Leaseholders: Service Charges

Debate between Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist and Lord Campbell-Savours
Wednesday 20th July 2022

(1 year, 8 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab) [V]
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, is not the reluctance of some freeholders and their agents to provide information to leaseholders about their identity, along with their refusal to discuss leasehold and wider services charge issues, a flaw in the system? Why cannot the law be amended to allow greater transparency over freehold, leasehold and sublease title ownership issues, going further than the proposed Bill mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Young of Cookham? Without greater access to such information, leaseholders lack leverage and are often powerless to influence service charges.

Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist Portrait Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist (Con)
- Hansard - -

I commend the noble Lord on his often interesting suggestions for the department, particularly on leasehold. I note that in the last series of questions, he suggested rolling up unaffordable services charges for vulnerable groups, and I undertake to take the idea of a debenture against property title back to the department if it has not already been considered. As for his question today, there are a number of existing ways in which leaseholders can obtain details of their landlord. A written statement of the landlord’s name and address must be given on request under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985. Failure to comply with the request is an offence. In respect of information about service charges, any ground rent or service charge demand must include the name and address of the landlord. If that address is not in England and Wales, it must include an address in England and Wales at which notice may be served on the landlord by the tenant. Her Majesty’s Land Registry can also provide a copy of the relevant lease for a property for a fee.

Flooding Compensation

Debate between Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist and Lord Campbell-Savours
Tuesday 25th February 2020

(4 years, 1 month ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist Portrait Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist
- Hansard - -

I agree with my noble friend, but it might be helpful to set out that “building on flood plains” is a catch-all expression. There are two different forms of flood plains; indeed, London is on one of them—I am not sure whether she is suggesting that we stop building here. However, high-risk flood zones, known as flood zone 3a, were developed as permitted, subject to Environment Agency concerns being satisfied. National planning policy is clear: inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding from all sources should be avoided by directing development areas to lower risk. Where development is in a high-risk area and is absolutely necessary, sufficient measures should be taken to make sure homes are safe, resilient and protected from flooding. New housebuilding and most other forms of development should not be permitted in functional flood plains where flood water has to flow or be stored in times of flood. These flood plains are known as flood zone 3b.

Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, if buildings are to be built on flood plains, why are they then excluded from Flood Re?

Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist Portrait Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist
- Hansard - -

I am not sure that the noble Lord is correct in that. Flood Re was introduced specifically to help with insurance for houses particularly at risk. The Government have that whole scheme currently under review.

Metropolitan Police Report by Sir Richard Henriques

Debate between Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist and Lord Campbell-Savours
Monday 30th September 2019

(4 years, 6 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist Portrait Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist
- Hansard - -

I am afraid that I cannot make that undertaking at the moment, but the Government agree that there should be a general right to anonymity before charge for all offences. But there will be exceptional circumstances where there are legitimate policing reasons to name a suspect—for example, to make a public warning about a wanted individual. In other cases, it is important to preserve the anonymity of those coming forward with allegations that may not pass the threshold, as they would damage their reputation if they were made public.

Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, in her initial response, the Minister used the phrase “at the earliest opportunity”. Why not tomorrow? What is blocking the publication of this report? Is it not fair to conclude that at no stage, post Henriques, has any police force, police commissioner or police chief had the good sense to say that there will be a full review of how sexual offence accusations will be handled by the police in the future? Therefore, we can only look forward to further blunders, injustices and lives destroyed, as in the cases of Lord Brittan, Lord Bramall and, indeed, Mr Harvey Proctor, who at least can now take these people to court and see justice.

Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist Portrait Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist
- Hansard - -

Regarding why it has taken so long to publish the report since the Metropolitan Police announced it on 14 August, the noble Lord will agree that, before publishing these reports, every individual named is given the opportunity to respond. That has taken some time. The Met has been concerned to follow the proper process before publication. The report contains sensitive material and it is right that care is taken, so that further distress is not caused to those mentioned in the report, including Bramall, Proctor and others.

--- Later in debate ---
Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist Portrait Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist
- Hansard - -

Of course the Government will consider that, just as we will consider all the recommendations in both reports and many of the questions raised in the House today.

Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait Lord Campbell-Savours
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I say to the Minister that some of us believe that Mr Rodhouse should never have been given his last appointment.

Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist Portrait Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist
- Hansard - -

I am sorry: the noble Lord has the advantage of me there. My brief does not cover that point.