Darren and Stephen have lived at  Springfield Avenue for 55 years. Darren looks after his brother who needs help with day to day tasks. The family have done this all of Stephens life.  Havebury Homes and West Suffolk council now want to split this situation up by evicting them and then separating them for housing. They have a possession order in place for August 13 I have tried to reason with Havebury and West Suffolk. They are ignoring Stephens challenges and have no permanent housing offer for either of them.  They may end up rough sleeping.  Darren tells me that he is worried. He is very concerned about what will happen to his brother.  In my view this situation is about care and Kindness and what is right. It's not right to split these brothers up. 

Even though renters’ tenancy deposits must be legally protected by a government-approved scheme, too many of us aren’t getting all the money that is rightfully ours when we move. Generation Rent estimates 296,000 renter households could be losing out on hundreds of pounds every year. Parts of the system work well. On average, those of us who challenge landlords’ claims on our deposits through protection schemes get 79% of our deposit back. But few of us get this far. Of renters whose landlords make unfair claims on their deposit at the end of the tenancy, just 1 in 5 raise a dispute with the deposit scheme. Some of us don’t know that it’s ultimately up to the tenant to claim the money, which can mean we run out of time to get it back. Others worry that the dispute process will be unfair or take too long - at a time when we need the money back quickly.  And some landlords actively pressure renters to settle for less than they deserve, by exaggerating their claims, refusing to deal with the deposit scheme or simply not protecting the deposit in the first place. While renters can take legal action if our deposit is not protected and get compensation, this can be a slow process with large upfront costs. And even if a claim for imaginary damage is ultimately rejected by the deposit scheme, there is no cost to the landlord for trying to get away with this. The way the system works makes this bad behaviour easier. Some schemes let the landlord hold on to the money themselves, while paying to insure it, which means dodgy ones can hold the entire deposit hostage while negotiations or adjudication takes place.  Making it the landlord’s responsibility to make a claim soon after the tenancy ends and return unclaimed cash to the tenant as soon as possible, will make moving home a lot less stressful. Scrapping the insurance-backed schemes completely, and holding all renters’ deposits in the remaining custodial schemes, would make it easier to update the rules and ultimately return the money to its rightful owner. And imposing fines on landlords who repeatedly get exaggerated claims rejected by the deposit schemes would shut down that behaviour and get money back into renters’ pockets quicker.

We urgently need to replenish our decimated council housing stock, and part of the answer is real funding for councils to Buy the Supply. Over 169,000 children are homeless and living in overcrowded and often dangerous temporary accommodation. Millions more families struggle to pay soaring private rents, meanwhile millions of council homes have been sold off since the start of Right to Buy, with only a tiny number of replacements built each year. A Treasury-backed Buy the Supply fund is a serious missing link in the policies needed to fix this crisis. It would help more councils buy housing that already exists and turn it into brand new council homes.  Whether that is buying back former council homes or snapping up other suitable houses when they are put on the market, buying the supply can achieve immediate, construction risk-free council housing near existing schools, parks and health services, without delay. This is a proven solution, with many councils across the country already buying up good quality homes where they can afford to. But much more funding is needed. That is why we need the Chancellor to look at this again, and create a huge new Buy the Supply fund to help councils make a real difference to all the families who need it. The benefits and savings add up and make this a great investment the Treasury must back at scale. And of course a Buy the Supply fund must go hand in hand with wider measures including: • an immediate end to Right to Buy, • a major scale-up of new council house building, and • making private developers deliver higher social and affordable housing quotas

Across the country, ordinary people are being forced to pay thousands of pounds a year for public parks, roads and communal spaces on top of their council tax.  This happens on so-called unadopted estates, where councils approve new developments but never take responsibility for maintaining the public spaces created. Instead, the costs are passed permanently to residents through uncapped service charges. These parks and roads are: • open to everyone • promoted by councils as public amenities • part of the everyday fabric of towns and cities Yet the bill is quietly pushed onto a small group of households – families, key workers, pensioners and first-time buyers – many of whom are already struggling with the cost of living. Although initially well-intentioned, Councils are complicit in arrangements that have pushed costs onto some of the poorest in society, with the risk of pushing their constituents into poverty.  Case study: Elephant Park, Southwark Elephant Park is a major regeneration development with a large central park that is open to everyone and promoted as a public space. But local residents are paying for it privately. For a small one-bed flat in South Gardens, the typical 2025–26 service charge is £6,202. Around 15% of this goes towards public parkland and surrounding roads.  That means almost £1,000 a year paid by one resident towards public spaces, on top of their council tax. This is double charging: ordinary people paying twice for parks and roads that are meant to be public. This is a national problem, not a one-off Residents across the country are affected  from major regeneration schemes to new housing estates and garden communities. Examples raised publicly include developments in: • Elephant Park (London Borough of Southwark) • St Edeyrn’s Village (Cardiff) • Vickers Green (Crayford, London Borough of Bexley) • Garden City (Kent) • Church Meadows (Great Broughton, Cumbria) • Carleton Meadows (Penrith, Cumbria) • Elm Farm / Wymondham New Estates (Norfolk) • Brookdale Estate (Aiskew, North Yorkshire) • Queensgate Development (Stockton-on-Tees) • Wynyard Park (County Durham / Teesside) • Lodge Hill Development (Chattenden, Medway) • Hoo Peninsula New Estates (Medway, Kent) • West Myreton Estate (Menstrie, Clackmannanshire) • Greenbelt Estates – Kirkcaldy (Fife) • Greenbelt Estates – Kilmarnock (East Ayrshire) • Fairfields Estate (Milton Keynes) • Whitehouse Park (Milton Keynes) • Kingsbrook (Aylesbury Vale, Buckinghamshire) • Cranbrook New Community (East Devon) • Great Kneighton (Cambridge) • Trumpington Meadows (Cambridge) • Northstowe (Cambridgeshire) • Barking Riverside (London Borough of Barking & Dagenham) • Chobham Manor (Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, London) • East Village (Stratford, London) • Newhall (Harlow, Essex) • Sherford New Community (Devon / Plymouth) • Poundbury (Dorchester) • Upton (Northampton) • Cambourne (Cambridgeshire) • Meridian Water (Enfield, London) • Kidbrooke Village (Greenwich, London) In every case, the pattern is the same: public infrastructure paid for by a small number of residents, with no cap to the their charges.  Parliament has heard the evidence In a recent House of Commons debate and evidence sessions on property service charges, MPs heard directly from residents paying for unadopted roads, parks and communal land. During that debate, Rebecca Paul MP made a clear recommendation: Councils should be mandated to adopt unadopted parks and roads.  This would end the practice of residents paying twice and close the planning loophole that has allowed “fleecehold” estates to spread. The evidence is clear. The solution has been stated publicly in Parliament. What’s missing is government action.  What we’re calling for We call on the UK Government to: • Mandate councils to adopt unadopted public parks, roads and communal spaces • Reform planning and Section 106 rules so public infrastructure cannot be permanently funded by residents • End double charging where people pay council tax and private service charges for the same services • Protect residents from uncapped, unaffordable estate charges Public spaces should be funded publicly, not hidden on household bills. Ordinary people should not be used as a substitute tax base. 

The leasehold system is an outdated relic that means millions of people own their home, but not the ground it's built on. This leaves them trapped paying ever-increasing ground rents and unfair service charges to a landlord who owns the land. This system is unfair and exploitative. It’s time to follow the example of other countries and switch to a system of commonhold, giving people genuine, full ownership of their homes and land. Let's give homeowners security and scrap this unjust system for good

New laws are being introduced to give leaseholders greater and fairer protection. A key part of this is making sure landlords are transparent about how they raise and spend service charges paid by homeowners. But some landlords of retirement properties are lobbying to be made exempt from these new rules. This would deny retired homeowners the right to see exactly how their money is being spent and leave them vulnerable to unfair practices. People in retirement deserve the same transparency and protection as everyone else. Please sign the petition to urge the Minister to reject any exemptions and ensure the law protects all leaseholders equally.

Help more disabled people get more appropriate accommodation. The housing waiting list for a bungalow is very long and if you're a first time buyer there doesn't seem to be any help towards new build bungalows and when there is they are for over 55's.

  Gentrification is driving thousands of families, key workers, and minority communities out of their homes, eroding the fabric of our cities. We demand a new approach that puts people before profit, protects our diverse communities, and guarantees the right to remain for all.  

Right now, thousands of people seeking asylum in the UK are being housed in unsafe hotels and barges, cut off from communities and support. Some have faced serious harm - including abuse, racism, and even death. These are people fleeing war, violence, and persecution, but instead of safety, they’re met with isolation and fear. The Ministry of Justice is even currently preparing prisons in case of more far-right riots this summer, like we saw in August 2024. Hotels housing asylum seekers faced arson and violence last year, and remain vulnerable targets, yet there has been no update to evacuation or safety plans. In their 2024 manifesto, the Labour Party pledged to end the use of hotels and barges as housing. But since the election, hotel use has actually increased. Ultimately, the Government is spending millions on private contracts for accommodation that fails to meet even basic standards. This system doesn’t work - for people seeking asylum, for local communities, or for public funds. Why should you join us? Everyone deserves a safe place to call home. This campaign is about more than asylum - it’s about fairness, dignity, and the kind of society we want to live in. If we come together, we can demand a better system: one that houses people in our communities, invests in social housing, and treats everyone with respect. Add your name to call for change. Let’s build a future based on compassion, not contracts.

Unsuitable living conditions are not acceptable for anyone.

We need your help to ensure the Government LISTEN and take ACTION.  There is a great push to achieve Net Zero and clamp down on rogue landlords. Why are social housing tenants not given the same standard of regulations or quality of living as imposed on Private Rental Sector? There should be an EPC standard for all social  buildings and also individual tenanted and more teeth given to Housing Ombudsman as last year  only a total of £1.1m was awarded compensation due to maladministration in England. We know how important a warm and safe house is to everyone. The responsibility of being a landlords should be taken seriously no matter who you landlord is. Our Social Housing properties are in need of significant improvements and sadly those in social properties do not have a say on making these changes and also because of a lack of information about the energy performance of these properties are not able to make an informed decision to continue to live in them.

 Management companies and housing associations are ripping off residents by overcharging and not providing adequate services. Cambridge City Council pays the service charges to these companies for residents who receive housing benefit, but there is barely any scrutiny of whether these charges are legitimate.  Service Charge Justice Cambridge is aware of tens of developments in Cambridge where residents are paying overinflated, bogus or entirely unjustified charges, many of whom are recipients of Housing Benefit. Cambridge City Council is experiencing a £11.5 million 'budget gap', with vital public services facing being cut, all the while public money is being channelled directly into the bank accounts of management companies and housing associations whose residents say they are being overcharged and underserved.  It's vital that the Council investigates how much public money was allocated towards housing service charges for the financial year 2023/24, and supports Service Charge Justice’s campaign for better regulation of service charges.