Green councillor seeks specific assurances on potential defects and repairs in the South Kilburn regeneration, and sales to 'predatory, rent seeking, private equity firms'

 

 

The Brent Green Group of councillors are clearly intent on delivering their local election manifesto pledging that they will ensure scrutiny and accountability of Brent Council decisions.

Cllr Paul Ryan (Green, Kilburn) has followed up his supplementary question to Cllr Kelcher* (Cabinet lead for Regeneration) on South Kilburn (above) with the letter below which is awaiting a response. This follows Pete Firmin's presentation to Brent Council of a resident's view of regeneration issues in South Kilburn.

The Council is due to appoint a single development partner for the remainder of the South Kilburn  Regeneration in September.

THE LETTER 

Dear Cllr Kelcher,

I am writing to you to follow up on some of the questions posed to you and the impassioned deputations made by South Kilburn residents at the latest Full Council meeting in relation to South Kilburn regeneration and the upcoming awarding of the single delivery contract.

I would firstly like to thank you for communicating your willingness to further engage with South Kilburn stakeholders to reach a decision and a contractual framework that is most beneficial for the residents of South Kilburn and I hope that this is something that can be demonstrated and borne out in the coming days, weeks and months.

Unfortunately due to the time constraints of full council meetings we were unable to fully engage with many of the issues raised, so I am writing to seek clarity and more detailed and extensive responses to some of the issues raised.

Contractor Accountability

I am sure you noticed that, in both the questions I posed to you and the deputation presented by local resident Pete Firmin, the issue of structural defects and a lack of stringent build quality are pervasive themes throughout South Kilburn regeneration. Unfortunately, I and may residents feel that your abridged answer did not sufficiently address the issues raised, so I would like to use this opportunity to get a more detailed and specific answer.

The points that you, and the broader Neighbourhoods and Regeneration team have raised regarding the need for the prospective single-delivery contractor to be a long-term collaborative partner is well taken but, considering the history of defects and negligence throughout South Kilburn regeneration, will you be seeking clear contractual guarantees that the cost of any potential repairs arising as a result of structural defects will explicitly and exclusively rest with the contractor responsible for those defects. Additionally, is the Council placing mechanisms in place to ensure these repairs are carried out in a swift manner.

Private Equity

During the full council meeting, I raised the decision authorised by Neighbourhoods and Regeneration that would allow Countryside Properties to sell 143 new build units in SK to US private equity firm Principal Asset Management. Unfortunately you did not respond to this during the Full Council Meeting, but can you now confirm if the Council will commit to ensuring that, in the midst of a housing crisis, it will not allow any more units in South Kilburn regeneration to be sold to predatory, rent seeking private equity firms. 

Granville Rec

In response, to Leslie Barron's deputation in relation to protecting Granville Rec, you did not provide assurances that this vital community space would be protected and intimated that the Save the Rec activists present should be cognisant that this land would be used for social family housing. This has been interpreted by some residents as a cynical attempt to override the wishes of local residents by portraying them as opponents to social housing.

Is there express guarantees that any construction on the Granville Rec will all be social housing? Additionally, considering the scale and scope of investment in South Kilburn regeneration, have efforts been made to move these units to an alternative location?

Can you also assure local residents, that if the Granville Rec is destroyed, that they will be provided with an alternative space that is similarly bio-diverse? Will this space provide a comparable amount of unobstructed, uninterrupted green space that can feasibly fulfil the existing functions of the Granville Rec; namely a community garden and social space. If these guarantees cannot be provided, can you assure residents that you will endeavour to do everything in your power to ensure that this vital community space is protected.

Community Engagement

I appreciate that as Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Regeneration, you have quite an extensive portfolio. However, considering the enormity and impact of this project, would you be willing to attend a walking tour of South Kilburn arranged by the South Kilburn Residents Panel. This would give you an opportunity to understand the concerns and trepidation of residents and would be a show of good faith to demonstrate that they have a collaborator in the Council who is willing to listen and engage with them.

I look forward to receiving your detailed and thorough responses to the above and to continue working with you and delivering for South Kilburn residents at this critical juncture.

Kind regards,

Cllr Paul Ryan

Councillor for Kilburn Ward

Cllr.Paul.Ryan@brent.gov.uk

More problems for residents of troubled Forum House and Quadrant Court - unsafe balconies and a shattered glass balustrade

 

Forum House built 2009

 Quadrant Court built 2010

 

Residents of two of the earliest buildings constructed as part of the multi-million Wembley Park regeneration received a warning letter today from the latest of their managing agents MLM Property. LRM and First Port having been removed.

MLM asked for immediate access today to the Quadrant Court Winter Garden balconies to carry out inspections.  

They said:

We have recently become aware that some of the winter Gardens balconies glass fixings have deteriorated over time and the railings securing the glass have, in a limited number of balconies become unstable. This is clearly a serious issue, and is a priority to have resolved as soon as possible.

We have recently completed inspections of all 60 Winter Garden balconies in Form House (on elevations to Empire Way and corner of Lakeside Way) with 2 requiring requiring immediate intervention (with the glass already being removed as a safety measure), with a further 17 requiring temporary supports whilst a permanent solution is devised. 

The seriousness of the situation for the public as well as residents is clear from the warni:

In the meantime, the instruction not to use these balconies remains in places and the cordon of the footpath below will remain in place for the time being as an additional measure for everyone's continued safety.

Both buildings, post-Grenfell, were found to have cladding problems and other fire safety issues, fire patrols necessary  and residents faced significant increases in service charges.

MLM note a further worrying issue:

Additionally, you may be aware that a glass balustrade recently shattered during the very hot spell of weather. At  this time, we believe this incident is not connected to the issues identified in the Winter Garden balconies. We are arranging additional inspections of these balconies and whist priority is being given to the Winter Garden types, we expect to complete these inspections within the next month if possible.

Anticipating the first question that residents are likely to ask on reading the letter MLM say:

Whilst investigations are ongoing it would be inappropriate to speculate on what is causing these failures, however, we wish to assure you that these inspections are thorough and are being professionally documented so that we can advise you further on causes and remedial actions needed. 

Forum House and Quadrant Court were designed and built by Sisk for £43m and £45m respectively.

It seems that South Kilburn is not the only Brent regeneration area facing problems.

 

 

 

Swathes of South Kilburn left to decline in anticipation of regeneration that will barely increase the number of social rent homes

 

The commemorative plaque on a South Kilburn building that needed remediation work a decade after opening

 

South Kilburn resident and local activist Pete Firmin addressed Brent Council this week on the reality of living on this flagship regeneration project,         

 

Survivors of the Grenfell Tower tragedy talk of 2 main lessons – organisations must be accountable and residents must be at the heart of all decisions which affect them.

 

The minutes of the Council’s Community Wellbeing and Scrutiny Committee state “It is essential that tenants are placed at the centre of everything the Council does. Safe, secure and decent homes are a foundation for a fair and thriving borough and are not optional for any responsible housing authority.“

 

New buildings in South Kilburn have won awards from architects and planners. But residents know that pretty much every new block has major problems, such as scaffolding up for years to remove flammable cladding, or mould, heating and hot water issues. New flats are poor quality, often smaller and more expensive than the previous council flats. When a resident who has been living in a new flat for 10 years says she would move back into her old flat like a shot, you know there is a problem.

 

2 blocks have to be completely refurbished. Work has still not started on Granville New Homes, despite the report pointing out that refurbishment was necessary having been published in 2017. Instead, residents suffer repeated problems with utilities and there is a 24-hour fire watch around the buildings. Yet the company that did such a botch job with Granville New Homes has been awarded further contracts by Brent.

 

We have swathes of South Kilburn left to decline in anticipation of regeneration.

 

Time and again, Brent has not foreseen that decanting residents from blocks and not securing empty flats left them open to illegal anti-social behaviour, endangering other residents.

 

When shops in Stafford Road were flooded because of squatters after the Council had not secured the buildings the Council did nothing to assist those who had premises there and have lost their livelihoods.

 

Regeneration isn’t addressing bringing down Brent’s waiting list. At the end of regeneration - another 20 years - there will barely be more social rent homes - i.e. ones which people can actually afford - than before it started. Instead, expensive homes are bought up on a buy-to-let basis. The latest wheeze being to sell them en bloc to a U.S.-based private equity company, because the market for such homes in London is “challenging”. So why are we building homes no-one can afford?  Meanwhile, residents are priced out of the area. Research elsewhere in London shows that such gentrification contributes to falling school rolls and school closures.

 

What else were residents told we would get in addition to new flats? Among other things, 2 new `healthy living centres’ (we have 1 new GPs surgery, delivered years late), a new sports centre, a new community centre. No sign of them.

 

There is a systemic rubbish problem across South Kilburn, which the Council fails to tackle, There is the scandal of the ex job centre in Cambridge Avenue where residents have been asking the Council to take action against the owners over the accumulation of rubbish. For 8 years residents were told this was too difficult,  before the Council finally instigated court action, but still the rubbish accumulates.

 

From the start of regeneration residents urged that there be proper coordination with the many Housing Associations brought into the area, because of potential conflicts over who is responsible for the upkeep of different areas. Those conflicts continue.

 

Then there are the lesser issues - a chairlift broken for years, fire extinguishers not checked for years, broken panes of glass in entry doors which take a year to replace.

 

In my block, contractors told the Council last year that our flat doors are not fire-safety compliant, yet, despite asking, we have no idea whether the Council intends to do anything about this.

 

Having persuaded HS2 to build its vent shaft in South Kilburn, Brent doesn’t engage with residents affected by this. Residents in Alpha House got letters from HS2 earlier this year saying HS2 would monitor the block for movement now they are tunnelling further towards Euston. Attempts to get reassurance from Brent around this meet a brick wall.

 

Residents at the centre of things!? That would explain why residents associations are denied use of communal halls in their buildings for years, why no new blocks have such rooms, why Brent Council talks of residents associations as part of its “team” when it wants anything, but fails to deliver the services it should.

 

You may have heard of the Kilburn Neighbourhood Plan, endorsed by both Brent and Camden Council. But Brent insisted that South Kilburn could not be included in the plan. This excluded South Kilburn residents from having any say - or vote - in what the plan said about the Kilburn High Road and other areas of Kilburn which concern them as much as those who did have a vote.

 

The South Kilburn residents panel, consisting entirely of South Kilburn residents, has been established and is hoping to move to a fully elected body addressing the concerns of South Kilburn residents. It has been given a small say in the next phase of regeneration. Yet Brent Council refuses to assist with its running costs, at the same time as announcing it will pay £5,000 compensation to the chair of a body it appoints in Harlesden.

 

Time and again senior council officers and councillors have visited and told us how concerned they are at the problems of South Kilburn and nothing gets done. Time and again we are told of reorganisation of Council departments and nothing changes.

 

Residents themselves fill the space with no support from Council at all, such as the Carnivale last weekend, attended by 600 people with zero assistance from Council.

 

On Friday a Council officer organised contractors to deal with several issues around our part of South Kilburn which have been outstanding for years. The catch? The officer said they had been taken off dealing with estates but was dealing with these issues off their own bat because they were so embarrassed at repeatedly putting in work orders and nothing happening.

 

South Kilburn Regeneration – building what is needed or building what provides profit for developers? Brent Council to sell 143 units to U.S. private equity company

 

Guest post by South Kilburn resident Pete Firmin

South Kilburn Regeneration – building what is needed or building what provides profit for developers?

An acquaintance with more patience than me who closely follows Brent Council documents on the regeneration of South Kilburn recently unearthed the fact that the Council proposes to bulk sell the non-social housing in the current phase of regeneration to a U.S. private equity company, Principal Asset Management. A glance at their website shows Principal Asset Management has no interest in housing as such, but in maximising returns on investment.

This involves 143 `private market units’ in the current phase. Whether a similar deal would be used in the next phase of regeneration (for which a £1 billion contract is due to be awarded shortly) isn’t known, but clearly can’t be ruled out.

The justification for this deal given in Council papers is that the London sales market is "challenging.".

This is a clear indication that these flats are to be sold as `buy to let’. From the earliest stages of the regeneration of South Kilburn, many of the new flats have been sold on the Far Eastern market, this appears to be the first time flats are sold to a foreign owner as a job lot.

All this begs the question “why are flats being built for which there is no market?”.

We have been told from the start of South Kilburn regeneration 20 years ago that social housing to replace that being demolished could only be built if developers could also be built at market rates. This latest venture takes that one step further.

Britain’s, and especially London’s, housing crisis is a crisis of lack of housing which people can pay for while leaving them sufficient to live on. What is desperately needed is housing at social (or preferably Council) rents, not more housing they can’t afford. Terms such as “affordable” which developers and Councils love to use to show how much they care are a smokescreen. The legal definition of `affordable’ is up to 80% of market rent, i.e. unaffordable to anyone on average pay or below.

Principal Asset Management is believed to charge around £2,500 a month for flats in London, not something any of the tens of thousands on Council waiting lists can take on. This bulk sell off just feels like another way of helping the developers make a profit at little risk.

Developers frequently say part way through construction (as happened recently in Camden) that the percentage of social housing they committed to when they were given planning permission is no longer profitable and push for - and usually get - a lowering of that figure. They have Councils over a barrel in negotiations.

Such projects not only fail to deal in the slightest with the housing crisis, but also lead to gentrification of the areas under development, changing the nature of an area without necessarily improving the lot of the original residents at all. On top of which the social housing which is built is, more often that not, of poor quality and smaller and more expensive than that which has been demolished. Social engineering at its worst.

Brent Council needs to recognise that its current approach does nothing to deal with the housing crisis (if anything, it exacerbates it). It needs to not only stand up to developers and their demands, but also fight for a change to national policy. Shelter recently called on the government to “remove the historic debt local authorities owe to the government” for council housing. They say that £29 billion in “historic housing debt” is based on an outdated financial settlement from 2012; that it “sucks away money that could be invested in building new social homes”. Shelter calls for the government to “remove this debt from councils and put it on its own books without affecting the overall national balance sheet”. 

Working with other Councils to push for such a change could go much further to provide decent housing for all, rather than cosy deals only helping developers and private equity.

 

 

Formal Complaint issued over 'unacceptable situation' at L&Q's Bigler Court, in Alperton

 Bigler Court

Brent Liberal Democrat Leader Anton Georgiou, has issued a Formal Complaint to L&Q (London and Quadrant Housing Trust) over 'unacceptable conditions at Bigler Court, a block managed by the Trust in Alperton.

The block hit the headlines in January 2024 when a disabled grandmother was left stranded on the 8th for two months due to a broken lift. LINK  

Things clearly have not improved. Cllr Georgiou writes: 

For years, residents and councillors have repeatedly raised concerns about disrepair, lift failures. heating and hot water outages, flooding incidents, poor maintenance standards, security issues and the overall management of the block. Despite numerous complaints and reports, residents continue to experience the same problems time and again, with little confidence they are being properly resolved.

The stories coming fom residents are deepy concerning. People have been left for months without reliable heating or hot water, repairs repeatedly fail to resolve issues, and the lift has been out of service for extended periods. In recent days, two residents became trapped in the lift despite assurances that repair works had been completed. This ongoing situation is having a serious impact on residents' physical and mental wellbeing. Many feel ignored, exhausted and badly let down. 

Bigler Court is not the only L&Q building in Brent to be the subject of complaints. Bourne Place, in South Kilburn has many similar issues and was the subject of a guest post by Lucie Gutfreund in August 2020.  LINK The then L&Q Chief Executive, David Montague, stepped down a month later. LINK

Plaque at Bourne Place, South Kilburn

 

Cllr Georgiou is calling for a meeting with L&Q senior management to discuss the ongoing failures at Bigler Court and the immediate action L&Q will take,

In addition he expects:

• A full review of outstanding repairs and maintenance issues at the block.
• Clear timescales for resolving ongoing problems.
• Improved communication and accountability from L&Q staff.
• Meaningful engagement with residents and local councillors moving forward. 

Green candidate speaks out at South Kilburn hustings - video

A unique hustings was held in Kilburn recently focusing on the South Kilburn Regeneration area where demolition and new build  is carrying on for decades.

Paul Ryan, spoke for all three Green Party candidates at the event. 

 

Published and promoted by James Paton on behalf of Brent Green Party and its candidates c/o 23 Saltcroft Close, Wembley, HA9 9JJ 

 

In bright sunsine the case is made for the retention of Granville Rec in South Kilburn

 

 

 Saturday's Action Day to Save the Granville Rec took place in glorious sunshine - so bright that I could not see the screen on my digital camera!  Despite that the video is worth listening to for Leslie Barson's passionate speech  in defence of the space. It is accidentally appropriate that much of her speech takes place against the background of the rustling of new leaves in mature trees as I was unable to focus on the speaker.

The space is in the centre of the South Kilburn regeneration and an oasis for nature and humans alike.

The day was attended by a cross-section of local residents and two of the Kilburn Labour councillors were there alongside two of the Green Party candidates in an atmosphere of community solidarity. 

The petition can be found HERE.

South Kilburn to question Brent Council candidates - Thursday 23rd April 6.30pm Marian Centre

 

'Underground, overground, rumbling free' - HS2 surveys South Kilburn residents before tunnelling begins

 

 The HS2 route to Euston through South Kilburn

 

With HS2 now tunnelling to Euston under the South Kilburn estate and surrounding neighbourhood, they have rather belatedly asked residents to register property details 'in order to share the information with organisations working on behalf of HS2 Ltd's 'to minimise the risk of injury, health impacts and wider environmental concerns.'

This sounded rather ominous to residents.

 Much of the property is ultimately owned by Brent Council so one would expect them to be able to fill in the detail if they have recently completed condition surveys.

 

South Kilburn residents have had to put up with regeneration disruption including noise and dust for years now, so any impact will be an additional  nuisance.  The vent shaft (marked HS2 on the map) is in place at Canterbury Works, next to a primary school,  after Brent Council negotiated its siting  there, rather than the original site in the car park adjacent to Queen's Park station. The route is also close to Wilberforce Primary School on Kilburn Lane, in Westminster.

 

 

 

 

 

 

SAVE OUR GREEN SPACES - Community fights to keep South Kilburn's Granville Rec

 

Wembley Matters has reported the regeneration of South Kilburn over many years - problems are many including Granille New Homes purcased by the Council and costing more to remediate than to purchase price, balconies that flood, windows that fall out, shops flooded and closed down, heating breaking down regularly, new build built up close to old build not meeting separation space standards, fire in the disused job centre, Brent Council's  'Landlord Promise' looking unlikely to be fulfilled and much more.

 

The new Peel Precinct public space (above)  is windswept concrete and privately owned and symbolises the lack of soul that often characterises new developments.

It is no wonder then that tenacious residents want to hold on to a remnant of green space that represents what many hold dear, community belonging and engagement, and a space that is utilised for the benefit of all. 

Even on a cold day outside the growing season, there were crops to be seen that contribute to Granville Community Kitchen's mission of transforming 'ourselves, our communities and our food systems to create a just resilient  and sustainable world.'

 

 

A space to run around, tumble safely on a grassy surface AND get involved in growing food and engage with your neighbours. It is clear to me that the site has a lot of potential. Volunteers are already investing hours of their free time and it would be great if Brent Council also invested in the space and saved it from further development.

 

THE PETITION - PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY - SAVE OUR GREEN SPACES

 

We, the undersigned, strongly object to the proposed development of Block D on Granville Recreation Ground (planning ref: 21/2587).

 

Key Concerns & Why We Object: 

• Loss of vital community green space & garden
• Negative Wider Environmental Impact - air pollution and biodiversity
• Lack of Proper Consultation with Residents
• Negative impact on Princess Road Conservation Area 
• Contradicts the original South Kilburn Regeneration masterplan
• Totally inadequate replacement 

 

We demand that Brent Council:

• Halt plans for Block D to preserve our existing green space, garden, vegetable growing project, trees and biodiversity.
• Conduct a genuine public consultation with all local residents
• Revise the development plan to benefit both new and existing residents without compromising our local green space.

SIGN THE PETITION HERE

This is an objection made in July 2025: 

I object to the proposed development at Granville Road, which prioritizes housing density over the preservation of vital green space. As a resident of this area for over 50 years, I have deep concerns about the environmental, social, and infrastructural impacts of this plan. My objections align with those of the Princess Road Residents Association and others who have highlighted the severe drawbacks of this proposal.

LOSS OF GREEN SPACE AND ECOLOGICAL IMPACT:

It seems to me that the removal of Granville Recreation Ground will have detrimental consequences for local biodiversity.

I cannot see where the plans help address the decline in birds, pollinators, and wildlife, many of which rely on the mature trees and green spaces that the current space provides.

The introduction of a heavily regimented "urbanized" park design falls woefully short in attempts to replicate the ecological value of the existing natural landscape - so much so that it begs the question if ecological value has been fully assessed.

I am also concerned about the increased heat island effect due to reduced tree cover, which I understand is contrary to Brent Council's own Climate Emergency Declaration (2019, updated 2021).

The proposed "replacement" park, while technically larger, is dominated by roads and parking spaces, meaning an overall loss of usable green space. I fully echo the expressed concerns that this is exactly what London does not need in the face of climate change.

FLOODING RISK EXACERBATION 

I have personally experienced severe flooding in this area (most recently during the July 2021 cloudburst), and the proposed development raises serious concerns about drainage. My household has received no compensation and has had huge implications on matters of insurance for us.

Increased hard surfaces (buildings, roads, paved areas) mean greater rainwater runoff, threatening already overwhelmed drainage systems.

Past flooding events (including historic incidents from the 1950s-60s where basements were inundated) show this area is highly vulnerable.

Lack of detailed flood response plans in the application suggests the council and developers are ignoring this critical risk.

INADEQUATE CONSULTATION & COMMUNITY VOICE IGNORED

Despite being a long-term resident, I-like many others-have not been properly consulted on the material changes to this plan since its 2021 inception. The opaque communication from Brent Council and developers has left me and my wife, as with many of my neighbours, feeling disregarded and misled.

CONTRADICTIONS TO BRENTS OWN POLICIES

As far as I can tell, this proposal directly conflicts with Brent Council's commitments to:

Green Infrastructure Vision (loss of mature trees and biodiverse spaces)
Health Equity Goals (reduction in accessible, natural recreational areas)
Clean Air & Carbon Reduction Targets (fewer trees, more concrete)
Conclusion & Appeal

IN SUMMARY

I urge Brent Council to reject this flawed proposal and instead:

- Protect Granville Recreation Ground as a vital green lung for South Kilburn. 

- Demand a full, independent flood-risk assessment before any further planning decisions. 

- Hold transparent public consultations-where residents' concerns are not just heard but acted upon.

If this development proceeds in its current form, it will be a loss for the environment, a risk to homeowners, and a betrayal of community trust. I expect Brent Council to uphold its duty to residents-not developers' profits.

LETTER: Complaint about delays with repairs? No problem, Brent will delay dealing with your complaint

 

Via ChatGPT         

 

Dear Editor,

   

Last November, with increasing frustration at lack of progress with mounting issues around our blocks, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants and Residents’ Association in South Kilburn submitted an official complaint to Brent Council. This listed over 20 outstanding issues around the blocks, some reported years ago, and also complained about the lack of communication from Council departments about these issues.

 

The response we received at the start of December was, to be frank, a joke. The seriousness with which the responding officer treated the complaint is perhaps best shown by the fact that they got the name of the blocks wrong. They tried to pin the blame for repairs not being carried out on the officer who does monthly walkabouts around the area with us and said “I am pleased to hear that a walkabout is scheduled for 11 December 2025. During this visit, all outstanding issues will be collated, and further updates will be provided afterwards. I have also reminded the wider service areas of the importance of clear and timely communication, both to manage expectations and to ensure residents feel included in the process of improving their community spaces.”

 

We waited until after that walkabout to respond on the off chance that what was written might materialise. Fat chance, so we escalated the complaint (20/12), pointing out that, as so often, no other Council officers came besides the one who always comes and makes meticulous notes. In escalating the complaint, we objected to the attempt to place the blame for delays on that officer, since we know for a fact that he passes on issues (he copies us into the emails). Like us, he rarely gets responses. In the face of this we named a succession of more senior Council officers who have, at various times, promised to take action to action those issues and little has happened and nothing more is heard.

 

The acknowledgement we received on 5th January said, “the latest date by which we hope to respond in full is 25 February 2026, although we will aim to do so sooner if at all possible.”

 

On 25th February we received an email from the Complaint Investigator saying “I am writing to update you with progress on your complaint. Unfortunately, ongoing unprecedented caseload pressures mean that we will need more time to complete the investigation. We expect to provide you with a full response to your complaint by 25 March 2026.”

 

Unbelievable. 

 

Of course, in the meantime, a few of those issues initially complained about have been dealt with, most haven’t, and new ones (reported, of course,) have arisen. As ever, getting blood from a stone is much easier than getting any information from brent Council.

 

Meanwhile, we are told that Brent's Chief Executive is concerned at problems with neglect of South Kilburn, A Cabinet officer recently told an online meeting that he knew there are real problems in South Kilburn. Yet knowing and concern and actually doing anything seem a long way from their minds. When, earlier last year, officers from several South Kilburn TRAs wrote to all and sundry (MP, CEO, Councillors, council officers), in general terms about lack of action and communication, most didn’t respond, those that did told us they were passing our letter on to Council Officers, obviously oblivious to what we were raising in the first place.

 

Note: To be clear, the Council blocks concerned are not part of South Kilburn regeneration, though people might think they are being neglected in advance of demolition.

Pete Firmin, chair, Alpha, Gorefield and Canterbury Tenants and Residents Association

       

LETTER: John H of South Kilburn still waiting for repair to his Octavia HA flat to be completed - 3 months on

 

Readers will remember the case of John H, the disabled South Kilburn pensioner, who was without heating for many weeks in the winter. After repeated stories on this blog and help from Brent Council the heating in his housing association flat was eventually restored, but the associated repairs are still outstanding. The wordcloud above gives an idea of the nightmare that John has encountered in trying to get the repair completed.

In despair, John wrote another letter to Wembley Matters yesterday that I publish below:

   

Dear Editor,

 

It is now 3 months (24th Nov. 2025-24th February 2026) since I reported to my landlord Octavia, that 2 of my thermostats had failed and needed to be replaced.

 

However, I am still waiting for the repair to be completed, even though my heating was restored on the 6th of January 2026.

 

Yesterday SureServe were due to install a new thermostat in my living room, but they failed to attend, which has now reached 14 missed appointments over 3 months.

 

Mears are due to come tomorrow to repair all the damage caused by SureServe when they restored my heating system.

 

I made a complaint to Abri yesterday by email regarding waiting for 7 weeks to get my temporary thermostat replaced with a new one in my living room.

 

As they did not reply to yesterday's email, I have now submitted another one, using the Abri complaints online form regarding the wait of 50 days for my thermostat.

 

 

John H

South Kilburn