Ruth Cooke - Crook?

This week, I’ve received multiple contacts from GreenSquareAccord residents who have received a cold and worrying update; their homes are likely to be sold off. This is because GreenSquareAccord is now forced to sell properties they can no longer afford to maintain. Several factors have contributed to this situation.

GreenSquareAccord is in dire financial straits, drowning in debt and struggling to make ends meet. To cover its financial obligations, it's been and is planning to sell off some of its properties and use the cash to cover expenses and invest in energy efficiency. But here's the catch; while they expect to make £55 million from property sales by 2026, they only managed £12 million in 2023. Relying so heavily on property sales is a risky move. If they can't offload properties quickly or at the desired prices, they'll find themselves in even deeper trouble.

Yes, they've managed to stick to their budget for 2024 and have some sales lined up for 2025. But let's be honest – having to sell off a significant portion of your assets just to stay afloat doesn't inspire confidence in their financial management.

We can draw parallels between the unsustainable nature of Ponzi schemes and the challenges faced by GreenSquareAccord and its residents. Just as a Ponzi scheme relies on a continuous influx of new investors' money, housing associations like GreenSquareAccord depend on revenue from newly built homes to maintain and improve existing housing stock. However, challenges such as an unsuccessful merger and the inability to build enough new homes have left residents in a situation akin to a Ponzi scheme. The excess of older housing stock in need of extensive repairs has created a financial burden that cannot be sustained without sufficient revenue from new developments.

This mirrors the collapse of a Ponzi scheme when it becomes impossible to recruit enough new investors to sustain operations.

Aren’t Ponzi schemes illegal?

The short answer is yes, Ponzi schemes are indeed illegal. They're considered fraudulent schemes that deceive investors by promising high returns with little to no risk. Just like GreenSquareAccord, Ponzi schemes rely on a constant influx of funds from new investors to pay returns to earlier investors. However, unlike legitimate investments, Ponzi schemes don't generate actual profits – they're simply a house of cards waiting to collapse.

So, if Ponzi schemes are illegal, why isn't GreenSquareAccord being held accountable for its actions? Well, the key difference lies in intent and legality. While Ponzi schemes are intentionally deceptive and designed to defraud investors, GreenSquareAccord's situation appears to be more of a financial mismanagement issue rather than deliberate fraud.

That being said, the parallels between GreenSquareAccord's financial struggles and the unsustainable nature of Ponzi schemes should raise red flags. It's a stark reminder of the importance of transparency, accountability, and ethical financial practices, especially in organisations entrusted with providing essential services like housing.

Not Illegal, Just Immoral Then?

So, it's not technically illegal, but it certainly raises questions about morals. Let's take a journey through the GreenSquareAccord machine to see just how their operations stack up.

GreenSquareAccord, through various partnerships, builds new homes – a process supported by government incentives, grants, and external funding. Some of these homes are sold privately, some become shared ownership, and others end up as social housing. So, in the first leg of the journey, we see this not-for-profit organisation profiting, albeit indirectly, for their 'funding partners.’

The next part of the journey involves GreenSquareAccord charging rent and service fees to maintain these homes. However, as many residents can attest, GreenSquareAccord often fails to uphold its end of the bargain. Residents find themselves in unsafe homes, waiting endlessly for repairs, and often resorting to avenues like the Housing Ombudsman for support. Even then, there's no guarantee that their housing issues will be addressed.

What makes this even more troubling is the consistent year-on-year increase in service charges, despite the lack of maintenance.

Having neglected these homes, GreenSquareAccord then seeks to offload the properties they deem too expensive to fix, putting cash back on their books.

So, at every step of the journey, GreenSquareAccord profits – from construction to the eventual sale or collapse of properties. While they may have provided much-needed housing, they've also, to a certain extent, exploited this need at every turn.

Should We Turn A Blind Eye?

Looking at the reality of GreenSquareAccord's financial struggles and the resulting sale of properties, we must consider and address the pressing concerns that lie ahead. Among these concerns is the fate of the properties being sold off, particularly those with energy performance ratings of C and below and in need of significant investments to meet modern standards.

Who will become the new owners of these properties? Will they fall into the hands of opportunistic slum landlords looking to profit from renting out substandard accommodations? Or will they be acquired by another housing provider, inevitably faced with the financial burden of bringing these flats up to habitable standards?

The repercussions of these property sales extend beyond mere financial transactions. They have the potential to significantly impact local communities and the well-being of future residents.

Properties in disrepair not only contribute to blight within neighbourhoods but also pose risks to the health and safety of residents. Furthermore, the influx of properties into the market in need of substantial renovations may further strain already limited resources within the housing sector. This could exacerbate existing housing shortages and deepen inequalities in access to safe and affordable housing.

Morally Bankrupt?

Working for a morally bankrupt boss can have profound effects on staff morale and well-being, particularly in organisations like GreenSquareAccord where residents' concerns are repeatedly ignored or inadequately addressed. The ongoing drudgery of facing the same issues reported time and time again takes a toll on staff members.

Imagine being in the position of having to reassure residents that their concerns have been raised, knowing all too well that these issues will likely go unresolved. It's a disheartening cycle that breeds frustration, disillusionment, and a sense of powerlessness among staff members.

The emotional burden of continuously confronting the gap between the organisation's stated values and its actual practices can be overwhelming. Staff members may experience feelings of guilt, frustration, and even ethical conflict as they grapple with the discrepancy between what they believe is right and the actions of their employer, a reason behind their staff retention issues, perhaps…

Moreover, the constant exposure to residents' dissatisfaction and disappointment can erode staff morale and motivation. It becomes increasingly challenging to maintain a sense of professional pride and commitment when confronted with the stark reality of systemic shortcomings and neglect.

Beyond the immediate emotional impact, the persistent strain of working in such an environment can have long-term consequences for staff well-being. Chronic stress, anxiety, and burnout are common outcomes of sustained exposure to morally challenging situations and organisational dysfunction. 

Staff members may find themselves caught in a bind, torn between their desire to advocate for residents and the fear of reprisal or professional repercussions for speaking out against management. This internal conflict further exacerbates the toll on their mental and emotional health.

The negative impacts won’t just be felt by the frontline staff but also by some members of the leadership team, the question we must ask is, are they implicit in their involvement or blissfully unaware that the remit of their role is to fail rather than provide a consistent, reliable, and acceptable level of service?

This is difficult to clearly ascertain, and we must expect senior and longterm employees to be in fear of losing their jobs and lucrative pay packages. We have previously explored the culture at GreenSquareAccord, and have called attention to the negative aspects as reported on external websites such as Reed and Indeed. Try to be mindful of ones clearly written by the award nominated GSA Comms Team!

In November 2022, we were made aware of multiple fire issues affecting a block of flats that GreenSquareAccord charged to provide service management, this was shared with us in the form of a Fire Risk Assessment conducted on 9th September 2022. It seemed clear that although GreenSquareAccord had charged for a service, the findings in the report certainly suggested that they had again fallen woefully short of being able or willing to provide the service charged for, in this case the safety of twelve vulnerable residents.

We shared these issues with local leaders, an act that was described by Julianne Britton (Customer Service Director) in writing as “Referred a third party complaint to a local MP which you knew, or should reasonably have known, was demonstrably untrue” yet this is another example of a building that we believe GreenSquareAccord have since removed from their portfolio.

So does GreenSquareAccord Customer Service Director believe what she writes when she states ‘demonstrably untrue’? It’s difficult to know for sure; however, in a legal document presented to court by GreenSquareAccord, she stated that “I find the Defendant’s (that would be me) conduct to try to “appeal to my better nature” insulting and belittling. He considers my actions are based on the instructions of others and that I do not and will not stand by them’.

From a legally binding document, assuming that Ms. Britton would not commit perjury, we can assume that she is aware of this practice and as such this behaviour is accepted as the norm, it is amongst the leadership team at least, systemic.

What is the Human Cost?

The selling of properties has hit families who have called a Wiltshire village home for generations, as reported in The Swindon Advisor on Christmas Eve 2023. Many of these vulnerable residents, residing in Clyffe Pypard, just five miles from Royal Wootton Bassett, were blindsided by the news, learning about the sale from their neighbours rather than from GreenSquareAccord, another example of GSA’s dismissal communication abilities.

While GreenSquareAccord has made assurances that they will rehouse the affected tenants, this offers little comfort, considering there is no other social housing available in the village. Consequently, residents face the grim prospect of being uprooted from their community.

Parish councillor Chris Rickett shed light on the plight of these residents, including a man in his 90s and a family with a wheelchair-bound son, who have made adaptations to their homes to accommodate their needs. Now, they face the upheaval of relocation.

The decision to sell the homes stems from their perceived substandard condition, compounded by GreenSquareAccord’s failure to adequately maintain them. As Mr. Rickett emphasised, these tenants have been diligent in requesting maintenance work to no avail, indicating a breach of duty of care on the part of GreenSquareAccord.

The manner in which the tenants were informed of the sale further exacerbates the distressing situation. While the first couple received formal notification from GreenSquareAccord, the remaining households were left in the dark until being informed by their neighbours, receiving belated letters two weeks later. With no official sale date provided, uncertainty looms over their future.

Among those affected are individuals deeply rooted in their community, including a resident of 65 years and a Ukrainian mother who sought refuge in the village with her children. Their displacement underscores the human cost of GreenSquareAccord morally questionable decision.

In response, GreenSquareAccord cites the unsustainable level of investment required to bring the homes up to standard, justifying the sale. While they pledge to assist tenants in finding alternative housing options and offer compensation for the disruption, the damage to the affected residents' lives and the fabric of the community remains irreparable.

Elderly residents in Telford are also facing significant upheaval as the decision has been made to close the Farcroft care home in North Road, Wellington. Operated by GreenSquareAccord, this care home provides essential accommodation and care services for up to 41 older individuals, including those with dementia and associated conditions.

Residents currently residing in Farcroft, a mix of self-paying individuals and those funded by Telford & Wrekin Council, are now confronted with the daunting prospect of relocation.

In addition to the residents' concerns, employees at the care home have been informed that their positions are at risk of redundancy, compounding the distressing situation.

As reported in the Shropshire Star on 12th May 2023, a spokesperson for Telford & Wrekin Council acknowledged the closure, stating, "We have received notification from GreenSquareAccord regarding their difficult decision to close down Farcroft care home in the borough.”

So the human cost of GreenSquareAccord’s inability to manage its stock is very real, affecting some of the most vulnerable within our communities.

So, is Ruth Cooke a crook?

No, she is able to act in such a way because she is permitted to behave in this manner. The desperate need for new homes seems to provide a shield, allowing individuals like her (and likely many others) to operate unchecked, as long as they don’t get caught with their hands in the till. 

This behaviour will continue unabated until those responsible for the failures are held to account.

The sale of properties by GreenSquareAccord amidst its financial challenges raises questions about the ethics of their operations and the implications for communities and individuals.

While not illegal, the practices employed by GreenSquareAccord should be viewed as morally questionable, especially considering the impact on residents, our communities, housing quality, and their own duty of care.

With a turnover last year of £214m, and with support from the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund totalling £12m, we must ask - who has squandered these resources, and why are we still permitting them to build new homes? Have they not already inflicted enough damage on the very communities they purport to support?

Thank you to the multiple sources who have shared their knowledge and firsthand experiences that have contributed to much of this post. Staying silent is difficult, while speaking out takes courage.

If you would like to be heard, albeit anonymously, please let us know. We treat all communications with strict confidentiality. - contact@greensquareaccordresidents.co.uk