New Broughton Village, Burglary Vulnerability.

Emails Between Contour/symphony housing and a local resident.

• Neighbour:

Hello David/Janet

Following a meeting of the residents of the Hatton Gardens/Oriel Gardens development on Friday 6^th June, I attach a 3 page document.

The first 2 pages relates to a number of questions raised by the residents as a result of your letter of 28^th May 2014, to which we are seeking your response. The 3rd page is my voting slip for the "gate vote".

It was apparent at the meeting that not everyone has received a “voting” slip. I have spoken to different people, some social housing residents and some private owners, who have not received your letter of the 28^th. If the voting slips are to mean anything, can you explain who qualifies to vote?

People in the social housing seem to have been only offered 2 choices, to repair or remove the gates. Is there a specific reason for this?

I have copied all the residents who attended the meeting into this e-mail and it would be useful if you could ‘reply to all’ in your response.

Look forward to hearing from you,

• neighbour;

Hello All



It has been 5 working days since I sent the below e-mail. I received an out of office from Janet, however the letter of the 28^th was signed by both David and Janet.


Has the e-mail with attachments been received and read? Is it being actioned?


I have discussed at length with Stephen Gallaghan, Michelle Howard and Tony Dunne the poor communication between CPS and its customers, which this once again highlights.

There are 18+ residents copied into this mail, all of whom pay the service charge and all of whom want to know what it happening with the communal gate entrances, and were concerned about the voting slips and options given.


We are really upset that no-one from CPS could have taken 30 seconds out of their day to pen a reply.


We would like to request an update on this issue before COB today.

• Contour/Symphony Housing;

Thank you for your e mail requesting progress on addressing the issues surrounding vehicle gates in New Broughton Village

At the outset can I assure you that no decision will be made by CPS on a unilateral basis concerning the future of the gates at your development and other schemes across New Broughton Village. It is our intention to engage as comprehensively as possible to reach a consensus about the best way forward and the most sustainable solution for each individual vehicle gate. This process will involve far more dialogue and consultation on our part

The purpose of the consultation exercise so far has been to gauge views and seek as much engagement as possible from residents

I will ask the CPS team to answer the questions you have raised in your note to  Janet dated 6^th June as soon as possible

In respect of the joint approach CPS has agreed with Countryside on 29^th May 2014 we are aiming to have all of the gates inspected for the following;

• ·         Inspection of individual gates to ensure correct construction ie concrete  pillars
• ·         Inspection of individual gates to ensure correct installation by manufactures and suppliers
• ·         Assessment  of  alternative potential improvements or enhancements in situ  to minimise risk of misuse or damage to each gate

This assessment will take up to 8 weeks to complete the necessary individual inspection of each gate. As soon as we have the results we intend to contact people again. We will wish to speak to as many residents as possible so that there is an informed decision making process taking account of the immediate and long term implications of the choice made by Leaseholders

I hope this note is helpful, in the meantime do not hesitate to contact CPS for further updates

Resident. Group Meeting @ Matchsticks 6:30 pm tomorrow/Friday

Resident. Group Meeting @ Matchsticks 6:30 pm tomorrow/Friday.

Dear Resident

I am writing in response to the letter we received from Contour dated the 28^th May 2014.

That letter is very confusing and may mislead people. As you know the letter gave us 3 options in relation to the gates; to repair them, to take them down, to upgrade them.

I purchased my house on the basis that it was part of a gated community. For that reason I have spoken to Tony Dunne, the Group Director of CPS (Contour Property Services). He is Michelle Howard’s line manager, who in turn is Janet Gaston’s (our Lease Hold Officer) line manager.

What is not mentioned in the letter from Contour is that CPS had a meeting with Ian Kelly from Countryside on the 29^th May. Following that meeting they have agreed the following actions:-

• Inspection of individual gates to ensure correct construction i.e. concrete  pillars;
• Inspection of individual gates to ensure correct installation by manufactures and suppliers;
• Assessment  of  alternative potential improvements, or enhancements in situ, to minimise risk of misuse or damage to each gate.

The above work is being undertaken at Countryside’s expense so will not cost the development anything. As it has yet to take place, it is difficult to understand why we are being asked to vote.

One of the key points is whether the gates are ‘fit for purpose’.  Altex/Countryside fitted “residential” gates for the development, however it is my understanding that the high level of traffic using these gates suggests the gates, and drive motors, should have been of a more “industrial” standard.

By voting to remove the gates we may save some money in the short term; however it will reduce the security of the development, could affect property prices, will make it more dangerous for children. Insurers of properties, and vehicles, will no doubt seek higher premiums because of the increased risk of crime due to the removal of the gates.

The gates at Oriel Gardens have been chained and unusable for over 12 months. Unless the law requires that there are two access points, then why not close one access point permanently and upgrade/replace the gates at the other access point. It would seem unlikely that there is a legal requirement for two access points, when Contour have been happy to chain one set closed for such a prolonged period.

This would maintain the security of the development, and may save us some money.

If the majority vote to remove the gate(s) then we will have NO comeback to either CPS, Countryside or Altex (the installers of the gates), as WE will have voted to remove them.

There will be a meeting to discuss everything before we take any action, held at Matchsticks Bistro on Friday (6^th June) at 18:30.

Really hope you can make it,

Adam Hutson

Upset Resident

Below is an upset resident. This has been forwarded to MP for the area.

I have sent the email below to Janet Gaston:

Dear Sir/Madam,

Firstly I want to thank you for the letter concerning the above matter. I also would like to congratulate you for finally coming up with this letter which you have sent out to the residents after such a long time.

Unfortunately, for me as a resident of this estate this does not help me to understand what you are trying to do. You have not explained what final outcome was with the BUILDER (HEREIN Countryside Properties) who apparently did not do their homework regarding the stress tolerance of the original gates. It is important to have their take on all this.

Assuming that we the residents have to do it, the information you have provided is far short of what I would expect if I am to make a sound decision. Here you are just giving lump-sum figures which are meaningless to say the least. What I expect from you, particularly that I pay you folks every month, is a BREAKDOWN of the amount for me as an individual. For the three options you have given for us choose from, you need to give a breakdown of how much it would cost each resident per option.

I am sorry to say that without this information your deadline is null and void. I am concerned that whoever prepared the letter I have just received did not do their homework thoroughly. Next time talking to us first may be useful and time saving; otherwise this individualism is not going to work.

What you need to do now, before you start throwing around deadlines to me, is to give me the following information:

1. Countryside Properties’ position regarding the mess with the original gates.
2. The number of residents who will make contributions towards each of the three options available.
3. The cost to each resident for each option available.
4. The forecasted annual future maintenance costs to each resident of each option.

PLEASE NOTE: If we choose to go with any of these options, we as residents MUST be involved in evaluating each option physically. This is more important if we are to install new gates. We have fallen prey to choices made by people who are not paying anything towards maintenance costs and do reside on the estate; therefore to avoid any more mistakes we have to be involved in assessing the new system that has to be installed before it is even paid for. We need to be involved in choosing whatever system will be installed – I don’t think this should be your task anymore. WE PAY and WE DECIDE what is to be installed, so that if it fails we don’t blame anyone.

Please pay attention this letter because it will be useful as we go forward. The deadline you have given at this point in time is meaningless because you have not given me the information that can help me to make a sound decision as a resident.

Kind regards,

***************

Update on New Broughton Village Conflict of interest.

Hi guys just to keep you up to date with developments. I've had a further reply from our local MP a week ago. Hes previously wrote a letter on our behalf to Countryside seeking explanations. He's recived a response from country side and is still awaiting a reply from Greater Manchester Police and has also now written to the Chief Executive of Symphony Housing Group regarding the maintenance of the gated systems. As soon as he receives replies he will respond with further developments. If anyone in the community has any information they would like to share to inbox me at matthewjohnengland@gmail.com.

The Letter from the director of Countryside to Graham Stringer MP reads;

"

It is disappointing to hear of the complaints made to you from your constituents regarding instances of crime and anti social behaviour taking place in the development, however it is perceived or caused.

Since the start of the regeneration, along with greater Manchester police, the developer partners have worked to reduce crime and anti social behaviour in the area. Indeed as recently as 29^th April 2014, neighbourhood managers from symphony group, great places housing group and salix homes confirmed to ourselves and the council that reports of crime and anti social behaviour in the development whilst not entirely eliminated had significantly reduced since the development began.

Along with the delivery of the new river view primary school, green Grosvenor park and almost 1000 new homes to date, the development has brought a transformational change to an area which was in social and economic decline. Plans for further development are underway and without doubt will continue to improve the environment and positively enhance the lives of those who live there.

I have looked into the matter of the security gate systems installed as part of the overall design of the development, and can confirm that following the completion and handover of these works, their subsequent management, operation and maintenance is entirely under the control of contour property services (CPS). Part of symphony Housing Group, Contour Property Services provides leasehold services for those who own their homes and for those who rent their homes provided by contour homes and great places Housing Group the Registered Providers of the development.

I am aware that a number of vehicle access gates have suffered damage due to deliberate impact from cars and other vehicles also through the misuse  and vandalism by individuals resulting in gates remaining open or inoperative until repairs can be completed. The company held a meeting with CPS in November to discuss joint concerns regarding the gated systems. Review and analysis of the issues experienced on site, in our opinion, remain a combination of a lack of appropriate maintenance regime in place using the correct parts, but substantially and unfortunately acts of vandalism forcing the gates open which in turn damage the motors which operate the gates.

We have identified one pair of gates where the construction of the pier to the gate is not constructed correctly and the company is arranging for that to be corrected. We remain in dialogue with CPS and a meeting is diarised for May to conclude discussions.

I understand that CPS has very recently written to the residents to outline the damage and repairs issues with the gates, how this will be addressed and the need for vigilance in the correct use of the gates.

Please be assured that we will continue to work closely with Contour Property Services.

Yours sincerely

Ian Kelley

Managing Director."

New Broughton Village Complaint against Countryside

I'm pleased to announce after a painful 2 months of people ignoring us, our MP for the area Graham Stringer has taken on board the complaint and has contacted the police authority as well countryside and is waiting for Countrysides next move. It would be great if everyone on this petition could help double our signitures by communicating with neighbours.

Graham Stringer mentioned he may well have to make a personal visit to the location.

Share this petition

Help this petition to reach more signatures.

How to promote a petition?

• Share the petition on your Facebook wall and in groups related to the topic of your petition.
• Contact your friends
  1. Write a message where you explain why you have signed this petition, since people are more likely to sign it if they understand how important the topic is.
  2. Copy and paste the web address of the petition into your message.
  3. Send the message using email, SMS, Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter, Skype, Instagram and LinkedIn.