Wrexham council terminate tenancy for councillor
-
Posts
-
There is an FOIA which supports what is said on the blog, likewise the £600,000 spent on EXTERNAL legal fees to administer/challenge equal pay claims over the last 8 years is supported by FOIA evidence. Wrexham CBC cannot say that their FOIA information is wrong as they would then be admitting to a prima facie case under the Act.
@WCBC 10620 wrote:
Response from Wrexham Council below
“When deciding whether to allocate a sole tenancy to the remaining partner, the Council will look at individual circumstances, including the composition of the household. Of the 78 cases granted a sole tenancy in the last 2 years, only one was to an applicant, in a three bedroom house, who did not have children residing with them on a permanent basis.
Rather different interpretation of FOI information than that shown on
Plaid Wrexham’s release. The above seems to have more credence. Poetic licence?This is the FOIA questions and responses:
Wrexham County Borough Council
Response/Digest FOI 3610
Department: Housing & Public Protection
1. In the last 2 yrs how many joint tenancies have been surrendered?
78 joint tenancies have been surrendered and referred for a Management Move. This figure does not include those tenancies which were terminated and both parties sought suitable alternative accommodation.2. And how many of those tenancies were transferred to single tenancy and allowed to remain in their existing homes?
Of these tenancies 78 were transferred to sole occupancy. This figure will include tenancies where one person is left in the property and where one tenant is left in the property with non dependents or dependent children.As you can see, no mention of the three bedroom house transfer etc in the FOIA,
Perhaps you need to question the selectivity of WCBC’s information and their ‘poetic licence’ in responding to FOIA requests.Incidentally I have asked for a review to include a breakdown of the answers in Q2.
Carrie Harper responds to WCBC Press Release:
‘In law, when a joint tenant gives notice it has the effect of ending the tenancy for both parties’. This may well be the case but the point is you never informed either tenant that this would be the situation for them, a point already acknowledged in meetings with officers.
In terms of looking at ‘individual circumstances’ you are yet to provide Cllr Gregory with ANY detail regarding how you have come to the decision not to allocate him the tenancy. This point was outlined to you in writing last week following the decision. A decision which it should be noted, has taken 15 weeks, rather than the usual 4 weeks. Nor have you followed the lettings protocol specifically set out for dealing with applications from local members, family members and staff.
As regards the information regarding the fact that no tenant in these circumstances has been refused a joint to sole tenancy over the last 2 years, quite a staggering fact in itself, this request for information was from a sitting Cllr who was forced to go through the FOI process to obtain it due to your refusal to answer the question. A breach of the councils constitution in itself as I understand it? Possibly you clarify?
As you refute any any suggestion of discrimination, possibly you can also enlighten us as to how many other tenants across the borough have received a hand delivered letter from the council informing them they are a ‘tolerated trespasser’? Another question that has yet to be answered.
You also fail to note the situation regarding Cllr Gregory’s disabilities and the £7,000 of adaptations to this property to cater for his medical needs, I assume this issue has been considered as part of the decision making process but with no further information from yourselves, this is of course very difficult to establish.
By all means, please feel free to elaborate on any of the above points in response.
As a community we need to know how widespread these types of circumstances are, how they affect people on daily basis, especially for those in the care of the public purse and cannot readily speak for themselves. A small example, was the lady who had a demand to pay for a replacement bin … how many people are suffering in silence … and what as a community do we do about it.
Obviously this is Revenge by Wrexham Council for Mr Gregory raising the issue of the Role of The Mayor.If Mr Gregory has Medical needs,let him stay there.If Mr Gregory is upto date with his rent,let him stay there.Mind you i would not put it past Wrexham Circus not to have Romainians or Bulgarians lined up for the property in the New Year.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
