David Lovegrove

Registered with Property118.com
Wednesday 13th January 2016


Latest Comments

Total Number of Property118 Comments: 76

David Lovegrove

20:16 PM, 17th August 2019
About 6 hours ago

Stoke-on-Trent escapes for now

Martin, it was David Adamson & Partners from Edinburgh.
193 dwellings inside the proposed licensed areas ( from around 5,000 properties) were recorded to contain cat. 1 defects and 3,027 outside !
They quote poor insulation in pre 1919 properties but offer no funding for wall insulation.
50% of households were recorded never to have changed energy supplier and this presumably is partly the reason for high levels of fuel poverty that the authority wishes to tackle.
Is licensing likely to address these issues !... Read More

David Lovegrove

14:49 PM, 14th August 2019
About 3 days ago

Stoke-on-Trent escapes for now

Is anyone else aware of which other authorities ,if any, have reapplied for a selective licence designation following its initial refusal ?... Read More

David Lovegrove

15:24 PM, 13th August 2019
About 4 days ago

Stoke-on-Trent escapes for now

The private stock condition survey that the authority commissioned to identify poor housing conditions indicated that the majority of category 1 hazards were confined to 3 of the 14 areas proposed.
1 of the 14 proposed areas covering 20% of the total proposals was not included in the survey. There were some 3,000 properties outside the proposed areas with cat 1 defects but no resources to address these issues.
Another area covering a further 20% of the total proposals was included because it was a student area and where properties are empty outside term. This area has little ASB & high property prices.
The survey further indicated that property conditions inside the city had substantially improved during the last 10 years though private rented property in the area had doubled in that time.
The pilot scheme that the city introduced recorded that only 339 licences were issued from 539 privately rented properties and it ran at a loss of £70,000 excluding any contribution to office overheads. The 2 further schemes where designation ended last week are likely to have lost further monies but the authority refuse my FOI requests due to the number of previous requests submitted to obtain information on other issues relating to these proposals that were not included within their business case. The consultation results showed that overall across the city, the majority of residents objected to the proposals but the authority then only took the views of the residents who they say, lived within the proposed 14 areas into account. No letters were sent to surrounding areas which in itself seems to me to be a contravention of Government guidelines.... Read More

David Lovegrove

19:20 PM, 18th July 2019
About a month ago

Real rents v LHA rents - info request

Reply to the comment left by David Lovegrove at 18/07/2019 - 19:07
Well that was rather annoying .
I have just checked out Gov.Uk -LHA rates from April 2019 To March 2020 and this includes a long list in table 3 of BRMA locations that were given an uplift of LHA of 3% by Targeted Affordability Funding (TAF) .
My authority is one of the minority that has had no uplift !... Read More

David Lovegrove

19:07 PM, 18th July 2019
About a month ago

Real rents v LHA rents - info request

Reply to the comment left by Jonathan Clarke at 18/07/2019 - 15:06
As historic LHA rates are available to view i guess with sufficient time it would be possible to identify those authorities that have had an uplift.
I am surprised your authority did not automatically pay you, did you have to ask them to increase it for you !
Getting the extra allowance of course does not mean you collect more in rent, it could be that your tenant now pays less of a top up.
If other landlords are aware of other authorities that have increased their allowances i would be interested to know which.
From a tenants prospective, paying unnecessary top ups should be a source of complaint.... Read More