Sponsored by
Anger at lock fault break-in
Laura Proudman of Whelley at her rear kitchen door with her daughter Ebonie-Jo and baby son Tyler-Lee
A WIGAN woman is seeking compensation after her home was burgled after she reported a faulty lock to housing chiefs.
Laura Proudman’s home was broken into on New Year’s Day and a number of items, including televisions, taken.
When the mum-of-two moved into the council house on Durham Street, Whelley, 18 months ago she noticed a problem with both the front and back door of the house.
She reported it to Wigan and Leigh Housing (WLH) and although a spokesman for the service says the problem was rectified the 24-year-old says it has remained a problem ever since.
She said: “I have had to leave the key in the back of the door to keep it locked, water floods in when it rains and when it is windy the doors rattle.
“I have reported the problem on numerous occasions and four different engineers have been out. On one visit an emergency engineer told me that the doors were not safe. But I have been continually told that there was nothing they could do because they were not council doors and so they didn’t have replacement parts.”
Laura called the council’s emergency line and says she was told by an operator that a note had been put on the system not to send another engineer out as they did not have the right parts.
But eventually someone went out later that evening and made a temporary repair by nailing pieces of wood to the back door.
She said: “An engineer arrived at about 11.20pm and that’s when planks of wood were screwed to the side unit against the door as that was all he could do.”
Since the back door was temporarily secured WLH has found replacement doors for the house.
WLH Chief Executive, Ashley Crumbley said: “We are aware of this issue and have taken action. A problem with the door was reported to us in August 2010 and it was repaired. The tenant further reported a problem with the door a year later in November 2011, and again it was repaired.
“A new door was ordered and it was agreed with the tenant that it would be fitted in mid-January.
“We received a report on Sunday, January 1 that there had been a forced entry into the property and we carried out emergency repairs that day. A new door has since been fitted.
“We are sorry to hear that the property has been broken into, particularly at this time of year.”
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Wigan
Friday 25 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 11 C to 25 C
Wind Speed: 23 mph
Wind direction: East
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 11 C to 23 C
Wind Speed: 23 mph
Wind direction: East
Comments
There are 37 comments to this article
Page 1 of 3
rockcottage
Thursday, January 19, 2012 at 10:36 PM@TruthAdvocate...there's still the commonsense aspect of the situation. The tenant should ensure the security of her property despite the shortcomings of the council. If she doesn't...then she can only expect to suffer the consequences. I agree the council are negligent. That does alter the fact that she should ensure her security if all else fails. There are simply too many people out there that can no longer function sensibly as they're used to everyone else carrying them. This has to stop.
Truth Advocate
Thursday, January 19, 2012 at 01:27 PMRock cottage..... wrong on all accounts: nor obviously you have no idea as to amateurs DIY’ers let loose, eg. simple job - painting wood frames, gouged instead of sanded, lol talk about distressed finish (with lumps out of it) but hey, no old flaking paint in sight - on your reasoning, this tenant then moves out and then the housing authority despite being paid maintenance, get the next sucker they put in the property to pay for remediation, no doubt, desperate, who have waited a long time in worse properties with no choice in the matter and are suppose to be grateful ---------------------- As to ‘daft’, suggest you review this article logically, clues are all there; one comment say – £1200 for a replacement door (that will be retail fitted), another comment says the window doesn’t look like a brilliant job either (would you like this lady to pay for double glazing too) and you think this is fair on top of rent being paid, that the council are suppose to own this property. As to actual sums, I suggest rockcottage you use your brain - after house building cost which at trade is not huge, then there is annual maintenance, check rents eg. charged circa £100 pw for two bed room property that’s £5200 pa - doesn’t take many year to fully cover building and maintenance, so you may want to look at where all the council money is going or being waste, for starters Wigan CEO is on £200k with a whole bunch of quango’s and cronies to overpaid officials, ryet you object name call - rather than securing a house that maintenance is already being paid on by a young family ! ---------------- As to ‘brainwashed’ I think you should have a look at comment using soundbites ‘FREE’ and expecting ‘something for nothing’ political propaganda; given crap wages paid to the working class, lack of real jobs, that unemployed people are suppose to work for ‘FREE’ in Tescos, while the CEO is on a salary of £6,000,000, yes that’s £6 million plus per year and it makes lots of profit for shareholders ie. people that are overpaid so they can afford to invest in shares, while they rip off the poor such as overpaid fatcats who work in unacknowledged 100% government funded charities and quangos ! So the poor are going to be ripped off in having to rent while fatcats rub their noses in it and now you want them to pay for and do all the maintenance too ! ------------------------- as to terms of ‘do-good’ brigade, the 100% government funded charity fatcats and public officials that justify their large salaries in merely doing waste of time survey and PR to tell us how wonderful they are but never actually provide any worthwhile help - I don’t think this applies to me !
rockcottage
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 07:38 PMTruth Advocate... Your either brainwashed by the do-good brigade, or... just plain daft.
Truth Advocate
Tuesday, January 17, 2012 at 09:54 PMJemmy, given the council has NOT disputed doing the actual work - it is the standard of the work and how long they took them to do the work that is in questions; another clue - screwing on planks of and reported problems are not simply not a lock, furthermore it would not be unreasonable to expect a lock to last for a good 15 to 20 years. If you want to have hypothetical arguments - I am sure that tenants of Wigan Council irrespective of whether they have lived in property for a year or 20 years would NOT be happy to foot a bill for replacement double glazing, doors etc....... so what are you saying this lady deliberately set out to vandalise her lock and door, made it insecure, made her house cold and damp for the fun of it, run up her heating bills trying to counteract the draft ?
JemmyH
Tuesday, January 17, 2012 at 08:14 PMActually, truth advocate, it refers to replacing anything which is broken that wasn't broken at the beginning of the rental term, so far as is reasonably practicable.. ..... I should imagine that something like a door lock would be within the list of things replaceable by the tenant, so long as it was in good order at the onset of the tenancy. .... Some people just expect everything for nothing.
Truth Advocate
Tuesday, January 17, 2012 at 12:49 PMJemmy – an interpretation in English, this means along the lines of keeping a property clean and tidy, no purposeful destroying property or causeing damage and keep the landlord notified of structural maintenance problems that need rectifying and NOT undertaking maintenance nor redesign of the property that the tenant is not way qualified or equipped to undertake, especially not without the permission of the landlord !
JemmyH
Monday, January 16, 2012 at 07:31 PM"There is a positive duty on a tenant to act in a tenant-like manner and it has been held that the tenant has an obligation to do the minor acts necessary to keep premises in a reasonable state." ...... 'Implied Covenant to Repair - section 11 - Landlord and Tenant Act'.
YNWA
Monday, January 16, 2012 at 02:53 PMthank god for Truth Advocate!, my jaw has been dropping whilst reading some of these comments! How arrogant to presume that this lady is a single parent living on benefits with multiple fathers, all os some of these may be true but equally may not, Who do you people think you are to make such judgements. Climb down from your ivory towers. You have no clue about this ladies circumstances, As a tenant she has every right to expect her home to be fit and safe to live in, it is the councils legal responsibility to ensure that it is such and clearly they have failed to do so, why should she be out of pocket. Oh, and why assume that everyone on benefits is a scrounger?, theres a lot of people out of work through no fault of their own, there but for the grace of god etc.
Truth Advocate
Monday, January 16, 2012 at 12:25 PMWow, talk about rabid comments – BVT etc, you are legally wrong and are inciting a can of worms - this is not Laura Proudman’s property, she is not a qualified trades person, on remediation to DIY amateurs loose in the long run can cost alot more; I had to laugh at BVT justification of doing his landlady’s repairs, doubtful he not would be so quick for a bloke - on his reasoning - it’s okay to charge vast amounts of rent, make lots of profit and then fleece tenants for all the maintenance to, while property value increases and the tenant is funding all of it and do the work - no wonder buy-to-let got so popular, or alternatively, stupid commercial contracts the public sector agreed to like Ministry of Defence did (in selling off cheap to a commercial organisation and rent back and being responsible for the maintenance – anyway now it’s uninhabitable, the taxpayer are now paying hug rents for unoccupied barrackshousing etc) ! -------------- Anyway, given the facts, in the article, the council was liable to fix this, no doubt costed into the rental factor, and when the council did bother to attempt to rectify it, they did a shoddy job August 2010 - for a tradesperson this is straightforward - sounds like the door not just the bolt mechanism was shot, a multipoint lock may explain why it needed to be locked and was the only way to keep the door shut ! She has had to put up with worry about insecure doors while she slept, that leaked rain and will be cold and damp to as a result of drafts, and on top of that got burgled, if property is not sufficiently secure – insurance companies will refuse to pay for theft or penalise for claiming even if deemed legitimate. -------------- So BVT not only are you legally wrong, also personally abusive, you do NOT know this lady’s personal circumstances and probably she needs to sue to replace what was lost (stolen). ---------- Oh and btw apparently local report - 40 % of kids in Wigan are living in poverty, so basically they cannot afford to subsidise shoddy workmanship that should have got it right and were paid to do in the first place, contrary to the idiot of idiots - Iain Duncan Smith, making people further destitute does not lift them out of poverty, an inheritance of Labour and Condem’s mismanagement and useless MPs !
Truth Advocate
Monday, January 16, 2012 at 12:24 PMAs to good deeds, DIY or not, an indication of council mentality and response in this article --- www.dailymail.co.uk\news\article-2086400\Council-fines-couple-cleared-away-rubbish-weeds-outside-home-unless-restore-was.html ----- (nb. change slash \ to opposite direction for weblink to work). ------------------ Back to our article and nasty attitudes, the article does NOT say she is 18 yrs old with five kids by five different fathers, on your bigoted reaction - probably why the article finds it necessary to specify she is 24 (nor do her kids do not look very old); on your lack of tact, she could be a war widow etc - nobody even says if she is single or not, so again comment assumptions are derogative to females; given the age we live in brothers, fathers, boyfriends etc are reported not to have basic DIY skills any more to help – nowadays even if they did try, they would probably be prosecuted by the council for making a nail hole in the door in temporarily trying securing it. -------------------- generalising and being nasty to all young mothers are irrelevant to the actual underlying issue – which is the council responsibility - taxpayer or private tenant, this shoddy service is being funded ! and would you lot be as nasty about a frail pensioner or injured war vet, same property, same council liability and responsibilities, even if they are using sub-contractors, no excuse !
finchman
Monday, January 16, 2012 at 08:17 AMOK then,lets bring back Tony Bliar then!
TheTruthFinderGeneral
Sunday, January 15, 2012 at 07:35 PMBring back Mrs Thatcher ? Don't make me laugh, the only person to ever enter the houses of Parliament with honest intentions was Guy Fawkes
Trelawney
Sunday, January 15, 2012 at 09:06 AMThe classic was when she needed an ironing board for number ten and was outraged when she found out they were proposing to spend £22.00 on one. Needless to say they got one cheaper.
Baron Von Thunderclap
Sunday, January 15, 2012 at 08:37 AMI'll think that you will find that Mrs Thatcher was incredibly frugal and in fact had one of the lowest expense sheets in Parliament. in fact, she is one of the few politicians that I can think of who was never in it for herself.
Scarecrow
Sunday, January 15, 2012 at 06:34 AM'Bring back Margaret Thatcher etc' A bit rich seeing that she was one herself with big fat expenses claims in Parliament.
Page 1 of 3
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.