Skip to content

Allegations Of Social Cleansing As Disabled Man Set To Be Evicted From Sweets Way Estate

September 24, 2015

A disabled man sat in his barricaded home last night and told of his despair at losing a High Court case, which means he can now be evicted without notice from his north London home to make way for a redevelopment dubbed as “social cleansing” by protesters.

Mostafa Aliverdipour, 49, who walks with a stick and occasionally uses a wheelchair, said he was “upset, angry and more nervous than words can say” about his imminent eviction from the Sweets Way estate in Whetstone, Barnet, the site of a long protest by activists to prevent its redevelopment, and a cause celebre of the comedian Russell Brand. He is the last of 140 private and social housing tenants who are being moved out.

Mr Aliverdipour said:  “The poor are being made to move out so the rich can move in. It’s not human.”

Sweets Way was a scene of disorder yesterday as High Court Enforcement officers, backed by police, removed dozens of squatters.

Footage filmed yesterday afternoon showed protesters standing on roofs being removed with cherry pickers. A video on social media showed one being carried away by six High Court Enforcement officers. As the evictions took place Mr Aliverdipour lost his case in the High Court that means he has no right to notice of eviction. Later as he spoke to The Independent protesters manned barricades of furniture, chipboard and shopping trolleys outside.

Conflict between the protesters and bailiffs acting on behalf of Annington Property Ltd seemed inevitable, and Mr Aliverdipour’s son Ash, 23, said last night: “We are ready to do whatever we have to to resist this eviction.”

Samir Dathi, 37, one of those on the barricade, said: “When you evict an entire housing estate, it’s social cleansing: what else can you call it?” The battle for Sweets Way began in July last year, when residents were told they would have to move because Annington had permission to build 288 homes.

As they vacated their homes this year, activists moved to protest. They claimed that with Barnet Council defining “affordable” as up to 80 per cent of market rents, the 59 “affordable” units would be beyond the reach of most, including many of those who lived there. Mr Aliverdipour, who has a damaged spine caused by lifting patients as a healthcare assistant and a car crash, was given a home on the estate by Barnet Council last November.

This was supposed to be temporary but, he claims: “Barnet have not offered me anything appropriate. They have offered me a three-floor home which would be inaccessible for me.”

Mr Aliverdipour, who receives disability living allowance and lives with his daughter Atena, five, and sons Ash, 23 and Hoss, 21, said: “I don’t know where I can go after this. I am very nervous.”

Annington has argued that it could have kept the estate empty after the MoD ceased using it to house Armed Forces personnel. Instead, it claims, it allowed the estate to be used by social housing tenants for the six years before it began redevelopment “to help solve the housing shortage”.

It says that after winning planning permission for the new development, it gave tenants far longer than the six-month notice required by law, and claims it cannot be held responsible for how “affordable housing” is defined.

3 Comments leave one →
  1. September 24, 2015 12:45 pm

    Reblogged this on perfectlyfadeddelusions.

  2. shaunt permalink
    September 24, 2015 2:59 pm

    Purchased from MOD 6 years ago. That would be 2009, during the nadir of the property crash, when house prices where at rock bottom and mortages could not be obtained by almost anyone. So moved social housing tenants to obtain rental income, until the price of housing is at its highest and choose to develop. Good intentions my lefty-foot. Anyway as their plan has now been put back by around 18 months, it could be that by the time the development is completed the housing market may have crashed and they will loose money. Of course they will then become charitable again by offering the development for social housing, as may be not enough house purchasers in the market.
    shaunt

Trackbacks

  1. Allegations Of Social Cleansing As Disabled Man Set To Be Evicted From Sweets Way Estate | Same Difference | sdbast

What are you thinking?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: