|
GOVERNMENT FIDDLES WHILE RESIDENTS BURN.
RESIDENTS RIGHTS SACRIFICED TO PROMOTE
PARK HOME INDUSTRY.
This Special Edition of PHRAA News is a WAKE UP CALL to every park homeowner in the country including members of IPHAS and NAPHR.
As all members of PHRAA will already be aware from the warnings issued in our Newsletters and Website, PHRAA has serious doubts concerning the welfare of park homeowners contained within the forthcoming changes to park home law now going before Parliament. UNFORTUNATELY, AS THE LEGISLATION PROCESS HAS PROGRESSED, THESE SERIOUS DOUBTS HAVE BECOME A REALITY. Except for a very few minor points the only beneficiary will be the Park Owners.
The All Party Working Group for the WELFARE OF PARK HOMEOWNERS which included representatives of IPHAS and NAPHR for residents, was established in 1998 and despite furious opposition from IPHAS & NAPHR was joined by PHRAA in 2002. It soon became very clear to Colin & Myself (as PHRAA representatives) that a very cosy relationship had been established between the Park Homes Trade Organisations (BH&HPA and NPHC) and the Residents Associations IPHAS & NAPHR, a relationship, which continues to this day as confirmed by two articles published recently in the Park Homes magazine, where Baroness Andrews, Under Secretary of State at the ODPM, now in control of the forthcoming legislative changes, praises the wonderful working relationship between the national Residents Associations and the Trade, which infers to anyone reading those articles that PHRAA was included, but I can assure our readers that PHRAA does not consist of “YES MEN” as it seems IPHAS & NAPHR have become and continues to be the only National Residents Association working EXCLUSIVELY for the WELFARE OF YOU, THE PARK HOMEOWNERS. During the first couple of consultation sessions PHRAA attended with the Policy Advisor John Connell at the ODPM in London together with representatives of IPHAS, NAPHR, BH&HPA, NPHC, Office of Fair Trading, Local Government, Park Owners, and other interested parties, it seemed that at long last the Government were going to improve Park Home Law to end the exploitation of Park homeowners at the hands of Unscrupulous Park Owners. It was not long however that it became obvious to PHRAA that following a meeting John Connell attended with some 100 plus Park Owners, that the Welfare of Park Homeowners had now become secondary to the aspirations of the Park Owners and the whole of the reform process had been hijacked by the trade and was now being used by Government exclusively as a promotional exercise for the Park Home Industry. Everything the Industry wanted, the Government have granted and the residents can go hang. 1983 all over again.
To confirm our fears, early in 2005 using the Freedom of Information Act, Colin and I visited John Connells office in the ODPM on two separate occasions trawling through masses of Stakeholders response files. To our surprise, except for one or two isolated letters from individual park homeowners, the files contained only the responses from Park Owners, BH&HPA, NPHC and Manufactures, nothing whatsoever from the residents side, IPHAS, NAPHR or any of the many submissions submitted by PHRAA were included. (mysteriously disappeared). What is noticeable is that all the trades requests for changes, most of which are detrimental to the residents, submitted by the trade are incorporated into the new legislation.
Much of the new legislation, which is supported by IPHAS AND NAPHR, is already drawn up and is due to be announced by Parliament very shortly and scheduled to come into force in October. In PHRAA’s View, based on intensive research, the effect of this new legislation in its present form will increase the power and control of the Unscrupulous Park Owners over our lives. UNLESS WE CAN GET IT STOPPED NOW. Why do we continue to let these rogues rule our lives, swindle out of our money? Without us Park Homeowners there would be no Park Home Industry. We as the customers have the power. Stand together and say no to the demands of the Rogue Park Owner. Would Baroness Andrews, Under Secretary of State at the former ODPM with responsibility for the upcoming “reforms” to Park Home Law, be so keen to promote this rogue infested Industry if it were her elderly relations that were being bullied, harassed or prevented form selling their home, by an Unscrupulous Park owner? It is up to us Park Homeowners to rid this industry of the rogue park owners.
Collectively we have the most powerful weapon. What is that weapon? PEOPLE POWER. THE ONLY WEAPON FEARED BY UNSCUPULOUS PARK OWNERS.
BID TO SILENCE PHRAA.
One message that has come over to PHRAA loud and clear from John Connell (ODPM), Park Owners, BH&HPA, NPHC, IPHAS and NAPHR, is that speaking out for the rights of Park Home owners to a fair deal would not be tolerated, as we were soon to find out on receiving a letter from John Connell, in July of last year alleging that PHRAA had released confidential information concerning the reform of park home law, therefore he had decided that as from February that year, to ban PHRAA from any further stakeholders consultation meetings at the ODPM. Knowing that this was a totally false allegation, Colin and I immediately challenged him to provide the evidence to substantiate his charge , which to this day, he completely refused to do. He was also asked to explain why it was that if as he stated he had banned PHRAA in February, Why did he neglect to inform us during any of the many telephone conversations and letters we had exchanged, also our meetings with him at the ODPM, in the period between February and July. This he also declined to answer.
Park Homeowners experiencing problems with Unscrupulous Park Owners will know from bitter experience, that the chance of obtaining justice or even a fair deal is virtually impossible, but is that really surprising when a Policy Advisor (John Connell) at the ODPM makes false accusations against the integrity of Officers of PHRAA, refuses point blank to state what the charges are, then assumes the role of Prosecution, Judge and Jury, return a guilty verdict, and then pass sentence with no right of appeal, in what can only be described as a Kangaroo Court. Hardly the type of behaviour becoming of a Policy Advisor for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister????
Every citizen of this country, whatever their status, has the basic Human Right to a fair trial, (Article 6 Human Rights Act), but not it appears if you are the only National Park Home Residents Association making itself unpopular by speaking out for the rights of Park Homeowners with Government Officers intent on placing the aspirations of the Park Home Industry over and above the WELFARE OF PARK HOMEOWNERS.
PHRAA was formed to fight for the right of Park Homeowners to a fair deal and will not rest until this goal is achieved. PHRAA WILL NOT BE SILENCED by jumped up Civil Servants, Unscrupulous Park Owners, who due to the fact that they own the tiny plot of land that your home is on assume that this gives them absolute power over your life their powerful Trade Organisations, (BH&HPA and NPHC), dubious Solicitors employed by Unscrupulous Park Owners to write letters, which they know bend the law and will terrify 70, 80, 90 year old residents, threatening Court Action for petty breaches of Park Rules, simply because the UPO wants them off the park to obtain their plot.
Whilst PHRAA can understand why the Unscrupulous Park Owners, the Trade and even the Park Owner biased Government, would wish PHRAA silenced, but we are absolutely disgusted to find that the two other National Residents Associations share their view and from information PHRAA received recently from a very reliable source may possibly have instigated the ban or were heavily involved in its implementation. Whatever the truth of their involvement in that particular issue, the fact remains that they have not raised any objection as PHRAA would have most certainly done had John Connell (ODPM) attempted to ban either IPHAS or NAPHR from Stakeholders Consultation Meetings. PHRAA stands accused by IPHAS and NAPHR of “ROCKING THE BOAT” which we can only interpret as meaning that PHRAA is interfering with the “COSY RELATIONSHIP’ they enjoy with the Trade Organisations. If telling the truth and bringing into the public eye the facts regarding the full extent of Park Homeowners exploitation and ABUSE OF THE ELDERLY at the hands of Unscrupulous Park owners which is getting worse and more widespread every day, is “ROCKING THE BOAT’’ THEN SO BE IT. PHRAA WILL NOT JUST CONTINUE TO ROCK THE BOAT, PHRAA WILL SINK IT, and IPHAS and NAPHR SHOULD, instead of pandering to the Industry’s every wish, FOLLOW PHRAA”s LEAD AND FIGHT FOR THEIR MEMBERS BEFORE IT”S TOO LATE.. IT HAS TAKEN TWENTY YEARS TO GET THIS CHANCE OF REFORM. IF THIS LEGISLATION GOES THROUGH IN IT”S PRESENT FORM, IT WILL BE ANOTHER TWENTY YEARS OF FIGHTING BEFORE WE GET ANOTHER CHANCE.
NEW LEGISLATION DRAWN UP BY THE INDUSTRY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE INDUSTRY.
Will the new Legislation benefit Park Homeowners?
The Short answer is NO, WHY NOT? BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT HAS PLACED THE BURDEN OF ENFORCEMENT FIRMLY AND SQUARELY ON THE SHOULDERS OF THE RESIDENTS. IT WILL BE UP TO THE RESIDENT TO TAKE COURT ACTION AGAINST THE PARK OWNER TO OBTAIN HIS RIGHTS, which places the homeowners in a virtually impossible situation, unless that is, the homeowners concerned are fortunate enough to have the tens of thousands of pounds available in the bank to enable them to afford Solicitors and Barristers fees, with expensive Court Costs, needed to take Legal Action against the Unscrupulous Park Owners who refuse to comply with any part of the new law which may benefit the homeowner, plus the many months or even years of stress the homeowner will have to endure as well as having to face the park owners acts of witness intimidation before the case even gets to Court. The main problem the homeowner encounters when attempting to instigate Court Action against his Park Owner is finding a Solicitor who has experience of Park home law as they are very rare. It must always be remembered by any homeowner, when considering taking Legal Action against their Park Owner, even if they are convinced that they have a rock solid case, that the park owner has access to, and the unlimited resources available, to employ top legal firms who are experts in park home law and can make mincemeat out of the inexperienced local solicitor, making taking a park owner to court a very risky and costly undertaking, not only financially, but mentally and physically. If, or more likely when, the resident loses his case against the park owner, he will then be liable for not only his own legal costs, but also the costs incurred by the Park owner, which can result, indeed has recently occurred to one resident, in the resident becoming Bankrupt and losing his home. Given these facts the actual benefit to residents of this so called park home law reform will be almost nil whilst the Government refuse to provide proper powers of enforcement. Unscrupulous Park Owners completely disregard the law now, does the Government seriously expect, or expect us to believe they will change into “goody goodies overnight and obey this new law? The phrase “living in cloud cuckoo land” springs to mind.
PARK OWNER WONT LET ME SELL MY HOME .
Hardly a day goes by without a call or letter from a distraught homeowner, pleading for help because their park owner is deliberately blocking their right to sell their home by putting off every prospective buyer they have until the homeowner is left with no alternative but to either abandon their home or sell it to the park owner for a pittance. As this is one of the most prevalent and rapidly growing problems being encountered by park homeowners today, especially those residents living in older homes, which according to Alicia Dunne, a Director of Policy at the National Park Homes Council in her article in the Park & Holiday Magazine recently, refers to homes over 10 years old, (shades of things to come) it was felt that this part of the new legislation would suffice for the purpose of providing a prime example of the ineffectiveness of the new legislation as a whole in its present form, particularly as this section of the reform has been in force since January 2005 and has actually made the problem even worse than it was before. AIDED BY THE NEW LAW UNSCRUPULOUS PARK OWNERS CAN BLOCK YOUR SALE AND THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT.
The Mobile Home Act 1983 reinforced by the amendment which came into force in 2005 states that the homeowner has the right to sell their home and assign the agreement to a person approved of by the park owner whose approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. It should be made clear that under the law the Park owner only has the right to approve the suitability of the prospective buyer. He does not have the right to impose any other conditions such as age of home, demanding surveys etc., but this does not stop the unscrupulous park owner from doing just that, especially if yours is an older home and the park owner wants it off, to replace with a new one at a vast profit to himself.
Having advertised the home for sale either privately or through an estate agent, (It may be difficult, if not impossible if the home is on an UPO,s park, to find a local estate agent willing to handle the sale of your home due to the UPO illegally turning away every prospective buyer they find and even being subjected to threats if they do not withdraw the home from the market.) you have a prospective buyer. You then inform the park owner in writing, giving details of the prospective buyer, including their name and address and telephone number and request approval. The park owner under the 2005 amendment has to respond to this request in writing, within 28 days. If approval is withheld he must give reasons which must not be unreasonable. If the park owner does not respond within 28 days or withholds approval unreasonably, the homeowner can take the park owner to Court apply to have approval granted and sue for damages for breach of contract. SOUNDS MARVELOUS doesn’t it, but think about it, taking the Park Owner to Court would take months or even years to get to Court and entail enormous expense for the homeowner, not to mention the effect that the stress and anxiety would have on the homeowners health. And what of the prospective buyer while all this is going on, is he or she, going to hang about waiting for a Court to decide whether or not they can buy your home, knowing that they too, would face exactly the same problems at some future date, should they buy? Not likely. They will disappear as fast as their legs will carry them , thanking their lucky stars they didn’t buy a home on that park. Losing the prospective buyer also means you lose your witness, without which you cannot take Court Action. The stipulated 28 day period applies to every prospective buyer, so the whole process has to be repeated for each prospective buyer and its introduction in the 2006 amendment, has effectively taken away the right of every park homeowner to sell their home, whatever its age, to any one but the unscrupulous park owner at his price, usually a pittance, thus depriving the resident of his investment.
WHY HAS THE 28 DAY PERIOD FOR APPROVAL IN WRITING MADE THE STUATION WORSE?
Because it has created an enormous loophole in the Act which enables the Unscrupulous Park Owner to block the homeowners right to sell without any sanction whatsoever.
Legalised robbery in other words.
Homeowner decides to sell, puts home on market, finds a prospective buyer. Obtains prospective buyers name address etc., then writes to park owner enclosing buyers details and requesting Park owners approval as required by law. Park Owner contacts buyer, either by telephone or meeting telling them that the home cannot be sold because of…. Usually accompanied with various verbal false derogatory statements regarding the state of the home, and if all else fails resorting to abuse, all designed to put off the buyer. Then in the full knowledge that the buyer has gone for good, the park owner then writes to the seller approving the prospective buyer, thus effectively depriving any chance the homeowner has of taking successful Legal Action against the park owner. As written approval has to be obtained each time a new prospective purchaser is found. You may well ask, why would the park owner prevent a sale, he gets 10% of the sale price each time a residents sells his home? This is true, but compared with the fantastic profit to be had by replacing the home with a brand new one or selling the existing home he swindled the previous owners out of for its true market value, that 10% is peanits. PHRAA obtained Legal Advice from a local Solicitor who is conversant with park home law, who stated that before the homeowner could take a case to Court, the park owner would have to have refused at least three prospective purchasers, each of whom would have to be willing to stand up in Court and give evidence. Does the Government seriously believe that is achievable?
Take a typical scenario. An eighty year old resident with failing health, has been forced by circumstances to move into sheltered accommodation, puts their beautifully maintained, but older home on the market, the park owner puts off every prospective buyer. Becoming desperate, totters off to a solicitor for help, only to find that it will cost £150 per hour for solicitors fees, plus barristers fees and court costs, take months or even years, before the case is heard. This being the last straw the distraught resident is forced to accept a pittance for their home from the park owner, thus losing not only her home, but left destitute. The homeowners right to sell their home must be made absolute and providing that the incoming resident fulfils the established criteria of the park (over fifties or retired etc) there should be no interference, other than the right to be notified, from the park owner. Should an incoming resident prove to be unsuitable after occupation, the Park Owner has ample measures available to him under the existing legislation to apply to the Court for the termination of their agreement. UNLESS THE RESIDENT IS AFFORDED THE ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO SELL THEIR HOME, AND GIVEN THE EVER INCREASING NUMBER OF PARKS BEING TAKEN OVER BY UNSCRUPULOUS PARK OWNERS, MOST OF WHICH ARE MEMBERS OF THE BH&HPA AND NPHC, NOT ONE OF THE 250,000 PLUS PARK HOMEOWNERS WILL BE ABLE TO SELL THEIR HOMES, WHETHER NEW OR OLD, EXCEPT TO THE PARK OWNER FOR A PITTANCE. YOUR £100,000 PLUS PARK HOME IS PRACTICALLY WORTHLESS WHILST THE LAW ALLOWS THE PARK OWNER TO STOP YOU SELLING. THE LEGALISED ROBBERY OF THE ELDERLY PARK HOMEOWNER MUST BE STOPPED.
NEW LAWS TIGHTEN THE NOOSE AROUND PARK HOMEOWNERS NECKS.
At first glance the proposed changes to the Mobile Homes Act 1983 as outlined in the latest Government Fact Sheet appear to provide extra protection to the park homeowner , but on closer examination it soon becomes very obvious that the Government has paid lip service only regarding the exploitation of Park Homeowners and have allowed the industry not only to totally monopolise the reform consultations, but to turn it into a promotional campaign for the park home industry at the expense of the long suffering park homeowners. In other words, WHAT THE PARK OWNERS WANTED, THE PARK OWNERS HAVE GOT. Any benefit to the homeowners is completely overruled by the fact that the Government has decreed that IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL RESIDENT TO TAKE THE PARK OWNER TO COURT TO ENFORCE THE LAW. What a brilliant solution that is, MAKE THE 70,80 or 90YEAR OLD VICTIM PAY just to obtain even the basic human rights enjoyed by every member of society, but denied to Park Homeowners. There is a suggestion that some form of Arbitration Scheme be set up, to which Homeowners can take disputes with their park owner at a low cost, but how will the Government guarantee that this process will be independent, posses a working knowledge of park home law, and will it be empowered to enforce any decisions, for without teeth, it will be useless anyway. The other problem with this type of scheme is that the verdict is final with usually no appeal. Even if a satisfactory truly independent Arbitration scheme were to be established it is certain that while the aggrieved resident will be representing himself, the Park Owner will have employed the services of a top Legal firm specialising in park home law to represent his interests and ensure a victory for the Park Owners.
For the purposes of this news letter I will just quote from some of the amendments to the existing IMPLIED TERMS of the Written Agreement as given in the Government Fact Sheet, April 2006, and how they will affect park homeowners.
Sale of Mobile Home by Resident.
Although already covered above, it is noted that the Fact sheet states that this Implied Term “has been amended so as to remove the owners (park) right to attach conditions to their approval of the purchaser and that the only factor they can take into account is the suitability of the incoming resident”. Under the 1983 Act, the park owner has never had the right to attach conditions, so what is new there?
Gift of the Mobile Home.
The resident has the right to gift or leave in their will, their home to a member of their family, but unless the beneficiary actually lived with the resident at the time of his death they cannot occupy the home without the park owners approval, but do have the right to sell it subject to the problems outlined above. It appears that the person inheriting the park home cannot even stay overnight in the home he has inherited judging from the actions of our own Unscrupulous Park Owner recently, who caused his Solicitor to send an extremely threatening letter to the son of the late homeowner who, because he lived some distance away stayed in his property for one night in order to get the home ready for sale. No where else but a park home would you be prevented from staying overnight in your own property.
Termination of Agreement by Park Owner.
We note that the widely abused “5 YEAR Relevant Period”, paragraph 6 of the Implied Terms relating to termination of the agreement on the grounds of the condition of the home, has been amended and replaced with “FORTHWITH” This means the removal of the previous 5 year notice period for the effected residents has been replaced with no notice period whatsoever. Yet another stick with which to beat residents now legalised.
Residents Associations.
The Government, with permission of the park owners and the BH&HPA and NPHC, have graciously allowed residents to exercise their Human Right to form a Residents Association on their park, but don’t get too excited, they have imposed strict conditions which have to be met before the park owner will recognise it. The main condition is that at least 50% of park homeowners have to be members, which in most cases is impossible to achieve, the UPO will make sure of that by threatening the most vulnerable elderly residents with dire consequences for joining. PHRAA receives reports nearly everyday where even long established Residents Associations have disintegrated due to the harassment of individual members by the park owner, especially when their park has been taken over by a UPO. To add insult to injury, the Government have decreed that the right to vote be denied to 50% of the park home population in that decisions by the members are to be by ONE VOTE PER HOME, thus depriving Wives or Partners of their democratic right to vote. It should also be remembered that all though in this instance this outrage against mainly women applies to park Residents Associations it will also apply to other park issues such as changes in park rules etc. Mrs. Pankhurst will be turning in her grave.
ACTION NEEDED NOW.
All the propaganda publicity being issued by Government, Park Owners, their Trade Organisations (BH&HPA and NPHC) including the two other National Residents Associations, (IPHAS and NAPHR), claim that this new legislation will give increased protection to Park Homeowners. Intensive research undertaken by PHRAA with Trading Standards Officers, Solicitors, Local Councils, Police Forces and others, prove beyond doubt that most of the amendments to the Mobile Homes Act, due to come into force on the 1st October 2006 have done nothing whatsoever for the WELFARE OF PARK HOMEOWNERS except to bestow even greater power on the UPO, already a law unto himself, over the lives of Park Homeowners. “ Prison camps for pensioners “,” second class citizens”, residents hounded out of their homes, we aint seen nothing yet.
If any PHRAA members know anyone who are members of IPHAS or NAPHR, please pass them a copy of this Newsletter, and urge them to demand answers as to why their representatives have betrayed the trust of their members by agreeing with and supporting this industry biased legislation. Why did they not, instead of enjoying a cosy relationship with the industry’s Trade Organisations, fight for the right of their members to a fair deal, also why they are hiding the true facts concerning the real effect on their members welfare. TIME IS SHORT the Statutory Instrument confirming this so called reform is due to pass through Parliament any day now so PLEASE, ACT NOW, TELL YOUR MP OF YOUR CONCERNS or send them to PHRAA and we will contact them for you. PHRAA is fighting for you, but we need your help. It has taken twenty years to have this opportunity for reform. Should this present law go through it will take another twenty years to right this wrong. PHRAA DOES NOT WANT TO HAVE TO SAY “WE TOLD YOU SO” in twelve months time.
HELP PHRAA TO MAKE THE VOICE OF ALL PARK HOMEOWNERS HEARD IN GOVERNMENT.
PHRAA WILL PUBLISH WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ANY OF THE CRITICISMS MADE IN THIS NEWSLETTER. PHRAA, THE ONLY NATIONAL RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION WORKING EXCLUSIVELY FOR PARK HOMEOWNERS.
|
