AS A MEANS OF DELIVERING THE 'RIGHT' VOTE TO TONY BLAIR - NOTTING HILL HOUSING TRUST SHOULD BE SUBJECTED TO MAJOR STRUCTURAL REFORM
TOO MANY GOOD TENANTS ARE BEING TREATED BY THE MANAGEMENT AS A 'PROBLEM' FOR WRITING LEGITIMATE COMPLAINTS TO THE MANAGEMENT!
TOO MANY GOOD TENANTS ARE BEING TREATED BY THE MANAGEMENT AS A 'PROBLEM' FOR WRITING LEGITIMATE COMPLAINTS TO THE MANAGEMENT!
I have seen too much evidence of good tenants being misrepresented as perpetrators and perpetrators being misrepresented as victims to realise that the management of Notting Hill Housing Trust are mismanaging the whole entity of the Charitable Trust, but more importantly, the Charitable Trust, treating the tenants with hostile confrontation and aggressive tactics as soon as any tenant submits a written legitimate complaint to the senior management.
Why so many complaints?
Why do the management not respond or even acknowledge serious legitimate issues that demand answers - such as mismanagement, disrepair, placing tenants into purported rent arrears and with great regularity placing a 'TENANT FROM HELL' next to any tenant that ('dares to') complain for writing to the management?
Why do the management so easily resort to eviction procedures when there are no good reasons to initiate an eviction? This tends to be regularly resorted to in far too many cases.
Why are good tenants not invited onto the Board to submit their helpful contribution?
Why are the same 142 (£1) members of the Charitable Trust not holding the Board to account (because it appears that the Board as Trustees of the Legal Trust dare not and will not appoint fresh intelligent tenants who are the true Beneficiaries of the Legal Trust)? Fresh talent is needed urgently onto the Board before a legal action is intiated against the Trustees. It appears that any semblance of independence is compromised - all are linked to the Chairman and to the very heart of the LABOUR PARTY.
There is NO CONFIDENCE in the Board.
What of the tenant representatives?
Are they independent or are they linked inextricably to the Board?
COMMUNICATION should be the answer.
Being in mind the evidence that continues to be endlessly repeated of not poor but outrageously bad communication and rock bottom mismanagement, the most senior management should have the decency to tender their resignation. Ironically, some of the Tenants are far more qualified to lead than some of the current Trustees - perhaps some of the beneficiaries of the Trust should be invited onto the Board?
Why so many complaints?
Why do the management not respond or even acknowledge serious legitimate issues that demand answers - such as mismanagement, disrepair, placing tenants into purported rent arrears and with great regularity placing a 'TENANT FROM HELL' next to any tenant that ('dares to') complain for writing to the management?
Why do the management so easily resort to eviction procedures when there are no good reasons to initiate an eviction? This tends to be regularly resorted to in far too many cases.
Why are good tenants not invited onto the Board to submit their helpful contribution?
Why are the same 142 (£1) members of the Charitable Trust not holding the Board to account (because it appears that the Board as Trustees of the Legal Trust dare not and will not appoint fresh intelligent tenants who are the true Beneficiaries of the Legal Trust)? Fresh talent is needed urgently onto the Board before a legal action is intiated against the Trustees. It appears that any semblance of independence is compromised - all are linked to the Chairman and to the very heart of the LABOUR PARTY.
There is NO CONFIDENCE in the Board.
What of the tenant representatives?
Are they independent or are they linked inextricably to the Board?
COMMUNICATION should be the answer.
Being in mind the evidence that continues to be endlessly repeated of not poor but outrageously bad communication and rock bottom mismanagement, the most senior management should have the decency to tender their resignation. Ironically, some of the Tenants are far more qualified to lead than some of the current Trustees - perhaps some of the beneficiaries of the Trust should be invited onto the Board?
e-mail:
Comments
Display the following 3 comments