Coning the public with public money: Crystal Palace Housing Associatin,
South London Family Housing Association, SLFHA Ltd, HORIZON HOUSING GROUP
etc because they might have a new name again!

Why coning:

*THIS WAS AN OPERATION OF ABOUT 70 to 80 PROPERTIES: 4 to 5 Million Pounds
of 1991 money!

Deal with Crystal Palace Housing Association now Horizon Housing Group (was
under supervision) also SLFHA Ltd etc..many names and the Housing
Corporation (publicly funded body) as regulator.

*The leases were misrepresented at the time of sale targetting people
without experience:

"Calling first time buyers" they said in the Evening Standard 31-07-91
and
"Absolutely no requirement to buy the remainder" they also assured us
and
"Does the rent ever go up?" they asked in their own leaflets
"Yes it goes up in line with inflation" they answered

And ten years later the dishonest sellers (CPHA now Horizon Housing Group)
wrote the following words to us: (from their letter 16-03-99)

"As you are aware..." !! "In October 2000, the 2(b) applies... Obviously
this has some considerable financial implications to all leaseholders who do
not own 100%" !!

(the implications to which they referred: 40 % rent rise indexed year on
year 2 % ABOVE inflation and something more or less the same a few years
latter according to this lease described above as with ABSOLUTELY no
requirement to buy the remainder!)

So here is what they were advising us now:

"and I suggest that you may wish to consider staircasing in the percentage
you currently own." !!

The sales contract disowns any representations the dishonest landlord made
to us, even publicly in the press!. The Housing Corporation says this is not
against their regulations.

All this I have documented.

The 4 million pound question is the same one they have the courage to ask
us: "and what did "their" solicitor tell "them"?"

And crucially: "Did "they" read the lease?"

Was all this in deed a deliberate plan as it appears to be? I understand
that the then CPHA now Horizon Housing Group actually was responsible for
chosing this type of lease! for this 4 million pound plus operation!

The Housing Corporation doesn't want to look in to this ! and it also told
me that I should have gone with a guy put by CPHA and who was peddling
pension endowment mortgages, possibly an ex employ of CPHA.. it was all not
very clear if he wanted to give legal or financial advice or both on CPHA
premises during their "Sales Seminar". They also say that my landlord
...didn't breach any Corporation procedural guidelines..

Should public organisations, landlords, lawyers, etc have freedom to operate
as other professions can't (and shouldn't) when they sell something to the
public?

Should public bodies be allowed to compete with the private sector in this
unfair way?

So much for the integrity of operations with public funds through the
Housing Corporation.
Misrepresenting leases in the process of sale should be a crime just like
any other way of deceiving the public.

Even worse this is coning the public with public money. That is our taxes
being used without integrity to con the public. This is why the Regulator is
not doing what it is supposed to.

Thank you for your attention and if you would like copies of the
documentation supporting these claims or you think that you may be able to
recommend a solution please write to me at adrianfoot@hotmail.com quoting
CPHA so that I know it is not junk mail.

Kind regards
David A. Foot