Forum Topics

Ealing's reliance on parking fine income betrays Labour party principles

Probably not a surprise that Ealing is one of the highest issuer of parking fines in the country according to a report on currently on this site. Judging by a ticket place on a car parked near my home, enforcement continues unabated despite the supposed lockdown.It is no longer worth pretending these fines don't act as a local tax with the revenue being used to cover the shortfall in Council Tax and government grant funding.PCNs are not adjusted for income so you get the same for parking in the wrong place at the wrong time if you have a Fiat Uno or a Ferrari. It will be argued that as the very poorest in society don't tend to own cars then as a tax this is a reasonably point. However, people who need to use cars for their work will tend to be on below or around average income with a large proportion of fines going to those in the building trade, carers, minicab or delivery drivers.Better off drivers probably make up the bulk of people who successfully appear these fines.Some will say that it is a voluntary tax and if you can't afford to pay it obey the rules. Our family have received two parking fines over the last decade in Ealing - in both cases we had thought we had parked correctly in areas we were familiar with but the signs were misleading. Appeals were dismissed out of hand and no attempt was made to improve the signage. Very few people parking in Ealing will do so on the basis they hope to get away with it because by now most are aware how intensive enforcement is so most fines are issued to people who have made a genuine mistake.This effectively means that the parking fines operate as a highly regressive tax something that is directly opposed to the founding principles of the Labour party. Yet it seems to be Labour authorities, like Ealing that use this most as a method of raising finance. I appreciate that this is a challenging time for council finances but the over dependence of this borough on this form of income is not healthy or fair on residents.

Mark Evans ● 2063d8 Comments ● 2056d

FUNERAL ARRANGEMENTS.

FUNERAL ARRANGEMENTS.For some people it is not bearable to think about, or to plan for their own funeral or for that of their spouse. However in these uncertain times I believe it is a responsible thing to do to take some of the pressure and grief off family members by not leaving things to late. Myself and my wife have taken steps to leave very little for our family members to worry about regarding these arrangementsWe have taken steps to arrange Pure Cremation funerals which was catapulted into the news a few years ago by singer David Bowie. For instance, if I die first, my wife will contact a funeral director in Hampshire. They will take care of all the arrangements needed. I would be collected from my home or from anywhere else and taken to Hampshire to to the funeral director's own private crematorium for disposal. No flowers, no family present and no funeral service. Arrangements have already been made for a memorial service shortly after my death.The benefits of doing things this way is that the cost to my wife and family is minimal. If I die at home the cost of the complete funeral arrangement is £1195.00 or £1.445 if I die in hospital or nursing home. The average cost of a cremation funeral in the UK is £3,986, sometimes thousands more.Being a very competitive business I am sure that some funeral directors would charge less than £1195.00.Nobody wants to die, but time and unforeseen events befall us all. In the mean time wash your hands and socially distance.

Neil Milkins ● 2058d0 Comments ● 2058d

Government says public should have right to ask councils to release land for redevelopment.

The government has published for consultation proposals that would enable the public to challenge councils and other public bodies to release underused land for redevelopment.The ‘right to regenerate’ proposals mean that underused public land could be sold to individuals or communities by default – unless there is a “compelling reason” for the owner to keep itPublic bodies would need to demonstrate clear plans for the land in the near future – even if it is a temporary use before later development. If it were kept for long without being used, it would have to be sold.The rights would also apply to unused publicly owned social housing and garages. The government notes that the latest figures show there were more than 25,000 vacant council-owned homes and recent Freedom of Information data shows there were more 100,000 empty council-owned garages last year.The government says it wishes to provide local communities with an opportunity to “transform eyesores” into something they want in their area. It builds on government work to encourage development on brownfield land.Jenrick said: “Right to regenerate is the simple way to turn public land into public good, with land sold by default unless there is a very compelling reason not to do so.“We are cutting through red tape so that communities can make better use of available land and derelict buildings, which means more new homes, businesses and community assets.“Millions of people will now be able to buy that empty property, unused garage or parcel of land and turn it into something good for them and their community.”Tom Chance, chief executive of the National Community Land Trust Network, welcomed the idea.“There are hundreds of community land trusts across the country wanting to build much-needed affordable housing, but getting hold of land at an affordable price is a huge barrier.“The potential for communities to be given first right of refusal could be a game changer. We encourage everyone to read through the proposals and respond to the consultation.”Ian Harvey, executive director of Civic Voice, added: “Across the country, communities see land that remains empty and wonder why. They imagine how it could be used for communities – from green space, to housing – but when they enquire about enhancing the space it’s never clear who owns it.“If a community has a viable use for this land, they must be given the opportunity to take these ideas forward.“The ‘right to regenerate’ is a great step forward to build on previous attempts at doing this and we believe it will increase the chance for communities to come together to bring vacant land into the heart of the community. We look forward to working with communities on this latest community right.”The consultation, which closes on 13 March, can be found here on the UK Government website.18 January 2021Laura Edgar, The Plannerhttps://www.planningportal.co.uk/news/article/750/planning_news_-_21_january_2021?utm_source=PPQ+Newsletter&utm_campaign=efc81fca0a-Newsletter_11072019_HTML_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_734e0b63a9-efc81fca0a-7282665#two

Rosco White ● 2062d0 Comments ● 2062d

Look After My Bills Nightmare.

To save people the agony of having to deal with a future nightmare  with Look After My Bills and Utility Point please read their horrendous reviews on Trustpilot.                                  This is an email I received from Trustpilot this week.                                                People are reading your review!Hi Neil Milkins,You recently wrote a review on Trustpilot and it looks like people find it helpful.117 people have already read your review.                                                                                                       LOOK AFTER MY BILLS SHAMBLES.It is now 12 weeks since Look After My Bills without my knowledge or permission changed my energy provider from S.S.E. to Utility Point. Jacqueline Loughman promised me 9 weeks ago that they would resolve the matter within 14 days. A week ago their senior complaints manager Daniel promised me he would phone me on (29-12-20) and have the matter resolved. No phone call and no answer to my emails to him. In the meantime I am going to have a sky high electric and gas bill when this matter is resolved. It is near impossible to get a reply from them once you have emailed and phoned them and it is totally impossible to phone Utility Point as ALL their phone lines have been cut off. I have been on the phone and emailing 19 hours in total trying to sort this mess out. Anyone thinking of going with Look After My Bills or Utility Point please check their horrendous reviews on Trustpilot.

Neil Milkins ● 2082d14 Comments ● 2071d

Renaming Havelock Road Council corruption

Renaming Havelock Road may be a trivial issue. The way it was achieved is an illustration of how Ealing Council at its highest level goes about its business: dishonestly. The decision to rename the road Havelock Road was made by “two pillars of the community”, Julian Bell, Council Leader, and Paul Najserak, CEO.   Bell suggested the idea (10.6.20.)  Why?  He doesn’t live on the road or in Southall.   ANSWER:  he depends on Southall councillors for support and is in the pay of the local MP.    Self-interest. On 14.7.20 the matter appeared on the agenda of the Cabinet, never having been discussed by them before.  The Cabinet had it all done and dusted there and then.   They decided a council officer could make the decision. Democracy?  No. Decisions should be made by our elected representatives, not by council employees.  Paul Najserak made the decision.  Between Bell making the suggestion and Najserak making the decision what occurred appears to be a conspiracy to subvert due process so that Southall could be given what Southall wanted -  FREE.FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST I have been trying to get straight answers about what occurred for weeks.  I am still trying. A Freedom of information Request is needed to secure the minutes of meetings and internal memoranda. I believe someone has already made one.  If that person is reading this, would they please let us know the result - if there was one.Meanwhile: LETTER SENT TO BELL “Dear Julian Bell, Why did the Cabinet deal with renaming Havelock Road rather than leaving it to a resident to make an application?   There was no reason a resident could not do so and it is the routine way for such applications to happen?  Your sincerely, Andrew Farmer”

Andrew Farmer ● 2107d10 Comments ● 2074d