The Aziz case highlights the woeful state of regulation. From hospitals to social services, police to building control, regulations on safeguarding children (Rotherham), building safety (Grenfell), media bias (Ofcom/GB News) are, at best, parking tickets, and in general, optional.
There is simply no accountability. The chances of any regulation breach resulting is prosecution are small. The punishments for doing so, ineffectively small to deter potential offenders.
We simply must impose much more accountability. Breaches that threaten life and limb should result in huge fines, invocation of the Proceeds of Crime act and bans on having control over companies or institutions. It is only the threat of ruin that will make these avaricious oligarchs think twice.
You're literally more likely to be punished for using a mobile whilst driving (stupid, dangerous) than you are for allowing people to sleep in a flammable building for a decade, having done everything possible to avoid responsibility for your decision.
I agree. This is why I've become cynic about the gleaming new housing bill with supposed tenant protections that became effective last month: I'm glad we finally have it, but after all the delays, do any councils have actual budget to enforce it if/when needed? Do they have the back-ups needed (like emergency housing for tenants caught up in consequences of irresponsible landlords)?
Honestly I think they should be seizing the property of these types of landlords, and especially in the case of Aziz. He has consistently shown that he can't have safe properties, and dodged paying taxes in the UK for years.
I hate that this horrible 'man' owns so much of central London. It's being completely gutted of its charm.
Even without seizing them, we can make the HMOs he seems to wish to change many of them in to, simply by having local authorities block permission, and more importantly, boycotting the property
Yet again, London Centric delivers. Yet again, Asif Aziz is at the center. Quelle surprise.
It is the same old story and the contrast exposed here is staggering. Grenfell occurred nine years ago, prompting a wave of legislation supposedly designed to make high-density buildings safe. Yet, while thousands of ordinary leaseholders are being held hostage by bills running into the tens of thousands to remediate cladding, this major property developer was able to evade accountability and keep an intolerable fire risk hidden in plain sight for nearly a decade.
As somebody who manages a shared freehold in London, dealing with the fire inspection industry has increasingly felt like (for the rest fo the property industry) paying a financial ransom—this is a sector that has effectively turned post-Grenfell safety compliance into a lucrative cash cow. But while shared freeholders are squeezed for every penny by rigid, box-ticking surveyors, a billionaire developer can simply demand and receive multiple rewrites to scrub a draft report of its caveats and warnings.
For me, the real next question here is the works of Clarke Banks. If they compromised their independence on this high-rise building for Azis, how many other buildings have they done the same for? What is their professional integrity? The entire property sector is a self-regulated industry and this, excuse the pun, is a smoking gun.
LondonCentric keeps publishing exposés like this. What we need now is a politician—whether it is the Mayor of London, a local London MP, or the Housing Minister—to step up and treat the evidence uncovered by London Centric as an actionable brief. It is time for a formal inquiry into the fire safety inspection industry, a complete audit of Clarke Banks' historic reports, and genuine statutory penalties for developers who manipulate safety data for economic gain.
Completely agree. What's more, I feel like much of our recent leglislation that has been passed feels, with hindsight, to be poor. Its as if the think-tanks and policy groups have encouraged the new regs to be written in such a way that the ultimate benefactors are not the us, the people. This is what annoys me.
I saw two Wayve (which I have been calling Waymo in my head, victim of the lapsus) vehicles yesterday, in two different parts of the city. One of them was on the move with a driver behind the wheel, and the other was parked, though the weird and slightly obnoxious equipment on its roof and around it was somehow still active and loud. It was empty, though a bag of sweets and a bottle of soda were traces of a probable human driver, unless self-driving cars need a sugar boost nowadays. I see them quite often around, which I'm not sure how to feel about (or how taxi/Uber/etc drivers do either).
Did you like on the 'right' side of the vehicle, though? - I noticed that the ones I spotted, with a driver behind the wheel, where all left-hand drive vehicles...
A few points I'd like to add regarding the Wembley Ibis:
1. They could have already resolved this; yes, this would have been costly, but the nearby Wembley International Hotel managed just fine: Years ago, it had been given a facelift with cladding, but when that cladding was deemed unsafe, they urgently removed it. This left the building looking even more unsightly then before, but at least the hotel could continue to operate (and honour reservations already made). In my memory it took a couple years before the current (safe) cladding was installed.
2. Wembley Ibis's owners and operators obviously knew its cladding was (likely) unsafe long before its unsafety was proven, hence the creative steps they appear to have taken to avoid the hotel's closure last year. They probably knew the building lacked in fire safety when they made money off paying guests, and they likely knew it in the early 2020s when it was tempararily closed for guest bookings and stripped of any and all comforts in order for it to house refugees and/or other unhoused people at a higher occupancy than they would have had through regular hotel bookings. My stomach drops at the potential human disaster that could have occurred.
3. If money was issue, this is has been a clear shot in the foot: As a local, I can't remember a busier summer events season at Wembley Stadium than this year's. Every local hotel that did take their fire safety seriously before is now reaping the benefits while Wembley Ibis stands idle, closed.
I watched one of the meetings (the 2nd one) and it was quite chaotic. The LDs supporting the proposed Green administration but then each important vote aside from that seemed to have a different coalition. Sometimes the LDs/Greens would vote together, sometimes Labour would support/propose an amendment to a Green motion, where the latter would vote against it but the other two would vote it through then the Greens / LDs would vote through the motion.
I didn't really understand much of it but certainly not a coalition. Just an uneasy set of temporary voting coalitions. Think it'll be a fraught 4 years!
Re "UK's unreformed property laws"(UnReformed surely -ed!) .....in Scotland it is possible to access the Register of Sassines(for a fee, naturellement!) and(usually )find out who owns what.
Re Lambeth's Green leader...does he think us voters are "green"?(clearly)....however, in Scotland we all already have much experience of the Greens in government - why bother voting for a bunch of nutters, when you can vote for fruitcakes instead(complete with their very expensive coffee machines!)
Sadly I've moaned about this before.
The Aziz case highlights the woeful state of regulation. From hospitals to social services, police to building control, regulations on safeguarding children (Rotherham), building safety (Grenfell), media bias (Ofcom/GB News) are, at best, parking tickets, and in general, optional.
There is simply no accountability. The chances of any regulation breach resulting is prosecution are small. The punishments for doing so, ineffectively small to deter potential offenders.
We simply must impose much more accountability. Breaches that threaten life and limb should result in huge fines, invocation of the Proceeds of Crime act and bans on having control over companies or institutions. It is only the threat of ruin that will make these avaricious oligarchs think twice.
You're literally more likely to be punished for using a mobile whilst driving (stupid, dangerous) than you are for allowing people to sleep in a flammable building for a decade, having done everything possible to avoid responsibility for your decision.
I agree. This is why I've become cynic about the gleaming new housing bill with supposed tenant protections that became effective last month: I'm glad we finally have it, but after all the delays, do any councils have actual budget to enforce it if/when needed? Do they have the back-ups needed (like emergency housing for tenants caught up in consequences of irresponsible landlords)?
Yes. We have a lot of rules that we can't actually enforce with current resources.
Honestly I think they should be seizing the property of these types of landlords, and especially in the case of Aziz. He has consistently shown that he can't have safe properties, and dodged paying taxes in the UK for years.
I hate that this horrible 'man' owns so much of central London. It's being completely gutted of its charm.
Even without seizing them, we can make the HMOs he seems to wish to change many of them in to, simply by having local authorities block permission, and more importantly, boycotting the property
Yet again, London Centric delivers. Yet again, Asif Aziz is at the center. Quelle surprise.
It is the same old story and the contrast exposed here is staggering. Grenfell occurred nine years ago, prompting a wave of legislation supposedly designed to make high-density buildings safe. Yet, while thousands of ordinary leaseholders are being held hostage by bills running into the tens of thousands to remediate cladding, this major property developer was able to evade accountability and keep an intolerable fire risk hidden in plain sight for nearly a decade.
As somebody who manages a shared freehold in London, dealing with the fire inspection industry has increasingly felt like (for the rest fo the property industry) paying a financial ransom—this is a sector that has effectively turned post-Grenfell safety compliance into a lucrative cash cow. But while shared freeholders are squeezed for every penny by rigid, box-ticking surveyors, a billionaire developer can simply demand and receive multiple rewrites to scrub a draft report of its caveats and warnings.
For me, the real next question here is the works of Clarke Banks. If they compromised their independence on this high-rise building for Azis, how many other buildings have they done the same for? What is their professional integrity? The entire property sector is a self-regulated industry and this, excuse the pun, is a smoking gun.
LondonCentric keeps publishing exposés like this. What we need now is a politician—whether it is the Mayor of London, a local London MP, or the Housing Minister—to step up and treat the evidence uncovered by London Centric as an actionable brief. It is time for a formal inquiry into the fire safety inspection industry, a complete audit of Clarke Banks' historic reports, and genuine statutory penalties for developers who manipulate safety data for economic gain.
And here is the rub (see my similar comment). Our politicians pass laws but fall to hold people to account. Something is very broken
Completely agree. What's more, I feel like much of our recent leglislation that has been passed feels, with hindsight, to be poor. Its as if the think-tanks and policy groups have encouraged the new regs to be written in such a way that the ultimate benefactors are not the us, the people. This is what annoys me.
Broken? This is the system working exactly as intended.
Fair point. I turned my cynicism down to 8 for a bit. Normal service now resumed
I wish I could like this comment x 1000.
"Due to the UK’s unreformed property transparency laws, the owner is obscured by a trust and we’ll never know who stumped up the cash."
How is this not reformed in 2026? Different rules for the dirty wealthy.
I want more on the secret olive story that you are quite clearly sitting on😂
and an update on the Subway cornichon shortage while we're at it :)
I saw two Wayve (which I have been calling Waymo in my head, victim of the lapsus) vehicles yesterday, in two different parts of the city. One of them was on the move with a driver behind the wheel, and the other was parked, though the weird and slightly obnoxious equipment on its roof and around it was somehow still active and loud. It was empty, though a bag of sweets and a bottle of soda were traces of a probable human driver, unless self-driving cars need a sugar boost nowadays. I see them quite often around, which I'm not sure how to feel about (or how taxi/Uber/etc drivers do either).
You'll mainly see Wayve around Kings Cross, etc, as their depot is around the back of egg nightclub.
Also, just much more subtle than Waymo, who have got for the full 'techno hat laser' setup on their vehicles.
They park up to swap safety drivers just off the Archway Road in Highgate most days.
Did you like on the 'right' side of the vehicle, though? - I noticed that the ones I spotted, with a driver behind the wheel, where all left-hand drive vehicles...
A few points I'd like to add regarding the Wembley Ibis:
1. They could have already resolved this; yes, this would have been costly, but the nearby Wembley International Hotel managed just fine: Years ago, it had been given a facelift with cladding, but when that cladding was deemed unsafe, they urgently removed it. This left the building looking even more unsightly then before, but at least the hotel could continue to operate (and honour reservations already made). In my memory it took a couple years before the current (safe) cladding was installed.
2. Wembley Ibis's owners and operators obviously knew its cladding was (likely) unsafe long before its unsafety was proven, hence the creative steps they appear to have taken to avoid the hotel's closure last year. They probably knew the building lacked in fire safety when they made money off paying guests, and they likely knew it in the early 2020s when it was tempararily closed for guest bookings and stripped of any and all comforts in order for it to house refugees and/or other unhoused people at a higher occupancy than they would have had through regular hotel bookings. My stomach drops at the potential human disaster that could have occurred.
3. If money was issue, this is has been a clear shot in the foot: As a local, I can't remember a busier summer events season at Wembley Stadium than this year's. Every local hotel that did take their fire safety seriously before is now reaping the benefits while Wembley Ibis stands idle, closed.
Speaking of olives was there ever an update on the Subway cornichon shortage? Why they couldn't just use gherkins is beyond me...
Pret. And yes I have doubts.
I apologise for getting the chain wrong (just shows my anti Subway bias)
No coalition in Lambeth!
I watched one of the meetings (the 2nd one) and it was quite chaotic. The LDs supporting the proposed Green administration but then each important vote aside from that seemed to have a different coalition. Sometimes the LDs/Greens would vote together, sometimes Labour would support/propose an amendment to a Green motion, where the latter would vote against it but the other two would vote it through then the Greens / LDs would vote through the motion.
I didn't really understand much of it but certainly not a coalition. Just an uneasy set of temporary voting coalitions. Think it'll be a fraught 4 years!
Well done for becoming part of literary culture
Re "UK's unreformed property laws"(UnReformed surely -ed!) .....in Scotland it is possible to access the Register of Sassines(for a fee, naturellement!) and(usually )find out who owns what.
Re Lambeth's Green leader...does he think us voters are "green"?(clearly)....however, in Scotland we all already have much experience of the Greens in government - why bother voting for a bunch of nutters, when you can vote for fruitcakes instead(complete with their very expensive coffee machines!)
soz.. that was e reply to Ben 12h ago!... but re Wembley Ibis...dont Ibis have anything to say?
Welcome to the future functioning(or not!) of politics....for further insight - look across the Channel, where the futur is already here!