 'Public
Consultation', when our questions
ARE NOT ANSWERED? The UK government has been
defeated once, already, because of its
failure to carry out PROPER public
consultation on nuclear power. There has
been NO proper consultation on this scheme,
especially since it started without even
asking if residents wished to have their
homes destroyed. Also, the false information
put out regarding the number of homes under
threat definitely negates any argument that
this is a genuine consultation process. It
is planned to build 'a sustainable
community'. This does
not mean eco-housing, with solar panels,
wind generators, large play areas for
children, away from cars and roads, (as we
have now) just hundreds of stunted boxes,
designed to generate as much wealth as
possible for the developers, with a large
(probably) Tesco shop for the 'lucky'
residents. Plus a tower block for the
wealthy to view the Solent. Of course, the
end result never looks like the pretty
drawings first put on display, to put you
off the scent. THIS
is what happens - Pathfinder
- homes in the north and the midlands
destroyed. Don't let it happen here. Have a
look at this info on the RVRA site - this
is what will happen to you and your home.
(and John Prescott now advises the Chinese
on new, sustainable
cities , plus after-dinner
speeches on REGENERATION! Can you believe
The amount of time allowed for 'public
consultation' has been kept to a minimum, so
that the destruction can start as soon as
possible. GBC intend to start
felling trees by the road in Magennis
Close, yet there 'are no plans yet'... GBC
has a legal responsibility to ensure the
consultation process is carried out
correctly. With so little information
available to the residents concerned, and so
few questions answered, they are not
fulfilling this responsibility. However
often you ask questions, you do not receive
answers. One hour spent in a local hall,
after a days work, trying to study
information that has not previously been
seen, is hardly fair on residents at risk of
losing their homes. This is all loaded in
favour of the developers. Were you told EVERYTHING when you
bought your property? If, according
to my Building Society, pre-fab houses are
worth only the value of the land on which
they stand, ask yourself: 1) How much is
my house/flat really worth? and 2) Why was
I not told this when my house was sold to
me? The fact that NO proper plans are being
made available to the residents, the
constant threats of compulsory purchase, and
the constant exhortations to carry out
negotiations in secret, all point to the
fact that this scheme is of no benefit to
the people it purports to help.
WHOSE IDEA WAS IT TO SELL
THESE PROPERTIES IN THE FIRST PLACE?
|While it is probably agreed by
residents of some buildings - the large blocks
of flats - that things would be improved for
them if they had houses to live in, (but not
houses with a large debt hung round the
owner's neck - they must be offered a
replacement home with no excessive financial
burden) , it does not follow that hundreds
more houses should be destroyed. People have
bought these in good faith, paid their
mortgages, estate maintenance, council tax
etc, and do not deserve to be treated thus. It
is at this stage that things seem to move from
benefiting residents to benefiting property
developers/builders. These are the houses
within large, grassed areas, with mature
trees, where it is safe for children to play,
picnic etc, and families to hold barbecues,
parties etc. While GBC is happy to support the
17th Century Village in Gosport, it is
doubtful that they wish to see genuine 21st
century housing built.
|If some imagination were to be used
in the planning of these new houses, we could
be looking at the sort of dwellings found at
these two sites, which are just two of many. BedZed and Dancing Rabbit. From the
little information supplied so far, it's
normal developer plans. ie: No imagination.
|The website that is supposed to keep
residents informed of public meetings etc, www.rownerrenewal.com, has finally
become live - 23rd October. The 'consultation
period' seems to consist of a few hours in a
local hall, AND STILL NO MAP.
We, the homeowners, need TIME to take all this
in. We need proper public meetings, with plans
available of where the proposed destruction is
to take place. (I say 'proposed', as it
does not have to happen).
We need communications in writing, not via a
telephone number that residents have to pay
for, with no record of what is said, and one
resident set against another. We need regular
updates on the RR website, giving people
plenty of notice of forthcoming meetings,
changes in plans etc, so that busy, working
people have time to read and digest this
information. We need information from Gosport
Council, an elected body, not from the local
newspaper, or an un-elected quango. We need a
clear plan shown on the RR website, showing
what is planned, when, where, and who is
paying for it. Is this too much to ask in our