Talk:Anchor (housing association)

Anchor's problems
I am a leaseholder in a property administered by Anchor in the City of London. The scheme's manifold problems are due in my view to the multiple layers of so-called 'administration' by scheme, area and regional managers, supposedly working with 'property' and 'finance' sections which have no apparent connection with the managers and rarely meet or discuss matters with them, let alone with the residents concerned. They are illustrated by a resolution of the City's Community and Children's Service Committee taken as recently as 20 July 2022.

The City of London granted a lease to Network Housing Association in 1998 to develop housing for the elderly at Tudor Rose Court, the only housing scheme of its sort within the City. The head lease set out the terms of the sub-tenancies to be granted to City nominated occupiers (about half the occupiers) and leaseholders (the other half). Since 1990, the head lease has passed from Network Housing Association, to Stadium, to Hanover and now to Anchor Housing Association. The terms of the tenancy agreements granted by each have gradually, over the years, been extended and made more onerous than was originally intended by the City. Anchor now requires elderly tenants to pay for major works, including replacement lifts and flooring to all common parts. This was never intended by The City. The annual sinking fund contribution from tenants, which was never provided for in the head lease, has more than doubled in one year. Furthermore, the nineteen City-nominated tenants have endured increasingly poor management from successive housing association landlords, and escalating costs of management. In 2022/23 Anchor has increased tenants' management fee costs by over 100%, without consultation or justification in terms of value for money.

The Committee agreed unanimously to investigate this situation further, with advice from the City Solicitor, to assess what can be done by the City, as freeholder and nominator, and to address this serious issue for many elderly City residents. If those residents had been direct City tenants, they would not be subject to these costs. There was no original intention by the City in granting the head lease to make them liable. The Committee agreed that the views of the City Solicitor be requested to help the City challenge Anchor's current actions. Anthony J. Camp, MBE. AnthonyCamp (talk) 09:54, 26 July 2022 (UTC)