The following email was sent to Helen Grant in reply to another one of Riverside’ emails (Stephen Elliott). How many deceits can Riverside come up with?
Thank you for the copy of Riverside’s letter and I can confirm that Riverside has written to tenants individually at Pudding Lane with its ‘offer’ with regards to moving and associate costs. A copy of this is attached and every offer is substantially on the same terms.
As drafted these terms only apply if a tenant moves to the private rented sector and are derisory and would see tenants incur huge additional costs.
To explain letting agents costs in Maidstone we investigated in a CAB report in November 2015 (also attached) and these costs would be incurred every 18 months which is the average length of stay in a private rented property. The Riverside ‘offer’ fails to reflect these added costs. Additionally as we stated originally such a move would also see Pudding Lane tenants never likely to have the security of a social housing property again with the issue you have forwarded to the Minister and the Riverside offer also fails to reflect or compensate for this.
Riverside also appear to link our homes with increased anti social behaviour in the city centre of a weekend which we find to be a scurrilous inference and has no foundation.
Riverside also state that they need to move out roof top tenants to conduct the roof repairs which was the basis for the original eviction letter of 27 January 2016 which they withdrew and Riverside then issued a further letter stating that rooftop repairs would go ahead in a letter dated 8 April and indeed these works have started with tenants in situ hence the claim the repairs required tenants to vacate is patently false.
This is just one reason why we maintain that the eviction notices from Riverside are both disproportionate and unnecessary.
STARC – Social Tenants And Residents Community