The first column of this table shows the rent agreed by the Edinburgh wide allotment association FEDAGA (Federation of Edinburgh & District Allotment and Garden Association) and landlord City of Edinburgh Council (CEC) for each year.
The last column shows what our rent would have been if it had tracked the RPI. (? - Of course we don't know the RPI for the next two years -although we do know our rent hike) Here's what a graphic comparison of the figures reveals:
The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 makes it automatically unfair for a landlord to impose an arbitrary increase in rent. Guidance by the OFT (Office of Fair Trading) on unfair terms in tenancy agreements indicates that unless increases are linked to such external factors as the RPI or evaluated by an objective person independent of the landlord they may be deemed to be unfair. It does not foresee that the representative body of the tenants might collude with the landlord in putting up rents! Clearly an oversight.
Hmm. What rationale is given for these yearly, and considerable, hikes? And how come FEDAGA don't argue against them?
ReplyDeleteFEDAGA has justified the rises by suggesting they will result in new allotment sites. I'm all in favour of new allotment sites, just not keen on paying for capital expenditure schemes from the rent account. In practice the result is that the Council no longer funds the 50% subsidy it promises the unwaged - Both the unwaged and the waged pay a higher rate instead.
DeleteI still consider our rents cheap...than I look at this and realise that with our rent rises over the last three years we too are being truly ripped off. Can anything actually be done about it Mal??
ReplyDeleteThe best form of cure is prevention. In retrospect I would be on the "nothing above the RPI" war path a lot sooner. Hope other people can learn from the Edinburgh experience and react faster to unfair rent hikes.
DeleteIt seems allotments are treated differently doesn't it? I noticed this when I was looking into the manure problem - composts and gardening products weren't covered by the same consumer protection as agricultural supplies.
ReplyDelete...also, when we got flooded, it seemed from the lackadaisical Council attitude (they didn't test the soil for nearly three weeks) that allotment folk should be less fussy about eating contaminated food!
DeleteThat's some increase. What are they using the extra money for? Are you getting anything extra for your money?
ReplyDeleteAfter the missing Council subsidy (see above) is covered, any further money raise is promised for buying new allotment sites!
Delete