A London council job advertisement sparks concerns
about the true motives of creating a private landlords’ register. Leading many to question whether planning enforcement is morphing into an
out-of-control profit-driven abuse of process. TheBigRetort...
Understanding POCA
The Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) 2002 allows authorities to recover funds obtained through illegal activity. The Asset Recovery Incentivisation Scheme (ARIS) financially rewards authorities with a significant 37.5% of the value recovered under the POCA scheme. While POCA serves a valuable purpose in the fight against criminality, concerns arise when such a significant financial gain appears to be the driving force behind prosecutions, as evidenced by Lewisham Council's revealing job advertisement we unearthed for a new enforcement officer.
Red flags raised by enforcement job advertisement
The job advertisement for a "Private Sector Housing Fraud and Intelligence Officer" raises red flags. Remarkably, the ad explicitly states that the successful candidate should "...ensure prosecutions are successful and maximise income for the borough in respect of proceeds of crime."
The focus on financial gain contradicts the Code for Crown Prosecutors, which demands prosecutions be based solely on public interest, not a council's income.
The curious case of Kevin Bottomley: Unintended consequences?
.jpg)
In 2010, an Appeal Court ruling equated breaches of planning enforcement orders to criminal activities. This ruling may have had unintended consequences, as demonstrated in the case of Kevin Bottomley, a long-time shopkeeper and landlord running K J Building Supplies. Last year, Bottomley, based in Loampit Hill, Lewisham, faced closure due to a seemingly curious planning enforcement action.
Despite years of openly trading sand and cement
from the side of his shop, a practice previously tolerated by the council,
Bottomley found himself targeted for planning enforcement, possibly - or now it may appear - for
targeted income. Kevin is the landlord of the store's new owner.
Court case sets precedent
A Court of Appeal case, Wokingham Borough Council v. Scott and others[2019], established a strong precedent for ensuring ethical enforcement practices. The court ruled that a council's desire for financial gain through POCA should not influence its decision to prosecute.
This case directly
addresses Lewisham Council's questionable tactics in the Bottomley case.
Notably, whilst the store eventually received planning permission, the
prosecution still continues. Kevin Bottomley, though now retired, is the "landlord" of the store's new owner..?
Call for investigation and ethical enforcement practices
A full, independent investigation into Lewisham Council's use of POCA and ARIS is necessary to ensure ethical enforcement practices. Mayor Brenda Dacres must address these concerns and prioritise the welfare of the people, as outlined in Lewisham's borough motto, "Salus Populi Suprema Lex."
We urge Mayor Dacres to reject POCA profiteering and prioritise ethical enforcement practices within Lewisham Council in order to protect private landlords from POCA profiteering.
Continued Investigation
TheBigRetort is commited to investigating this story further and reporting any future developments.
