Gloucester City Homes pause freeholder charge consultation
A letter was distributed recently on the estate service charges
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN UPDATED
Gloucester City Homes have paused their consultation with freeholders of former GCH homes to bring about estate service charges. A consultation will still go ahead but they have announced further work needs to be carried out.
In a Facebook post, GCH said: “We'll consult directly with home owners who're beneficiaries of services provided by GCH later in the year, sharing an accurate estimate of what the individual charge would be, linked to the services received.
We recognise the letters received over the last few days aren't sufficiently clear to provide enough information for a meaningful consultation, and we offer our apologies for any worry caused.”
We will undertake further work to ensure that we have more accurate information about which homes are impacted and can provide individual cost indications. When we get to this stage, the consultation will re-open and we will welcome feedback.”
What has happened?
Letters had been sent out by the independent housing association to residents of freehold properties, making the case for estate service charges.
The distributed letter, which has been seen and made public on many Gloucester Facebook groups, argues that GCH want to implement “a revised service charge policy to ensure that costs incurred by GCH in maintaining communal areas and providing essential services across the estate are fairly distributed.”
GCH say this follows on from “a review of our records and a thorough examination of Land Registry documentation”, meaning the housing association has “identified that estate service charges were previously not applied to your freehold property.”
The letter goes on to say that a “detailed breakdown of the proposed changes" will be sent to residents separately and will take affect from April 1st 2025.
What is a freehold property?
A freehold property is a building and the land it's built on that you own outright.
Freehold is different from leasehold, where you buy the right to live in a property for a set period of time as defined in a contract with a landlord. Leasehold properties are usually purchased through shared-ownership schemes.
What are the basic changes GCH want to implement?
Covering the maintenance and upkeep of communal areas is their priority including: estate cleaning, landscaping, general maintenance, rubbish removal and management of fly-tipping incidents.
A written response
Byron Davis, who stood as a Community Independent candidate for Coney Hill at last year’s City Council election, does not agree with these charges arguing they are unfair.
Mr Davis has shared a response he received from GCH.
Some of the key points include GCH making clear that the service charge is “separate and not funded through council tax”, arguing that charges will be based on a “fair and reasonable apportionment, taking into account the number of residents and the services being delivered.”
GCH add: “any service charges being applied relate to the ongoing provision of estate service and are not a retrospective charge for previously completed works. The implementation of these charges follows a structured process, including a consultation period, to ensure transparency. Any necessary adjustments will be considered where valid challenges are raised, and we are reviewing all feedback.”
Further points addressed include GCH stating that the “service charge is applied in line with the obligations set out in the TP1 Transfer Deed agreements relevant to properties within the estate. If you believe your property does not fall under these obligations, we encourage you to review your TP1 document or title deeds and provide any supporting evidence.
Once the charges have been applied, if you feel you are not receiving value for money, you can submit a formal complaint through our standard process. Additionally, leaseholders and freeholders have rights under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 to challenge service charges if they believe they are unreasonable, and they can do so through the First-tier Tribunal (FTT).”
“This represents an incredible misuse of taxpayers’ money”
A meeting with concerned GCH residents has been organised at the Redwell Centre in Matson this evening (Wednesday 19 February) at 7:30pm, with an invite extended to GCH.
As this newsletter is published before the meeting takes place, Alastair Chambers, Community Independent councillor for Matson, has expressed his shock that GCH are now seeking to impose service charges on freehold properties that “have never previously been subject to such charges” and he stands firmly against what he considers to be an “unreasonable and unjustified money grab.”
Making the valid point that people may not be aware that GCH is not part of Gloucester City Council or Gloucestershire County Council, Cllr Chambers said: “After nearly a decade, Gloucester City Council finally conducted a land mapping exercise to distinguish between land owned by the Council and land owned by GCH. Shockingly, this exercise revealed that all Gloucester City Council taxpayers have been funding the grounds maintenance of GCH-owned land—at no cost to GCH.
This represents an incredible misuse of taxpayers’ money. In a time when people are sleeping on our streets during harsh winters, it is astonishing that the Council has spent the last ten years cutting grass for a separate organisation at public expense.”
Cllr Chambers adds: “It now appears that GCH is attempting to recoup these new costs by charging its residents, including freeholders who own their homes and maintain their own gardens. I find this approach completely unreasonable. While there may be some debate regarding flat communal areas, charging households who manage their own gardens and freehold homeowners in this manner is wholly unjustifiable—a blatant attempt to recover costs they should be responsible for.
“GCH must clarify the legal basis for these charges” - City Council leader
It is accurate that the current Lib Dem minority administration has not been running the City Council for a decade as last year’s elections saw the Conservatives lose control for the first time in two decades.
Current leader of the council, Jeremy Hilton, says he himself has been contacted by residents in his Kingsholm ward, expressing their concerns about the proposed changes and bewilderment as to why they are being charged for services linked to GCH estates when their homes are not even on one.
With the cost of living hanging over people’s heads, “this has come as a complete surprise to residents who are understandably concerned about these charges, and I share their frustration, Cllr Hilton said. We need full transparency from Gloucester City Homes on how these costs have been calculated and why freeholders, particularly those not on GCH estates, are receiving these letters.”
He adds: “GCH must clarify the legal basis for these charges. The letter also states that homeowners will receive a further letter detailing the proposed charges – this will cause further anxiety while residents wait to find out how much they will be charged. It is unacceptable to introduce charges without full transparency and consultation.”
Cllr Hilton goes on to say: “Before these charges are imposed, GCH needs to provide clear justification. What specific services are being provided to each affected property, and how are the costs determined? I will be engaging with GCH to ensure that residents are properly consulted and given the opportunity to raise their concerns. My priority is to support residents and make sure they get the answers they need regarding these proposed charges.
Cllr Hilton confirms that he has written to the Chief Executive of Gloucester City Homes, Guy Stenson. Labour MP Alex McIntyre has written on Facebook that he has met Mr Stenson calling on GCH for the “withdrawal of their services charges consultation immediately.”
In a further previous statement published by the Gloucester News Centre, Anne Southern, Executive Director of Business Resources at GCH said: “GCH has sent letters to some freeholders across Gloucester, where we have identified that an estate service charge for the maintenance of nearby communal land has not been previously charged, relating to non-council land located near the properties.”
I emailed GCH asking for clarification on costs and got this:
"We will provide a detailed breakdown of the charges and further clarification on the basis for these charges as soon as you provide us with evidence that your property is exempt from these charges."
Absolutely absurd!
Making the valid point that people may not be aware that GCH is not part of Gloucester City Council or Gloucestershire County Council, Cllr Chambers said: “After nearly a decade, Gloucester City Council finally conducted a land mapping exercise to distinguish between land owned by the Council and land owned by GCH. Shockingly, this exercise revealed that all Gloucester City Council taxpayers have been funding the grounds maintenance of GCH-owned land—at no cost to GCH.
-----------------------------------
So in the last ten years the lands was cleaned and maintained by city council and with the taxpayers money which I am one of them.
Now GCH want me again since I am a freehold owner to pay for this maintenance which I already paid as a taxpayer and full council tax bill payer.
Then they need to give me back the money I paid for the service in the last decade or more, or make me the council tax discount for the amount they want to charge me!