Version Number: 7

Page: 1 of 43

CABINET TEMPLATE

Subject: Housing stock transfer – FINAL REPORT

Status: For Publication

Report to: Overview & Scrutiny Committee Cabinet

Council

Date: 16th February 2012 15th March 2012

19th March 2012

Report of:

Donna Bowler – Strategic Housing Manager Gerald Davies – Housing Transfer Project Manager

Email: gerald.davies@rochdale.gov.uk

Tel: (01706) 924380 or 07802 337063

Cabinet Member: Councillor Linda Robinson, Portfolio Holder for Health, Adult Care and Housing

Comments from Statutory Officers:

Section 151 Officer

Monitoring Officer

Key Decision: Yes Forward Plan General Exception Special Urgency

1. PURPOSE OF REPORT

1.1 The purpose of this report is to seek approval for the terms of the transfer

of the Council’s housing stock to Rochdale Boroughwide Housing (‘RBH’).

1.2 This report is also designed to:

1.2.1 explain the key terms of the Transfer Agreement; and

1.2.2 update the full Council on progress with the development of RBH’s mutual rules (which have been developed in accordance with

previous decisions taken by the Council).

2. RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 It is recommended that the Council RESOLVES TO:-

2.1.1 Approve the execution, delivery and performance of the Transfer

Agreement, Development Agreement, the TR5 property transfer and any other deeds or documents that need sealing and signing on

behalf of the Council and to do whatever else is necessary or expedient to complete the transfer, subject to receipt of the consent of the Secretary of State pursuant to Sections 32-34 and 43 of the

Housing Act 1985 for the disposal of the Council’s housing stock to RBH, together with any other consents required for the disposal of

any non-housing related assets;

Version Number: 7

Page: 2 of 43

2.1.2 Approve the execution, delivery and performance of the Deed of Collateral Warranty which forms part of the Transfer Agreement to be given to the funders or to any security trustee for the funders;

2.1.3 Approve the terms of the Transfer Agreement, as set out in this report, subject to any amendments and/or agreement on final terms;

2.1.4 Delegate authority to the Chief Executive, the Service Director, Corporate Services and the Service Director for Finance and Procurement, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to agree

any final financial issues which must be settled before completion of the transfer and to resolve any outstanding matters which might

need to be dealt with before completion of the transfer, including amendments to and agreement of the final terms of all documentation;

2.1.5 Delegate authority to the Chief Executive and the Service Director, Corporate Services, in consultation with the Leader of the Council, to

agree any necessary action with regards to the responses that have been received concerning the statutory consultation on open spaces.

2.1.6 Note that the Council’s Service Director, Corporate Services is

required to give a Legal Opinion to RBH’s funders to confirm that the Council has the authority to enter into the Transfer Agreement and

authorise the Service Director Corporate Services to sign and deliver the Legal Opinion.

3. MAIN TEXT INCLUDING ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED/ CONSULTATION CARRIED OUT

Background

3.1 This report represents the culmination of the process which began formally when the Council resolved to consult tenants on a large scale voluntary transfer of its housing stock to a registered provider of social housing

(‘RP’). The Council chose to promote its arms-length management organisation, RBH, as the RP recipient of its housing stock. Before transfer,

RBH will have converted into a new ‘not-for-profit’ RP.

3.2 Following agreement of the offer to tenants, consultation began with tenants on the proposed transfer. The Council agreed to proceed to a ballot

of tenants, which took place in December 2011 and produced a result in favour of the transfer (with a 56% turnout and 76% of those tenants voting

in favour of the transfer).

3.3 The positive benefits of the transfer have been fully set out in a number of reports which were presented to Council prior to progressing to the ballot

of tenants.

3.4 The Council’s officers and advisers have been working with RBH (and its

officers and advisers) to conclude the formal legal arrangements for the transfer. This is an enormous task, a critical part of which is the development of the Transfer Agreement.

3.5 The Transfer Agreement is the legal document which sets out all matters relevant to the transfer of the Council’s housing stock, staff and related

assets to RBH. It details all the arrangements, warranties, indemnities and conditions of the contract between the two organisations. Agreement of

Version Number: 7

Page: 3 of 43

the contents has been the product of detailed negotiations between the Council’s project team and that of RBH.

3.6 The Transfer Agreement will be reviewed by: RBH’s funders to ensure that

the transfer is fundable; DCLG to ensure that the transfer guidelines have been adhered to; and the regulator, the TSA, to ensure that it contains

nothing that would prejudice RBH’s registration with them as an RP or fetter its ability to operate as an independent organisation in future.

3.7 This report summarises the terms of the Transfer Agreement and the

implications for the Council. The whole Transfer Agreement is a very substantial legal document and it is not being circulated to all members for

this reason. A copy of the Transfer Agreement can, however, be viewed on request to the Service Director, Corporate Services.

Present Position

3.8 The transfer target date is 26th March and Housing Benefit and other related

agencies are all working to ensure that the transfer of services to tenants happen smoothly on that date.

3.9 At this point the Transfer Agreement is around 90% complete but this is

usual at this stage. The final 10% is partly the information still to be provided to go in the agreement and a small number of key points to be

agreed. The Council is being asked to approve the transfer and to delegate authority to settle the outstanding points to the Chief Executive and the

Service Director Corporate Services in consultation with the Leader of the Council.

3.10 While many elements of the transfer process are prescribed by the

Government (such as the way in which the housing stock is valued), there is at the heart of the transfer process a commercial negotiation between

the Council and RBH, as the new landlord.

3.11 The remaining sections of this report cover the nature of the financial deal and a summary of the Transfer Agreement itself.

Alternatives considered

3.12 No alternatives have been considered at this stage as this report represents the culmination of a process 15 months in length and has been supported by Cabinet and Council decisions throughout as well as having been

endorsed by the ballot of tenants (see para. 3.2 above).

Consultation proposed/undertaken

3.13 Throughout this project there has been a high level of consultation with the principal affected stakeholders which are:

• tenants and leaseholders of the houses, flats and bungalows affected (and the principal requirement of the Government for a ballot of tenants

was undertaken with an outcome in favour of the transfer, as set out above);

• employees who are directly affected – principally these are RBH

employees; • elected members of the Council.

Version Number: 7

Page: 4 of 43

Conclusion

3.14 The transfer process has been an extremely difficult and complex exercise. A balance has needed to be struck between the positive

benefits to the tenants and the wider regeneration opportunities, against the residual liabilities to the Council in terms of warranties and indemnities

together with any resultant residual costs.

3.15 The final Transfer Agreement will contain all the necessary provisions to transfer the housing stock and enable the Council to monitor RBH’s

performance in the future.

4. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

4.1 There are a number of components to the financial deal involved in the

transfer process, some of which involve the Government and some of which are transactions between the Council and RBH. In summary these are:

• the value of the stock;

• the sale of the various assets and the transfer of business items such as rent arrears by the Council to RBH;

• the repayment of the Council’s long-term borrowing in relation to housing;

• the sharing of capital receipts from continuing right to buy sales;

• the sharing of the proceeds of the VAT shelter arrangement.

4.2 A major part of the negotiations with RBH so far have centred on the need for the Council to minimise the revenue impact of the transfer. Apart from

the purchase price for the housing stock the resources generated from the transfer are the VAT shelter and future RTB receipts, both of which are

available to share between the Council and RBH.

4.3 If the transfer does not proceed the Council will remain liable for its costs in relation to the proposed transfer and RBH’s would have to be paid

out of its surpluses.

4.4 The specific financial implications for the Council also need to be considered

alongside the economic benefits of the transfer across the Borough. Value of the stock

4.5 The valuation determines the purchase price that RBH will pay to acquire the Council’s housing stock. The valuation is known as a tenanted market

valuation (TMV) and is prescribed by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). The TMV assumes that the housing will continue to be used as social rented housing in the future and is based upon a

comparison of income and expenditure associated with the stock over a 30 year period.

4.6 These 30 year financial projections are then discounted to reflect the value of money over time. The valuation of the housing stock is currently £25.5m. This will not however provide a useable capital receipt as the

transfer price must be used to pay off part of the Council’s £241m housing

Version Number: 7

Page: 5 of 43

debt at the date of transfer. DCLG will make arrangements to provide overhanging debt grant to pay off the remaining £215.5m of debt

Sale of assets

4.7 It is proposed that the following assets are to be transferred to RBH: some

13664 HRA properties, 34 non-HRA properties, 32 HMR properties, 83 shops, 1606 garages, and around 40 playgrounds falling within RBH estates. These are contained within approximately 300 distinct registered

titles covering all land and assets to be transferred.

4.8 The assets proposed for transfer to RBH were drawn up according to

principles agreed by the Stock Transfer Project Board, chaired by the Chief Executive. These principles sought to reach an equitable position with respect to the financial viability of RBH and the current financial challenges

facing the Council.

4.9 The Transfer Agreement includes schedules of all assets to be transferred

to RBH and any leases and legal agreements those assets are subject to. These schedules are drawn up in accordance with the principles described above.

4.10 Among the specific assets to transfer to RBH there will also be a significant amount of land. The Council has completed voluntary first registration of

all its land assets with the Land Registry. Consultation has been carried out with the Council’s asset management framework and affected service

areas. Consultation with elected members is ongoing.

4.11 Among the land assets to be transferred are a number of potential development sites. These will allow RBH to fulfil their commitments in

relation to the Affordable Housing Programme, meeting local need with housing schemes across the Borough.

4.12 As part of the process of transferring assets the Council has to comply with the statutory procedures set out in the Open Spaces Act 1906 and Local Government Act 1972 section 123 (2A). This legislation makes it a legal

requirement to advertise proposals to transfer ownership of public open spaces and consider any representations. The Council has complied with

this requirement and the deadline for objections was 2nd March – a schedule of all those received can be found in Appendix B. The representations received have all been considered as part of the

delegated decision making for the details of the transfer, as per 2.1.5. All of the persons making representations will receive or have already received

an explanation in line with paragraph 4.13 below.

4.13 It is not proposed that the status of the land described in 4.12 be changed - where land is subject to legal protection or designated as protected

recreational open space under the UDP (Unitary Development Plan), this will continue to be the case after transfer. Should RBH wish to develop any

part of the land in future, it will be subject to the usual planning process. This takes consideration of the status of the land (i.e. whether it is protected or not) and its current use or amenity. This is not a guarantee

against future development, but the planning process ensures that planning permission is unlikely to be granted for a well used piece of recreational

open land.

Version Number: 7

Page: 6 of 43

Repayment of long term borrowing

4.14 On completion of the transfer the Government will write off the Council’s remaining housing debt. The write-off of debt will be based on the amount

of housing debt the Government assumes the Council has for housing subsidy purposes (£241m). The Council’s housing debt is £220m, meaning

that the Council will be left with a net capital receipt of £21m. This can be used to repay existing General Fund debt or to fund General Fund capital expenditure.

Sharing of Future Right to Buy Receipts

4.15 As part of the transfer agreement, the Council will secure an entitlement to a proportion of any post transfer RTB sale proceeds arising from sales to transferring tenants. Reductions in the housing stock have a negative effect

on RBH’s business plan. This issue is addressed by RBH retaining the net income foregone from each RTB sale together with an administration

allowance. The capital receipt remaining from each sale, after deduction of the net income foregone and administration allowance, is available to be shared between the Council and RBH. This aspect is still subject to

negotiation but the amounts are relatively low in comparison to the VAT shelter sums due to the low level of sales. Officers are considering the

proposals within the Government’s latest consultation document which seeks to re-invigorate the RTB sales and provide funding for one-for-one

replacement of social housing. This may mean that to protect the overall pot of resources for Rochdale, an innovative solution may be needed for the use of future RTB receipts that would normally have been usable by the

Council’s General Fund.

The VAT Shelter Arrangement

4.16 The VAT shelter arrangement will allow RBH to obtain the same VAT exemption on its capital works, which the Council has. This is achieved by

the Council entering into a development agreement with RBH, which allows full recovery of any VAT incurred by RBH in carrying out the works. The

VAT shelter scheme applies to first time improvement works only and therefore will diminish over a period of time. The VAT shelter is expected to last for 15 years.

4.17 To assist both the Council and RBH in making the necessary arrangements, a joint appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers as VAT shelter advisers was

made. Based on an assessment of works undertaken by them it is estimated that approximately £52m of VAT (at current prices) will be able to be recovered under the VAT shelter arrangement. The VAT will be

recovered by RBH as works are undertaken.

4.18 The proposal is that the VAT shelter savings will be shared between the

Council and RBH. The Council will have the first £8.3m of VAT shelter savings generated to pay for the pension deficit (£6.1m) and the Council’s costs of setting up the transfer (£2.2m). The Council’s set up costs would

normally be an allowable deduction from the capital receipt or purchase price. In Rochdale’s case, DCLG have not allowed this as they wish to

minimise the amount of debt that they need to pay off with overhanging debt grant. The VAT shelter is the only available fund to cover the Council’s costs. RBH will fund their costs out of their reserves and their future

business plan.

Version Number: 7

Page: 7 of 43

4.19 Thereafter, the proposal is that the Council will receive 40% of the VAT shelter, which is estimated to be £17.5m over 15 years, excluding the effects of future inflation. RBH will retain the remaining 60% of the

balance. The first five years’ worth of their share is to be used to support their business plan and reduce the amount they need to borrow. The

remaining RBH VAT shelter receipts are expected to be used to deliver regeneration priorities within the Borough.

Other cost implications

4.20 Members attention is drawn to the following specific cost implications:

Pension Deficit for transferring staff

4.21 The Government’s transfer guidelines state that the pension fund should be

fully funded for the transferees’ staff on completion of the transfer. The Greater Manchester’s Pension Fund has calculated that the estimated

pension fund deficit for RBH staff is currently £6.1m. The actual deficit figure will reflect market conditions at the time of transfer. The full impact of the Pension deficit is subject to the Hutton Review. The amount currently

included is the estimated deficit at the point of transfer.

4.22 The current proposal is for the Council to be given the first £6.1m of the

VAT shelter savings generated in order to repay the deficit. This may take up to two years to generate.

4.23 The Council will deal with the deficit either by a payment to the pension fund (possibly spread out over a term of years) or an increase in the employer’s contribution rate or a combination of the two. If the deficit is

greater than £6.1m, then the Council will need to fund any increase. RBH’s funders have stipulated that a cap should be placed on the amount of VAT

shelter than can be given over for this purpose. Officers are still considering with the pension fund the most advantageous method of dealing with this deficit.

Service Level Agreements (SLAs)

4.24 The list of SLAs is set out in section 5 below. Where the transfer results in a loss of recharge income to the Council’s General Fund (either now or at the end of the SLA period) the strategy will be to reduce costs by a significant

amount, wherever possible. However some costs are likely to prove to be fixed or irreducible, in which case the impact on the General Fund will need

to be managed over a period of time.

Summary of financial implications

4.25 The transfer has financial implications for the Council which are summarised in the table below.

Version Number: 7

Page: 8 of 43

General Fund Revenue Financial Implications Summary

2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Notes

and future

years

£000 £000 £000 £000 £000

Costs to the General Fund

Loss of income from charges currently made

to the HRA

1,089 1,089 1,089 1,089 1

Loss of SLA income 162 162 162 162 2

Benefit System changes 51

Estimated costs to the General Fund 51 1,251 1,251 1,251 1,251

Savings to the General Fund

HRA Balance Transfer (6,000) 3

Estimates savings to the General Fund 0 (6,000) 0 0 0

Net General Fund Cost (Saving) 51 (4,749) 1,251 1,251 1,251

Notes

1. Based on current charges to HRA for Homelessness; staffing and overheads;

debt management expenses; community centres contribution

2. Loss of SLA income assumes that services will reduce costs to reflect impact

from future withdrawal from SLAs

3. Based on current estimated HRA balance at point of transfer

Corporate Impact on Central Support Service Recharges

4.26 The Housing Revenue Account is currently recharged via support

services for costs incurred by the Council including HR, IT, Finance, Legal, Insurance and Accommodation etc. In addition to this the HRA also contributes to the Council’s central democratic costs. In total the current

budgeted charge from the General Fund directly to the HRA is in the region of £1.089m per year. The largest amount is £0.375m in relation to the

Homelessness service, which will remain as a statutory duty of the Council and should be funded by the General Fund. Following transfer, the General Fund will no longer receive all of this income from the HRA and therefore

the General Fund will bear additional costs. However, there are a number of actions that the Council can take to mitigate these costs. Typical mitigating

options are: • There are no TUPE transfer posts on the day, however services have looked to utilise vacancies or delete vacant posts from their budget

to save costs;

• Where there is no TUPE applicable and no SLA available, service

heads have been encouraged to identify non-staffing cost savings to mitigate the loss of income, examples are postage and enveloping for

billing;

Version Number: 7

Page: 9 of 43

• Provision for some diseconomies of scale has been provided for in budget estimates going forwards. For example, the role of the staff within the retained Strategic Housing function will change, as the

Council will be required to monitor the performance of RBH to ensure that it meets the promises in the offer document. The Council’s role

becomes more one of a strategic partner across the borough rather than an active landlord, so the costs do not fall to RBH in future.

• The SLAs listed in section 5 below will generate for the Council

approximately £1.8m in a full year.

4.27 There are five services currently charged to RBH for which there is no

Council SLA and there is a risk that these services will not be purchased in future. It is likely that the General Fund will need to support these services, so adding a further £162k to the additional General Fund budget

requirement.

4.28 In the case where any of the SLA’s are not renewed in future, staff working

on the SLA’s may have a right under TUPE legislation to transfer to either RBH or to the new service provider. Although details will change during the course of the SLAs, an estimated 50 posts are considered to be potential

for deferred TUPE transfer at the end of the SLA’s but this will depend on the way in which services are delivered and changed throughout the period

of the SLA. The majority of these are within Environmental Management and Facilities Management. Service Directors have also been asked to

consider an exit strategy to mitigate the loss of income, should RBH choose not to renew in future.

4.29 The table above at 4.25 gives the overall anticipated impact on support

service budgets of an estimated £1m pa. and provision has been made to cover this in the budget going forward.

HRA Arrears

4.30 The HRA currently has uncollected income (arrears) in respect of housing

rents, service charges and other general debtors. Normal practice in a stock transfer is that an element of these arrears would be sold to RBH,

with the balance remaining with the Council. The Council will sell all balances to RBH. The HRA currently includes a bad debt provision calculated in accordance with a CIPFA recommended formula but this may

not be enough to meet the residual arrears following transfer. Any residual arrears in excess of the current bad debt provision would be a cost to the

HRA should these arrears not be subsequently recovered. Final negotiations around arrears to be transferred to RBH are still to be concluded.

RBH reserves on completion of the transfer

4.31 At present, RBH is expected to utilise any remaining balances to cover their

costs of the transfer set-up. Warranties, Indemnities and Guarantees

4.32 The financial warranties, indemnities and guarantees to be given to RBH in order to make the transfer fundable are significant in terms of risk and

potential claims value. More details of these risks and the steps taken to mitigate them are set out in Appendix A.

Version Number: 7

Page: 10 of 43

HRA Balances

4.33 Those balances relating to the transferring stock will be retained by the Council on completion of the transfer and are estimated to be around £6m.

5. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

The Transfer Agreement

5.1 A ‘Plain English Guide’ to the Transfer Agreement prepared by the Council’s solicitors, Anthony Collins Solicitors LLP, is attached at Appendix A to this report. This guide summarises the terms of the Transfer Agreement.

5.2 A few key points in relation to the Transfer Agreement are also set out below.

Council’s liability after Redevelopment

5.3 The warranties relate to the current use of the property being transferred. They cease to apply if there is redevelopment unless it is for social housing and related purposes. This follows normal practice.

Service Level Agreements (SLAs)

5.4 Within the Transfer Agreement are contractual arrangements dealing with the provision of services from each party to the other. These are referred

to as SLAs.

5.5 It has been agreed that the Council will provide the following services to RBH after transfer which are primarily intended to ensure a smooth

transfer: • Cleaning and Caretaking

• Courier • Grounds Maintenance • People Management(HR)

• Legal Services • Customer Access Services

• ICT • Contact Centre and Switchboard • Payroll

• Aids and Adaptations support services

5.6 The specifications and terms of these SLAs have been agreed. Grounds

Maintenance and Legal Services will run until March 2014, the others are due to end in March 2013.

5.7 RBH will provide the following services to the Council:

• Mortgage Portfolio Management • CCTV monitoring services

5.8 The specifications and terms of these SLAs have been agreed. The provision of services to RBH under the SLAs will provide income to the Council which

will be offset against the residual costs which the Council faces.

Monitoring Arrangements

5.9 The Council will retain an important duty of monitoring RBH’s performance

of its obligations under the Transfer Agreement and, in particular, its

Version Number: 7

Page: 11 of 43

carrying out of the promises made to tenants by the Council in the formal offer document. There are reporting processes within the agreement with which RBH must comply and a protocol that will allow elected members to

continue to raise concerns on behalf of their wards as they do now.

Retained Housing Services

5.10 The Council will retain important statutory responsibilities for housing at the

point of transfer. These include the provision of a homelessness service, services to the private sector and providing the strategic housing function for the borough. The Council has established a draft structure for the

retained housing service which will be fit for purpose.

RBH Mutual Status

5.11 In preparation for the stock transfer, RBH has converted to a charitable industrial & provident society where the shareholding currently remains

controlled by the Council. At completion of the transfer, RBH will become independent and no longer controlled by the Council (as is required for all

stock transfer RPs). The Council will initially retain the right to nominate 4 nominees to RBH’s Board of 13 people and remain a shareholder.

5.12 It was proposed for Rochdale that the Council’s stock transfer should be

under a new “mutual” model so that tenants and employees have more engagement and involvement in RBH. Therefore, within fifteen months

after transfer, RBH will adopt “mutual” status resulting in all of RBH’s tenants and employees being entitled to become shareholders and have a

stake in how RBH is run. These shareholders will elect a “Representative Body” to represent the shareholders, work with the RBH Board in setting the policy framework and appoint the majority of the RBH Board. The

Representative Body will be made up of 18 tenants, 8 employees and 5 others from external organisations (included 2 representatives appointed

by the Council). The RBH Board will be reduced to 10 Board Members: 6 non-executives; 2 executives; and 2 further non-executives nominated by the Council. In March 2017, the Council’s right to nominate these last 2

non-executives will fall away but the Council will have the power to appoint an additional 2 representatives onto the Representative Body. The current

draft rules for RBH as a mutual organisation form part of the transfer agreement.

5.13 All of the above is consistent with what was set out in the Council’s formal

offer document which was sent to tenants.

Legal Opinion

5.14 The funders require a legal opinion from the Council confirming that the

Council has properly authorised the entry into and performance of its obligations under the Transfer Agreement and related documents (including the funders’ collateral warranty). It is likely to be in standard form

confirming that the Council has the necessary vires to complete the transfer and transfer documentation and it is recommended that the

Council's Chief Legal Officer be authorised to sign this. Statement Confirming that Consideration Has Been Given to

Relevant Legislation

Version Number: 7

Page: 12 of 43

5.15 All relevant legislation has been adhered to and the Council has sought to comply with DCLG’s transfer guidelines.

6. PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS

6.1 RBH has its own staff and so there are likely to be no Council staff

transferring to it on completion. However, at the end of any Service Level Agreement period there may be issues to resolve about any posts involved in this service provision that may then fall within the provisions of

TUPE legislation. This may result in some council staff having the potential for TUPE transfer to RBH, or if an alternative contractor was to provide the

service to the new service provider. Therefore a provisional ’deferred TUPE list’ of posts affected will be agreed.

6.1 As described in 4.27 above there are around 50 posts which have been

identified as ones where there may be covered by TUPE regulations once the relevant SLA has come to an end and if the service is to be continued to

be provided by RBH or an alternative provider.

6.2 Relevant staff affected by the potential for deferred TUPE at the end of the

SLAs will be informed that this is the situation and assured that full staff consultation will be undertaken should this be the case and at the appropriate time.

6.3 The Council is required to give RBH warranties as regards staff in respect of the transfer. In essence, the Council warrants to RBH that there are no and

will be no TUPE related claims that would fall on RBH as a result of the transfer. The Council’s consultations with its staff and the results thereof

mean that the risk of any claims arising out of these warranties is low.

6.4 Regular meetings have been undertaken between representatives of RBH and the Trade Unions in order to consult on a wide range of staff related

issues.

6.5 A similar consultation process will take place with affected staff at the end

of the relevant SLAs.

7. RISK ASSESSMENT IMPLICATIONS

7.1 All the issues raised and the recommendations in this report involve risk considerations as set out below:

i. There is a risk that both/either parties fail to agree the final terms of the Transfer Agreement or that funders will not agree to fund it.

ii. There is a risk that the long-term relationship between the Council and RBH will fail but the Transfer Agreement includes provisions

which seek to avoid that situation.

iii. That the promises in the Council’s formal offer document to tenants

are not properly complied with (although it should be noted that the Transfer Agreement gives the Council the legal right to take action to force the Association to comply).

iv. There will be a number of residual financial risks for the Council post transfer resulting from indemnities, warranties and guarantees given

– whilst these could be low in number, they may be financially significant if called upon. However, the Council has these risks and liabilities now as Landlord and Landowner, so the issue is dealing

Version Number: 7

Page: 13 of 43

with the loss of control over mitigating these risks. This is dealt with by various provisions in the Transfer Agreement whereby RBH has to take action to minimise these risks. Furthermore the Council is

reviewing whether or not to procure insurance to protect it from the higher risk areas where future claims may be received.

v. If the Transfer did not proceed, the Council would face the following risks and issues:

• The Council would forego the positive benefits to tenants of transfer outlined in previous reports and in the Council’s offer to tenants;

• There would not be the considerable inward investment with the consequential benefits to the local economy

• The abortive set-up costs would need to be charged to the General Fund

• The Council would have to implement the new ‘Self Financing’

system, which comes into effect from 1st April 2012, and which does not provide the resources to undertake the necessary works

to the homes when they are required. 8. EQUALITIES IMPACTS

Workforce Equality Impact Assessment

8.1 There are no significant workforce equality issues arising form this report.

Equality/Community Impact Assessments

8.2 An up-to date equality/community impact assessment is being produced and its outcome will be reported at the Cabinet meeting.

Background Papers

Document Place of Inspection

• DCLG’s Housing Transfer Manuals 2005 & 2006

• Previous reports to the Cabinet and

full Council regarding this project

• The Council’s formal consultation

document – known as the ‘Offer Document’

}

} All at the Municipal Offices in the

Housing Strategy section }

Version Number: 7

Page: 14 of 43

Appendix A

PLAIN ENGLISH GUIDE TO

THE TRANSFER AGREEMENT

ROCHDALE METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL TO ROCHDALE BOROUGHWIDE HOUSING LIMITED

REPORT ON THE TRANSFER AGREEMENT

INTRODUCTION

1. Following the successful ballot of tenants, the Council and Rochdale Boroughwide Housing ("RBH") now need to enter into a formal contract to complete the housing stock transfer. The Transfer Agreement is the

contract which sets out the rights, responsibilities, covenants and requirements of both parties. It also contains all of the necessary

arrangements to terminate the Management Agreement and enable RBH to receive and manage the properties and the Council to enforce the promises made to tenants during the consultation period.

2. As mentioned in the report, the Transfer Agreement is extremely large, and is a highly complex legal document. For these reasons it has not been

circulated, and the document can be accessed on request. However, the remainder of this guide summarises the main elements of the Transfer

Agreement.

THE TRANSFER AGREEMENT

3. The Transfer Agreement takes the form of a contract for sale with

numerous schedules and annexes containing supporting information.

4. In particular, the Agreement contains:

• covenants by the Council and RBH in favour of each other;

• an Assignment of Rent and Service Charge Arrears which will be entered into within 28 days of the completion of the transfer;

• a Nominations Agreement to sit behind the choice based lettings scheme. The Nominations Agreement gives the Council the right

to make nominations into a certain percentage of the transferring dwellings as they become vacant in the event that the Council and RBH withdraw from the choice based lettings arrangements. RBH

and the Council are seeking to negotiate terms to make sure the Council can still nominate homeless nominees into RBH properties.

• employment provisions in respect of any members of the Council’s current staff transferring to RBH. These include warranties that the Council has given all material facts and records relating to the

transferring employee to RBH and that there will be no employment related claims relating to the period before the

Version Number: 7

Page: 15 of 43

transfer made against RBH following the transfer. Whether there are any members of staff transferring is still to be settled.

• provisions dealing with any ongoing contractual obligations of the

Council with third parties, which are relevant to the stock being transferred (e.g. maintenance contracts);

• provisions for the actual transfer of the tenanted dwellings and any associated land, any commercial properties and open spaces;

• title warranties by the Council in respect of the property being

transferred;

• a Right to Buy Sharing Agreement which protects RBH from

fluctuations in RTB and shared ownership sales and could give the Council a share of RTB / shared ownership sale proceeds following transfer. The Council and RBH are considering whether to set up a

“community chest” whereby the net RTB receipts are kept and used in Rochdale, rather than pooled nationally, which the

government is currently consulting on. The usable receipt would be after deduction of an amount representing the cost in rent and management terms of RBH losing a particular property from its

stock.

• provisions for both parties to apply for and maintain registration as

data controllers and to comply with the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Freedom of Information Act 2000;

• agreements for the provision of services by RBH and the Council to each other after transfer; and

• all of the other necessary provisions to transfer the housing

function to RBH as a going concern.

5. Other significant clauses are as follows:-

• Confirmation that the Council is responsible for payment for goods and services up to the completion date and that RBH is responsible for payment for goods and services on and after the completion

date.

• Arrangements covering insurance claims and risk. If any

properties are destroyed or damaged before completion then the Council will reimburse RBH for the reasonable cost of reinstatement.

• The legal position of any transferring employees. From the completion date, RBH will be the employer of any transferring

employees by virtue of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations ("TUPE"). By giving staff warranties to RBH, the Council retains the risk of any staff claims caused by

matters such as breach of a contract of employment by the Council, the Council failing to pay staff money due before

Version Number: 7

Page: 16 of 43

completion, the Council's failure to consult with trade unions on the transfer and so on.

• The Council's contractual liability under the staff warranties and

their liability for all other claims is likely to end some 12 months after completion.

• The Agreement imposes a requirement on RBH to obtain admission to Greater Manchester Local Government Pension Scheme for the benefit of any transferring employees and its own employees who

transferred to RBH when it was set up as an ALMO.

• The Agreement also deals with Council employees who will remain

with the Council after transfer and provide services to RBH for a limited period after completion. When these agreements end, those employees may have rights to transfer to RBH or to a

replacement contractor.

A ‘CLAUSE BY CLAUSE’ GUIDE

6. Clause 1 – Definitions

This clause sets out the principal defined words and phrases which are used subsequently in the Transfer Agreement.

7. Clause 2 – Agreement to Sell

In consideration of RBH paying the Price to the Council, the Council will

transfer the Property to RBH.

8. Clause 3 – Incumbrances

The Property is sold subject to and with the benefit of various incumbrances (such as existing covenants and rights of way which affect the legal title to the Property), the Tenancies (which include the

transferring Council tenants and the former Council tenants occupying flats which they have bought under the Right to Buy) and the Rights (which

include rights of way and other matters which affect or benefit the legal title to the Property).

9. Clause 4 - Completion, Payment of the Price and Adjustment of the

Price

As mentioned in the report, it is currently intended that the Transfer will

take place on 26th March 2012 and on completion, RBH will purchase all the Property.

10. Clause 5 – Covenants for Title

The Council will (except where specifically stated in the transfers of the Property that only limited title guarantee will be given) sell the Property

with full title guarantee. This is the strongest covenant which a seller can give, though it is qualified by reference to those incumbrances referred to in clause 3 (as set out above).

Version Number: 7

Page: 17 of 43

11. Clause 6 – Conditions of Sale

The provisions of this clause incorporate a set of standard conveyancing conditions called the “Law Society’s Standard Conditions of Sale (Fourth

Edition)”. These standard conditions are varied to reflect the circumstances of the Transfer.

This clause also provides for general apportionment of income and outgoings. The Council receives all income from the Property and pays outgoings up to but not including the Completion Date. RBH receives

income and pays outgoings on and from the Completion Date.

12. Clause 7 – Rent and Service Charge Arrears

This clause contains a rent and service charge arrears calculation. On completion the Council will transfer over to RBH the rent, service charge and other charges arrears due from existing tenants. The amount to be

paid to the Council for these arrears will be a percentage of their value and the actual figure will be worked out after transfer, once the Council’s rent

accounts are closed. The figure will reflect the value of the arrears to the Council and the cost to RBH of pursuing them.

13. Clause 8 – RTB and Shared Ownership Receipts and VAT Sharing

Agreements

This clause confirms that the Council and RBH will share all RTB and shared

ownership receipts and VAT savings in the manner described above.

14. Clause 9 – Service Costs and Apportionments

Under this clause, the Council agrees to pay for all work done and services provided to the Property for the period up to but not including the Completion Date. On and from the Completion Date RBH assumes

responsibility for such matters.

15. Clause 10 – Contracts Affecting the Property

Contracts which relate to the Property and are ongoing on Transfer will be dealt with in one of three ways:

(i) they will be assigned (in whole or part) to RBH;

(ii) they will be retained by the Council and held on trust for RBH; or

(iii) they will be retained and completed at the Council’s expense.

The Council is required to warranty that it is not aware of any breaches or outstanding legal action in relation to these contracts and that all payments

due under these contracts have been made. In addition, the Council is required to indemnify RBH and its funders against any liabilities and costs

arising because of a material breach of any contract entered into by RBH in the six years prior to Transfer (subject to RBH meeting the first £250,000 in aggregate of contract liabilities).

Version Number: 7

Page: 18 of 43

16. Clause 11 – Damage to the Property

The Council agrees to reimburse RBH’s reasonable costs incurred in reinstating any part of the Property which is the subject of any damage as

a result of standard insured risks.

17. Clause 12 – Transferring Employees

The clause deals with the following matters:-

• it requires the Council to set out (in Part I of the Fourth Schedule) the names and other related employment details of the Council’s

staff who are to transfer to RBH upon completion. There are likely to be none, but this is not yet final;

• RBH acknowledges that it will become the employer of any transferring staff after transfer and that the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations ("TUPE") apply to the

transfer;

• it provides RBH with various warranties in relation to any transferring

staff’s employment with the Council and in respect of existing RBH staff. The liabilities in respect of RBH staff will only be in respect of material claims, over a threshold of £250,000.

The Council gives RBH an indemnity against losses which may be suffered by RBH as a result of breaches of the warranties, inaccuracies in the

information provided by the Council in respect of any transferring staff and other matters such as failure to pay any transferring staff up to the

Completion Date.

The Council also agrees to indemnify RBH against any claims made by or in relation to staff retained by the Council. RBH could bring a claim under this

indemnity if, for example, the Council fails to include an employee on the transfer list and that employee is later dismissed by the Council, and makes

a claim against RBH.

Before transfer, RBH will gain entry into the Greater Manchester Local Government Pensions Scheme, for the benefit of its employees.

As mentioned above, it is still being settled as to whether there will be any staff transferring.

18. Clause 13 – Support Service Employees

Following transfer, the Council will provide a number of services to RBH under agreements set out in Part I of the Tenth Schedule. This clause

contains provision similar to those contained in Clause 12 in respect of any employees providing these support services who may transfer to RBH at a

later date.

19. Clauses 14 and 15 – The Council’s and RBH’s Obligations

Version Number: 7

Page: 19 of 43

These clauses deal with the Council and RBH’s obligations to one another – see below in relation to Schedule 5 for further detail.

20. Clause 16 – Civil Emergency

This clause sets out RBH’s obligations in the event of a civil emergency, including compliance with the Council’s Emergency Plan.

21. Clause 17 – Disrepair Claims

This clause provides that the Council will be responsible for the conduct, management and defence of any disrepair claim made before the

Completion Date (or on or after the Completion Date but which relate in whole or in part to matters arising before the Completion Date) and RBH

shall be responsible for all other disrepair claims. The Council also agrees to indemnify RBH against any damages etc awarded as a result of disrepair arising before the Completion Date, but RBH must mitigate these costs as

far as possible when it carries out the programme of works promised in the offer document.

22. Clause 22 – Arrangements for the 3 TMOs

It is important for the Council to ensure that RBH meets the commitments being made to the TMOs before transfer. The parties are negotiating terms

which set out these commitments, while giving RBH flexibility to come to arrangements with the TMOs which will work in practice after the transfer.

23. Clause 27 – Dispute Resolution

Unless there is a provision elsewhere in the Transfer Agreement to the

contrary, disputes under the Transfer Agreement shall be dealt with in accordance with the dispute resolution procedure set out in this clause.

24. Clause 31 – Further Assistance

This clause provides that both the Council and RBH will use reasonable endeavours to ensure that third parties do anything reasonably required in

order to effect the provisions of the Transfer Agreement.

25. Clause 37 – Car Loans

This clause provides that RBH will pay the Council a sum in respect of

outstanding car loans to RBH employees.

26. Clause 38 – Performance Guarantee Indemnity

Under this clause, RBH agrees to indemnify the Council against all costs and losses (etc) in relation to performance guarantees given by the Council to the HCA in respect of Brighter Horizons (RBH) Limited.

THE SCHEDULES

27. Much of the information and detail of the transfer is contained in the

Schedules to the Agreement. These are as follows:

Version Number: 7

Page: 20 of 43

(a) The First Schedule: This Schedule gives details of all property to be transferred to RBH including general needs property, sheltered units (including the common areas in sheltered schemes), open spaces, garages,

garage plots and the freehold interest in commercial premises, such as shops. The transfer of land and land assets will be with reference to plans

which officers are preparing and agreeing with RBH’s officers now.

(b) The Second Schedule: Contains the Nomination Rights. As mentioned above, RBH will give the Council the right to nominate tenants for housing

into a certain percentage, probably either 75% or 80% of RBH's properties. The nomination procedure is set out in detail in the Nominations

Agreement. This Schedule also sets out arrangements for the Council’s continued access to dispersed temporary accommodation units, the homeless hostel units at Great Howarth, the properties currently used to

house asylum seekers and housing agency arrangements linked to the coice based lettings scheme.

(c) The Third Schedule: Contains the contracts affecting the transferring property to be assigned to RBH or retained by the Council.

(d) The Fourth Schedule:

• This Schedule sets out the warranties which the Council will give to RBH in respect of any transferring employees and are the

warranties the Council is giving in respect of RBH staff. These have the effect of making liability for employment related claims

either against RBH with regard to pre-transfer employment issues, the transfer itself or against the Council with regard to post-transfer employment lie with the Council.

• Gives details of the posts likely to transfer to RBH / the Council at the end of any service level agreements.

• Contains any disclosures to the staff warranties with regard to any transferring employees. There are likely to be few disclosures.

• Acknowledges that the Council’s staff warranties are in respect of

current RBH staff are only above a materiality threshold of £250,000.

(e) The Fifth Schedule:

Part 1 sets out the Council's covenants or commitments in favour of RBH. If the Council breaches any of the covenants, RBH will be entitled to serve a

notice on the Council giving details of the breach. If the breach is capable of being put right and the Council does not do so within 28 days of service

of the notice, then RBH will be able to claim damages from the Council. Specifically the covenants are as follows:-

• to work with RBH in the formulation of wider community

initiatives;

• to assist RBH to answer Land Registry requisitions so that RBH can

register its title to the property;

Version Number: 7

Page: 21 of 43

• to maintain amenity areas, play areas and grounds retained by the Council in good order;

• to pay Housing Benefit to RBH direct where tenants agree to this;

• to process claims for Housing Benefit quickly and in accordance with the H.B. Regulations;

• to enforce any rights that the Council has against its contractors and consultants, for the benefit of RBH;

• to assist RBH, where it is reasonable and practical, with any

enquiries RBH might have regarding the transfer for 2 years from completion;

• while the Council has the right to nominate board members to the RBH board, to nominate Council board members who have the desired skills and experience for the role and capacity to attend

board meetings and attend induction and other necessary training; and

• to treat RBH's tenants the same as other residents when they seek a Disabled Facilities Grant.

Part 2 of the Fifth Schedule sets out in detail RBH's covenants. This is the

part of the Transfer Agreement that enables the Council to take action to make sure that RBH fulfils the promises made to tenants during

consultation – and on which they voted for transfer. The Transfer Agreement contains a detailed breakdown of the promises and where RBH

made a financial commitment to spend money or hold a budget, the covenants require it to do so. They also oblige RBH to stand by its non-financial commitments (eg: to appoint council and tenant board members

to its board). To satisfy funders there are the usual “safety valves” that allow RBH to defer compliance with these covenants if circumstances

outside its control prevent it or to do so would put it in default under its loan agreement.

Specifically, RBH’s covenants are as follows:-

• to use the income and receipts from rent and any sales of property in the payment of its loans and in the management, maintenance,

repair, modernisation and improvement of the housing stock - any surpluses are to be used primarily within Rochdale;

• to attend quarterly meetings with the Council for six years after

transfer so that the Council can monitor its progress;

• subject to the provisions in the agreement dealing with the

conversion of RBH to a mutual, not to change its constitution as regards Council or tenant board membership without the Council's agreement;

• to maintain all open space and amenity land in reasonable order and, in particular that grassed areas are not kept to a standard

Version Number: 7

Page: 22 of 43

which is lower than the standard applied by the Council to other similar areas;

• to maintain its registration with the Tenant Services Authority

(TSA) (or its successor);

• not to do anything which might result in RBH's registration with

the TSA being withdrawn and to comply with any of the TSA’s mandatory requirements;

• to carry out the promises made by the Council in the Consultation

Document and Stage Two Letter;

• to raise rents only in line with what is allowed in the consultation

document and to comply with the Government's rent convergence regime as described in the consultation document for as long as it is in force. This would not prevent RBH from increasing rents if it

needed to do so to avoid defaulting on their loan;

• not to take possession proceedings other than on the grounds set

out in the tenancy agreement;

• to consult with tenants on any changes in housing management;

• to accept the Council's Board Members, make sure that the Tenant

Board Members are properly appointed and to act reasonably in considering membership applications from tenants;

• in selecting its tenants, RBH are to act reasonably and in accordance with its Allocation Policy;

• not to vary the tenancy agreement after transfer without advising the Council of the proposed changes and allowing the Council to comment on them;

• to recognise and encourage tenant groups and residents associations and offer them financial and other support;

• to use reasonable endeavours to employ local people and encourage and support local employment training schemes;

• to work with the Council in the adoption of joint objectives within

Rochdale, for instance in the formulation of a crime and disorder strategy, in the formulation of the Council’s social housing strategy

and regeneration policy;

• to give the Council and its auditors all reasonable and practical information and assistance it needs to complete its annual returns;

and

• to respond promptly to queries raised by MPs, Council members

etc.

(f) The Sixth Schedule – The Warranties: The Council is being asked to warrant to RBH that there are no matters in connection with the land or

Version Number: 7

Page: 23 of 43

property transferring that could cause RBH financial or other loss. In particular, the Council are to give environmental warranties so that as far as possible, any risk of liability in relation to environmental contamination

stays with the Council. The Council will give warranties both to RBH and separately to RBH's funders. The warranties will last for 30 years (a funder

requirement) and are for the purposes of risk allocation.

(i) Title Warranties

The warranties themselves are as follows:

(1) that the warranties are true and accurate, clear and not misleading;

(2) that the legal title to the property is good;

(3) that the property is free from any mortgages, rents, charges or loans;

(4) that the current use of the property does not breach the Planning Acts or any other law or regulations;

(5) that there are no circumstances in which planning enforcement action could be taken and that there are no outstanding or unperformed obligations by the Council;

(6) that there are no compulsory purchase/demolition/slum clearance orders affecting the property;

(7) that any leasehold property is held on standard terms;

(8) that the property is subject only to the Council's tenancies and

that there are no claims or known potential claims against the Council by any of the tenants which might affect the value of the property;

(9) that the information supplied by the Council with regard to the property, including information relating to the stock condition

survey and valuation, is correct;

(10) that properties sold off under the Right to Buy have been sold on appropriate terms;

(11) that there are no current actions, demands, disputes or liabilities in respect of the property nor circumstances which

could give rise to any actions;

(12) that the Council has the right to go onto adjoining land to carry out works of maintenance of the property and RBH will

have the same rights;

(13) in a nutshell, the Council is warranting that unless formally disclosed, title to the property being transferred is good, marketable and free from encumbrances.

Version Number: 7

Page: 24 of 43

These are in standard form and we have ensured that there are the usual mitigating provisions contained therein. In particular, the funders may not make a claim unless/until they have suffered loss, which is only likely to happen if RBH have significantly defaulted on their loan (which they will be very reluctant to do) and RBH is under a legal obligation to mitigate the Council’s exposure under the warranties so the risk of unreasonable or spurious claims is minimised.

We are limiting many of the warranties in respect of housing management so that the Council is only warranting what it is aware of, as RBH have all of the knowledge of these areas. Caps on liability

have been negotiated in the warranty to RBH which follow industry norms. As is usual the funders will not accept any financial cap on

their warranty but the Council is protected by the provision that prevents funders making a claim unless/until RBH has gone into default under its loan.

Given that the land is all registered at the Land Registry, we understand the Council’s senior officers dealing with the transfer are

comfortable that the likelihood of claims under the title warranties is small and that the main risk is of claims under the environmental warranty.

(ii) Environmental Warranty

It is standard practice and a funder requirement that the Council

retain the risk and liability arising out of any contamination of the land transferred. The warranty in respect of environmental pollution is very important to RBH as, potentially, claims could be enormously

damaging to RBH's business and there is no provision within the RBH business plan to pay for environmental clean-up costs. The transfer

cannot proceed without this warranty because RBH’s funders would not fund unless this risk is dealt with.

We understand the Council has made its own investigations and

commissioned external consultants to assist it in identifying the risks of claims under these environmental warranties. As a result we

understand the Council’s officers are confident that the risk of a claim arising is low. If a claim did arise, there are provisions in the Transfer Agreement requiring RBH to mitigate its loss.

The warranty confirms that:

(1) the Council is complying and has complied with all applicable

environmental law and obtained environmental approvals relating to the ownership and use of the property;

(2) there is no current pending or threatened environmental claim

against the Council and there are no past or present acts, omissions, events or circumstances that could form the basis

of any environmental claim against the Council or the funders in respect of the ownership and use of the property;

Version Number: 7

Page: 25 of 43

(3) there is no dangerous substance at, in, on, or under any of the property and no such substance has been used, disposed of, generated (and so on) at, in, on or under the property; and

(4) no part of the property could lawfully be designated as contaminated within the meaning of the Environment Act

1995. This protects RBH from the key risks if the Property is found to contain contaminated land or buildings.

(iii) Asbestos Indemnity

Because the cost of some £6.9 million worth of potential asbestos remediation works to the transferring properties has been taken into

account in RBH’s business plan, the Council is to give an indemnity to RBH for any costs of asbestos remediation over this budget. This indemnity is in respect of (a) the costs of the removal /

encapsulation / remediation of asbestos from the property; and (b) claims in respect of death / personal injury due to asbestos on the

property.

(iv) Other Warranties

Finally, the Council warrants:

(1) that it has the appropriate power and authority to enter into the transfer;

(2) that no material adverse entries would have been revealed if individual local authority and other searches had been made

against each of the properties to be transferred; and

(3) that the terms under which the leasehold parts of the property (including the sub stations and shops) are held are standard

and have not been changed.

(g) The Seventh Schedule: Contains the form of Property Transfer to be

used to actually convey any land and property to RBH on completion.

(h) The Eight Schedule: Will contain a protocol setting out how RBH staff are to deal with member queries or issues raised on behalf of commitments

after transfer.

(i) The Ninth Schedule: Contains a draft protocol for both parties to work

together to deliver disabled adaptations.

(j) The Tenth Schedule: Contains the forms of leases of office space to RBH.

(k) The Eleventh Schedule: Contains details of the services that the parties

will provide to each other after completion. These are listed earlier in this report.

(l) The Twelfth Schedule: Contains the standard form of Deed of Assignment of rent and service charge arrears to be used post-completion.

(m) The Thirteenth Schedule: Contains the RTB / Shared Ownership Sharing

Agreement documenting the arrangements agreed with RBH.

Version Number: 7

Page: 26 of 43

(n) The Fourteenth Schedule: Contains the Disposals Clawback provisions which will require RBH to pay the Council a certain proportion of RBH’s net profit on the sale of any land sold for commercial gain for 30 years from the

completion date.

(o) The Fifteenth Schedule: Contains a protocol for the Council to monitor

the works RBH are doing in respect of asbestos.

(p) The Sixteenth Schedule: is currently unused.

(q) The Seventeenth Schedule: Contains a protocol describing how the

parties will work together in the administration of housing benefit for RBH tenants.

(r) The Eighteenth Schedule: Contains the draft deeds of variation in case the VAT Scheme changes.

(s) The Nineteenth Schedule: Sets out the arrangements for sharing of the

VAT monies received back from Customs. The current proposal is that the Council are to receive the cost of the pensions deficit and the Council’s set-

up costs of the transfer and then 40% of the remaining VAT recovered.

(t) The Twentieth Schedule: Contains the form of Development Agreement which the Council and RBH will enter into just before the transfer is

completed. This will ensure that the VAT shelter is properly in place.

(u) The Twenty First Schedule. Lists the Council’s set up costs referred to

above.

(v) The Twenty Second Schedule: Will contain some covenants around

regeneration of the estates. These are still to be settled.

(w) The Twenty Third Schedule: Sets out the new RBH mutual rules.

CONCLUSION

28. The above is only a summary of the principal terms of the Transfer Agreement between the Council and RBH. As mentioned, reference can be

made to the Transfer Agreement on request if required.

Version Number: 7

Page: 27 of 43

Appendix B - Responses to Open Space Consultation Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Holt Concerned the land may be used

for development

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Telephone 01/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0001

Hollingworth

Lake

Highlighted error in advert -

Cleggswood Ave, not Cleggswood

Rd. Concerned about land

transfer.

Further call 17/02/2012 - given

information about community

asset transfers

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Telephone 02/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0002

Alkrington Concerned the land may be used

for development

Land at Conway Cl Telephone 02/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0003

Alkrington Concerned the land may be used

for development

Land at Conway Cl Telephone 02/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0004

Greave Concerned about the future use

of the land

Land r/o 8-46

Parkway/5-23

Denehurst Rd

Telephone 02/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0005

Smallbridge Questions about the process &

future use of the land

Land adj 42-69 Low

Hill

Telephone 02/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0006

Holt Concerned about the future use

of the land & campaign in the

local area

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Telephone 02/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0007

Syke What the Council aims to achieve

by disposing of the land to RBH?

Do RBH intend to develop the

land or sell to a developer?

Is the land in question green belt

and does that limit the potential

for development?

Land at Joy St/Glen

Gardens

Land r/o Joy

St/Glen

Gardens/Scarr Dr

Letter 02/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0008

Holt Concerned about future

development of the land and its

facility as open space

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 02/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0009

Holt Concerned about future

development of the land and its

facility as open space

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 02/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0010

Hollin Allotment holder - concerned

that there may be plans to

develop on the site

Land r/o 32-94

Hollin Ln

Telephone 03/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0011

Hollin Allotment holder - concerned

that there may be plans to

develop on the site

Land r/o 32-94

Hollin Ln

Telephone 03/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0012

Hollin Concerned about the future of

trees & local wildlife in the area

in question

Land r/o 14-48

Furness Rd, 13-29

Whalley Rd, 36-54

Pershore Rd

Letter 04/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0013

Version Number: 7

Page: 28 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Hollin Concerned about the future of

trees & local wildlife in the area

in question

Land r/o 14-48

Furness Rd, 13-29

Whalley Rd, 36-54

Pershore Rd

Letter 04/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0014

Calderbrook Concerned with the future use of

land at Calderbrook, its safety as

open space and proposals for

development

Land r/o Melrose

Ave & Tintern Ave

Telephone 06/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0015

Holt I hope you can help me iv had a

note posted through my door

informing me that Rochdale

council is planning to sell the

COMMON in Milnrow to

Rochdale council borough

housing, I am writing to

yourselves to see if this ridiculous

proposal is true ? Please respond

ASAP

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Email 07/12/2

012

ST/OSC/0016

Broadfield Concerned about development

on the site and the safety of trees

- interested in securing TPOs for

the same

Land at Argyle Cr Telephone 07/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0017

Broadfield Concerned about development

on the site and the safety of trees

- interested in securing TPOs for

the same

Land at Argyle Cr Telephone 08/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0018

Holt Objection Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 08/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0019

Shawclough Objection

Concerned about future use as

recreational space

Inquiries about whether land can

be bought

Land r/o 16-30

Thrum Hall Ln

Letter 08/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0020

Syke Want to confirm what land is

described and what is proposed

Land at Joy St/Glen

Gardens

Land r/o Joy

St/Glen

Gardens/Scarr Dr

Telephone 09/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0021

Syke Concerned about development of

the land, particularly the plot

next to their property

Land at Joy St/Glen

Gardens

Land r/o Joy

St/Glen

Gardens/Scarr Dr

Land at Chatsworth

St

Land r/o Norton

Rd/Dewhirst

Rd/Newlands Ave

Land r/o Nook Farm

Ave/Bernard St &

Telephone 09/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0022

Version Number: 7

Page: 29 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Chatsworth St

Land r/o 69 Newark

Rd-87 Newark Sq

Haugh Holder of a garage plot on the

site - concerned about security of

this arrangement and the future

use of the site.

Would object to a change of use

for the site.

Further contact by email -

Formally lodge objection if the

intention is to change the use of

the land.

Land r/o 4-28 Two

Bridges Rd, 38-52

Haugh Ln

Telephone

& Email

10/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0023

Baytree Local people concerned about

development on the land

Land adj 48-72 Fern

Cl

Telephone 13/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0024

Hollingworth

Lake

Wants to know more about

proposal.

Would object to development on

the site in the future.

Adjoining land and site well used

for recreation

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Telephone 13/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0025

Syke Concerned about development

and additional ASB/nuisance

problems this may cause

Land at Joy St/Glen

Gardens

Land r/o Joy

St/Glen

Gardens/Scarr Dr

Letter 13/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0026

Calderbrook Maps of the areas in question All Telephone 13/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0027

Hollingworth

Lake

Querying the future use of the

land, particularly any plans for

development

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Telephone 13/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0028

Holt Objection - the land is heavily

used by local children for play

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 11/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0029

Hollingworth

Lake

Concerned about development

on the site.

Notes it is very well used and only

amenity in the area.

If about access to r/o properties,

could it be restricted to strips

behind those?

Intends to formally object

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Telephone 14/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0030

Version Number: 7

Page: 30 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Calderbrook Objection.

Holds RoW license at side of 53

Calder Ave for rear access to

property

Land r/o 25-53

Calder Ave, 21-32

Laneside Cl, 1-15,

18, 20 Welbeck Ave

Letter 09/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0031

Haugh Wanted to know what land

exactly the notice pertains to

Land r/o 4-28 Two

Bridges Rd, 38-52

Haugh Ln

Telephone 14/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0032

Hollingworth

Lake

Concerned about future use of

the land.

Noted its significant use for play

by local children

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Telephone 14/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0033

Hollingworth

Lake

Objection:

Concerned about possible future

development of the land.

Used by grandchildren and

friends' children for play;

overlooked by adjacent

properties;

Additional homes would

exacerbate local peak time traffic

congestion;

Parking is already very tight in the

area;

It was recently necessary to land

an emergency helicopter on the

field to attend to a visitor to

Hollingworth Lake

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0033

Hollingworth

Lake

Spent on play area;

No road access to land;

Property purchased knowing the

play facility is nearby;

Disappointed notices in mid-week

paper; 'some may say this is

underhand'

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 11/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0034

Holt Objection

Brought up in the area around

the land; belives the Council

holds the land for the public as a

common and that as such cannot

disponse of it in this way

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0035

Holt Objection -

Few green spaces in the area

available for children to play;

The land is well used for play by

local children;

Building on the site has failed

previously

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 13/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0036

Objection -

Does not think that the green

spaces should be lost.

All Letter 12/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0037

Pot Hall Objection -

Flats and mature trees to front of

property block light. Concerned

that development on the land in

Land r/o 84-102

Hind Hill St /108-

138 Egerton St

Letter 13/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0038

Version Number: 7

Page: 31 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

question would do the same to

the rear of the property

Alkrington Concerned about potential

development - if simply

transferring ownership, why is

public consulation required?

Also, land unsuitable for

development owing to former

mineshafts under the surface

Land at Conway Cl Letter 09/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0039

Alkrington Objection:

Thanking for previous letter and

register a complaint against any

future proposals to build on the

land

Land at Conway Cl Letter 24/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0039

Bentgate r/o 19-59

Laburnum Ln

Telephone 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0040

Haugh Garage Plot - felt could have been

notified about the proposed

change.

Held garage plot since 1988 -

concerned about future use.

Last tenancy agreement in 2002.

Also sending letter.

Land r/o 4-28 Two

Bridges Rd, 38-52

Haugh Ln

15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0041

Haugh Land r/o 4-28 Two

Bridges Rd, 38-52

Haugh Ln

Telephone 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0042

Haugh Objection:

Concern that the land will be built

on in the future. This is a concern

because:

There is not enough room for

roads and paths in the small area

of land;

Any development would detract

from the neighbourhood and be

too close to existing properties;

The land is higher than

surrounding properties so any

new development would block

light and compromise privacy;

Development would block the

view from existing properties;

To build on the land would

damage the community spirit in

the area

Land r/o 4-28 Two

Bridges Rd, 38-52

Haugh Ln

Letter 23/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0042

Holt Objection:

Land is subject to a covenant to

keep it for public use;

Land should be kept in the

stewardship of the Council

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0043

Version Number: 7

Page: 32 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Boarshaw Land behind 22-110 Tennyson Rd

has always been a play area and

recently had new equipment

installed.

Opposite side of the road is now

a 'Horse Sanctuary' and borders

Boarshaw Clough Nature

Reserve.

Play areas, allotments & open

spaces should be retained as the

land is not 'spare'

Land r/o 22-110

Tennyson Rd

Land r/o 35-155

Tennyson Rd

Letter 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0044

Hollingworth

Lake

Objection:

Used by the residents of

Smithybridge - the only safe place

to do so locally.

The Council should not dispose of

the land to avoid maintaining it.

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0045

Hollingworth

Lake

Concerned about future use and

maintenance of the land.

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Telephone 17/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0046

Haugh The land is used for allotments &

garages - concerned these may

be under threat.

Land r/o 4-28 Two

Bridges Rd, 38-52

Haugh Ln

Telephone 17/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0047

Hollingworth

Lake

Would like more information

about the proposal 'to build over

this field'

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Email 17/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0048

Hollingworth

Lake

Development of the land would

take away privacy and the use of

the land for recreation.

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Telephone 20/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0049

Holt Objection:

Land is used by children to play

Children playing is enjoyed by

local residents

The Council should not remove

the outlet for children;

The green is an important part of

the village;

The land was one of the reasons

for buying the property;

Development would make

residents feel suffocated;

The wellbeing of residents should

come before money;

Empty homes in the borough

should be renoved first.

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0050

Alkrington Objection:

Green spaces are an integral part

of the fabric of post-war estates;

Most houses at Conway Close are

no longer Council properties;

The land will most likely be used

Land adj 19-30, 48-

50, 66-77 The

Heath, 6-24 & 41

The Moss;

Land adj 27-64 the

Downs, 72-89 The

Letter 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0051

Version Number: 7

Page: 33 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

for development. Meadows, 42-53

The Moss;

Land at Conway Cl

Hollingworth

Lake

Objection:

Land is protected;

Does the Council own or merely

manage the land;

A covenant is on the land;

Significant use by people in the

area;

No clear use for the land post-

transfer;

The land is excessive for access to

3 RBH properties

Wildlife live in and around the

land.

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter ST/OSC/0052

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter ST/OSC/0053

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0054

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0055

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0056

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0057

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0058

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0059

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter ST/OSC/0060

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0061

Version Number: 7

Page: 34 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter ST/OSC/0062

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0063

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0064

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0065

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0066

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0067

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 21/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0068

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 21/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0069

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 21/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0070

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 21/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0071

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 21/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0072

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 21/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0073

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 21/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0074

Version Number: 7

Page: 35 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 21/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0075

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 18/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0076

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 17/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0077

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 17/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0078

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0079

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0080

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0081

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0082

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0083

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0084

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0085

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0086

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0087

Version Number: 7

Page: 36 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0088

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0089

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0090

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0091

Holt Objection:

Object to development; used by

correspondent, her children &

grandchildren.

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter ST/OSC/0092

Holt Objection:

Land is used to exercise dogs.

Milnrow suffers from traffic

congestion which would be

exacerbated by development

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 09/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0093

Holt Objection:

Land is used by children to play.

Milnrow suffers from traffic

congestion which would be

exacerbated by development

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 11/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0094

Holt Objection:

Land is used by grandchildren to

play and as a shortcut.

Milnrow suffers from traffic

congestion

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 11/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0095

Holt Objection:

Land is used by grand children to

play and as a shortcut.

Milnrow suffers from traffic

congestion which would be

exacerbated by development

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 11/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0096

Holt Objection:

Land is used by children to play

and to exercise dogs.

Milnrow suffers from traffic

congestion which would be

exacerbated by development

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 11/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0097

Holt Objection:

Land is used to exercise dogs &

for playing.

Milnrow suffers from traffic

congestion which would be

exacerbated by development

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 11/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0098

Version Number: 7

Page: 37 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Hollingworth

Lake

Objection:

Land is protected;

Does the Council own or merely

manage the land;

A covenant is on the land;

Significant use by people in the

area;

No clear use for the land post-

transfer;

The land is excessive for access to

3 RBH properties;

Wildlife live in and around the

land.

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 19/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0099

Haugh Objection:

Too small for development;

Land is elevated with respect to

surrounding houses to protect

against flooding;

Development would threaten the

privacy of existing residents;

Development would block light;

Development would offer no

contribution to the existing

environment;

Existing use has seen people

invest time and money in the

land.

Land r/o 4-28 Two

Bridges Rd, 38-52

Haugh Ln

Letter 20/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0100

Haugh Objection:

Have a garage on the land - eases

parking issues in the area.

Would expect to be informed of

any proposals for development,

which would also impinge light

and view to home.

Land r/o 4-28 Two

Bridges Rd, 38-52

Haugh Ln

Letter ST/OSC/0101

Kirkholt Objection:

The green is used for play and the

proposal threatens this

Any development will overlook

the existing properties;

The proposal ruins the area and

lives of local people;

People affected should have been

informed personally

Land r/o 2-40

Ceasar St, 1-37

Gerrard St, 1-51

Snowdon St

Letter 16/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0102

Holt Objection

Told the Council holds the land

for the public as a common and

that as such cannot disponse of it

in this way.

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter ST/OSC/0103

Hollin Objection:

Land represents pockets of green

space in built up areas for

recreation, dog walking, wildlife

corridors, etc

Open spaces should be better

maintained, not used for more

homes

All land in

Middleton

Letter 17/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0104

Version Number: 7

Page: 38 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Holt Objection

Told the Council holds the land

for the public as a common and

that as such cannot disponse of it

in this way.

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter ST/OSC/0105

All Objection All Letter 24/04/2

012

ST/OSC/0106

Open space was laid out in

estates for visual amenity;

ground conditions are unsuitable

for development on the land

between Perth Road and Caesar

Street;

Development would affect the

appearance of estates and reduce

land available for children to play;

The proposal may solve some

problems but will only create

others

Land on Kirkholt Letter 01/03/2

012

ST/OSC/0107

Holt Objection:

Land is used to exercise dogs.

Milnrow suffers from traffic

congestion which would be

exacerbated by development

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 09/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0108

Holt Objection:

Land is used to exercise dogs.

Milnrow suffers from traffic

congestion which would be

exacerbated by development

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 15/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0109

Holt Objection:

Land left for the recreation of the

people of Milnrow and is used by

young people and families;

Proposal has let the people of

Milnrow down and is against the

intended purpose of the land

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0110

Hollingworth

Lake

Objection:

Land is protected;

Does the Council own or merely

manage the land;

A covenant is on the land;

Significant use by people in the

area;

No clear use for the land post-

transfer;

The land is excessive for access to

3 RBH properties

Wildlife live in and around the

land.

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 23/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0111

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 20/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0112

Version Number: 7

Page: 39 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Hollingworth

Lake

Form letter; as above Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 20/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0113

Hollingworth

Lake

Objection:

This is the only area of green

space in Smithy Bridge where

children can play in safety;

The Council would be disposing

of the land to a limited company

which could sell the asset or use

it to raise capital;

Few Council properties border

the land so transfer is not worth

the time or effort

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 18/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0114

Holt Objection:

This is the only area of green

space in the immediate area

where children can play in safety

and is very well used;

Further houses in the area would

cause further problems with

traffic, parking and road safety.

Land at Smith

Hill/Merlin Rd

Letter 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0115

Various There are ongoing problems with

parking and the volume of traffic

in the area; development would

exacerbate these issues

Land in Milnrow Letter 21/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0116

Hollingworth

Lake

Objection:

Land is protected;

Does the Council own or merely

manage the land;

A covenant is on the land;

Significant use by people in the

area;

No clear use for the land post-

transfer;

The land is excessive for access to

3 RBH properties

Wildlife live in and around the

land.

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 25/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0117

Shawclough Objection:

Property bought with a view to

not being overlooked;

Developing the land would take

away one of the only safe places

for children to play on the estate;

A lot of traffic comes on and off

the estate and there is little

parking;

Looking at buying some of the

land to extend garden;

Houses build on the land would

affect business and property

value

Land r/o 16-30

Thrum Hall Ln

Letter 29/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0118

Version Number: 7

Page: 40 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Haugh Objection:

On the grounds that the land will

be used for housing and not a

garage site;

holder of 2 garages on the site,

which were put up at a cost of

£5,000.

In addition, new properties would

overlook those already in the

area

Land r/o 4-28 Two

Bridges Rd, 38-52

Haugh Ln

Letter 29/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0119

Haugh Objection:

Any new properties would

overlook existing properties;

Two Bridges Road is used as a cut

through when Huddersfield Road

is busy and as a result of the

nearby industrial estate;

Vehicles are parked on both sides

of the road and more houses

mean more traffic

Land r/o 4-28 Two

Bridges Rd, 38-52

Haugh Ln

Letter 29/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0120

Hollingworth

Lake

Objection:

This is the only area in Smithy

Bridge where young people can

play ball games and the only

football pitch in the Lakeside

area;

Sale of the land for development

will bring additional traffic to an

already congested area and

subsequent parking difficulties

Land r/o 17-47

Cleggswood Ave

Letter 25/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0121

Shawclough Ongoing correspondence

regarding purchase of garden

between 1 Clarence Street & 106

Bentley Street (this is not

included in the open space

notice)

Letter 17/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0122

Shawclough Ongoing correspondence

regarding purchase of garden

between 1 Clarence Street & 106

Bentley Street (this is not

included in the open space

notice)

Letter 17/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0123

All Objection:

It is incumbent upon the Council

that fair market value is obtained

for the land;

Consultation for the stock

transfer did not involve open

space being transferred;

There is no indication that the

land to be transferred will be

protected in the future by

covenants.

0.047ha of Council-owned land

with 'development potential' on

Spotland Road is being marketed

All Letter 02/03/2

012

ST/OSC/0124

Version Number: 7

Page: 41 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

for £52,000. The land proposed

for transfer to RBH is

approximately 41ha

Thistleyfield Objection;

Disputing the Council's rights to

dispose of the land to RBH.

Consultation with the Lyle family,

who left the playing fields and

land in question to the Council,

and The Fields In Trust suggests

the land is the property of the

children of Firgrove, not the

Council. Would like to see title

deeds if this is not the case.

If land were to be sold to a

private company there would be

ne reason the land could not be

developed and residents would

only be notified once the

planning application is approved.

The land has been enjoyed by the

children of firgrove for 60 years

and it would be a shame to

dispose of it for housing.

Would like to be informed of

reasons why the Council is

disposing of the land.

Development would increase

traffic on Uncouth Road, which is

already problematic owing to

lorries for the nearby scrap yards.

Residents also expressed

concerns about crime and

impeded views.

Petition attached

Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Letter 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0125

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0126

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0127

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0128

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0129

Version Number: 7

Page: 42 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0130

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0131

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0132

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0133

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0134

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0135

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0136

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0137

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0138

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0139

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0140

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0141

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0142

Version Number: 7

Page: 43 of 43

Estate Query Land in question Mode Date Reference

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0143

Thistleyfield Signatory to above petition Playground,

Uncouth Rd

Petition 22/02/2

012

ST/OSC/0144