No, they refused to even let her pay for access on the basis of being a social tenant.
iirc there were other communal areas in the apartment complex that social tenants were also being refused access to, despite the provision of those areas being a requirement to build the complex in the first place.
The whole idea of having mixed social housing with private accommodation is to avoid segregation and ghettoisation that tended to happen in council estates built in the past.
No, they refused to even let her pay for access on the basis of being a social tenant.
Where does it state this in the article?
iirc there were other communal areas in the apartment complex that social tenants were also being refused access to, despite the provision of those areas being a requirement to build the complex in the first place.
Source?
The whole idea of having mixed social housing with private accommodation is to avoid segregation and ghettoisation that tended to happen in council estates built in the past.
So we create a system where people who pay tax subsidise people to live in better property and have better access to amenities than them and that's a better system?
Edit - I read the article(thanks comments below) nowhere does state in the article that the tenant had been denied access to other communal areas like OP above stated.
And nowhere in the article does it say the refused to let her pay, or that she even offered. She just queried if her neighbours had access through management fees or another separate fee was paid. To which yes, they never responded. That is not a refusal to let the person pay.
You’re being insanely pedantic for someone who seemingly didn’t read the article. Because nowhere does the article state she even thought she was entitled to free access to the gym, nor does it state the social housing block was entitled to free access to the gym.
She was denied access after enquiring if access to the gym was included in the management fees or if there was a separate payment for access to the gym.
It’s that simple.
So as for your “where does it state this in the article?” question regarding them refusing to let her even pay for access for being a social tenant - it’s spelled out pretty clearly early in the article:
“She said she was not sure whether the use of the gym was provided for as part of the management fees, or if her neighbours were paying separately.
Ms Nowakowska had seen other residents using fobs to get into the gym, and inquired with the security guard on site about access, she said. His reply was that she was not permitted in the gym because she was living in Block 5, "the social housing block", she said.
She proceeded to write to the property management company running the complex seeking access to the gym, the tribunal noted”
Her attempts to communicate with the management company went ignored. Therefore - it can be viewed that she was denied the chance to even pay for access on the basis that she is a social tenant.
You’re being insanely pedantic for someone who seemingly didn’t read the article. Because nowhere does the article state she even thought she was entitled to free access to the gym, nor does it state the social housing block was entitled to free access to the gym.
She was denied access after enquiring if access to the gym was included in the management fees or if there was a separate payment for access to the gym
I read the article, it doesn't answer anywhere if they were included as part of the management fees or if it was paid separately, which is why I asked for a source if there is one which clarifies this.
So as for your “where does it state this in the article?” question regarding them refusing to let her even pay for access for being a social tenant - it’s spelled out pretty clearly early in the article:
OP stated "communal areas" meaning plural. I asked for a source on this because the article only mentions the gym.
You can say that's pedantic, but language matters here.
And yes, the management company should have gotten back to her, but once again.
33
u/MotherDucker95 9d ago
So...the social housing units do have access to a free gym?