with thanks to thisisnorthkensington.wordpress.com

Comments

DAMESATHOME@GMAIL.COM
send the Dame your information, discretion assured.
Comments are welcome but do not necessarily reflect the view of the Dame.
Offensive/inappropriate comments will be deleted and the poster banned.

Saturday, 11 December 2021

CLLR FAULKS; THE WORKARY AND A VERY DAMAGED SMALL BUSINESS





       THE WORKARY PARTNERING WITH THE COUNCIL


Dame, thank you for allowing me to put my position. I thank 'Surveyor' for his lucid analysis of how Council favouritism has more or less put me out of business.

Cllr Faulks makes this claim, "We are here to help support our businesses and self-employed during this unprecedented time"

That claim rings hollow. 

Cllr Faulks was persuaded by this successful entrepreneur, David Fletcher, to use council properties free of Business Rates and at below-market rents. He is a lucky man.....

On the other hand, the Council expects me to run a competitive business whilst paying £25,000 a year in Business Rates and a full market rent for a prime location. Even though I charge very little I am unable to compete with the Council's business partner, The Workary. 

As a result twenty-five of my long term co-working tenants have had to leave. One asked Faulks what he should do... she recommended another co-working office!

Her other bizarre advice was that I should adjust my rates to compete with the Workary...and she is supposed to understand business?

Justin Downes


                   David Fletcher, Owner of the The Workary Group of  Co- Working spaces


Surveyor11 December 2021 at 17:24

I wonder if it would help to look at this dispassionately and to try to look at the numbers, so far as they are available. 

To make a rationally based judgement, we really need some more numbers (like what rent Workary are paying the Council) Perhaps the Dame could ask Councillor Lady Faulks to respond with a reasoned and factual response?
The facts so far as we know them. Mr Downs is saddled with non-domestic rates of about £25,000 a year. 

A hefty burden for a small business. 

The Chelsea Library Complex is rated at £120,000. 

It is many times the size of Mr Downs’ small office of about 120 square metres, but benefits from a favourable treatment as a public library. 

So, it pays non-domestic rates of about £60,000 a year. 

Less than two and a half times the rates that Mr Downes pays for a building many, many times larger. 

It would appear that the Workary is not paying rates at all. 

Why is this? It is because public libraries benefit from a special rating concession. The Council seems to have passed this benefit on to the Workary. 

If anyone wants to look this up, see the Rating Manual for Valuation Officers Section 6 Part 3, Section 620. 

This concession has caused problems when a local authority, for example, delegates the Library function. 

In this case, the Serviced Office provided by Workary, should have been assessed by the Valuation Officer as a separate hereditament and as a commercial enterprise. 

You would have expected the Council to inform the Valuation Officer of the situation and to arrange for a separate entry to go into the List. 

If this has not been done, it should be corrected as soon as possible, and back rates paid either by the Council or the Workary Business. 

I am not sure what happens at Workary’s other branches, but the situation is likely to be the same.
So, what about the Workary and why is the Council giving them what appears to be such a ‘sweetheart’ deal, that is putting the competition out of business? 

The pitch is that it is offering space to young entrepreneurs starting out in life and to not-for-profit organisations. 

This is a fiction. 

The Workary is a highly successful large business established by David Fletcher some few years ago. 

It has numerous branches and is far from the ‘pitch’ for if you look at its website it boasts that its services are available to people who are part of big companies, freelancers or just getting started (comes last in the blurb!) 

So, it looks as if the Council are living in a parallel universe and totally unwilling to accept that it is subsidising a commercial business that is putting its own local businesses out of business. This is what appears to be the position, but please Dame, ask Councillor Lady Faulks to respond.

22 comments:

  1. This the most extraordinary of stories. Which officer permitted this?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Can we expect the Council to 'partner'and subsidise other businesses with a view to damaging local business. The Workary is not even run from the Borough

    ReplyDelete
  3. Brompton Resident11 December 2021 at 22:15

    Dame. I am sure you know but Workary has additional branches at Notting Hill and Brompton Libraries. Presumably the same favourable deals! I can't see that planning consent was ever applied for change of use. Quite careless really for a local authority! I think these are 24 hour operations. I wonder how many complaints there have been.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If ever there was a case for Mr Downes not to continue pay BR it is this

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Downes needs to take his case to the Local Government Ombudsman. Its a pain to handle all the forms and explain the situation. But they do take complaints seriously. And a judgement against the silly Councillor will make a good story for the press.

      Delete
    2. Downes also needs to contact the Competition Markets Authority. Stir the pot. One of the complaints will be upheld and Cllr Faulks will be exposed

      Delete
    3. Thanks for the advice. Unless RBK&C do something to right a gross wrong I will do all of this and much more. For the last 2 years my tenants and I have had to fight through COVID 19 and Work From Home and then floods. All the time The Workary has had Council subsidised support.

      Delete
  5. Workary is the trading name of Wimbletech Community Interest Company. Sounds like a charity but of course it isn't. I am surprised that as a CIC it can involve itself in letting space to multinationals, but there you are. I am sure the Council is very impressed by dealing with a CIC. Thinks it is almost a charity. But as the sole owner David Fletcher is not likely to be on the breadline. As the owner he is allowed to collect dividends within a limit and can pay himself a salary. My employer (also a CIC) discloses its profit and loss account to the Council. Has the Council ever asked to see Wimbletech's Profit and Loss Account? Interesting that Wimbletech elects not to file a profit and loss account. It is of course perfectly entitled to do this, but why would it want to?

    ReplyDelete
  6. You Could Not Make It Up12 December 2021 at 06:46

    The central argument in all of this is that Cllr False does not understand business. She does not understand profit and loss. She does not understand competition. She does not understand a level playing field. In short, she does not understand what a market based economy is all about. Nor is she able to handle simple arithmetic. For Cllr False, 2 + 2 does not equal 4. It is whatever she feels like at the moment.

    All of this is quaint. Standard Sloane Ranger stuff. The problem is that dizzy Campbell has put this dud in charge of business!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
  7. I see that Vivian Thompson Property Ltd operates out of what seems to be a very expensive private house in Portobello Rd. No issue with Business Rates for Viv and Cat...lucky gals!

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Whilst there may be a considerable anger towards Lady Faulks can we please all refrain from personal attacks on her? It is now a matter for the Council to investigate and take the appropriate action. Lady Faulks should no longer be expected to be involved in matters of a legal and technical nature. So, please, kind readers no more personalised attacks but focus on the Council for ever allowing this situation to exist.

    ReplyDelete
  10. https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09017486/filing-history David Fletcher is the sole director of Wimbletech CIC. He can pay himself a salary and pay dividends to himself. Sounds a smart way to sail under the onerous regulation of a charity. How much has he paid himself by way of salary and dividends. Perhaps Downs should set up as CIC. They say a picture is worth 1000 words. That would apply to Mr Fletcher

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thank you for giving prominence to my posting. There needs to be an urgent enquiry about what is happening with these serviced offices. Are these offices lawful, what is the position about rates and planning consent?

    Above all is it right for the Council to put local businesses out of business by subsidising the competition. This is not a new problem for the Libraries. There have been other cases of what many people consider unfair competition from our libraries.

    ReplyDelete
  12. What a disgrace!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Shameful that someone could have agreed this. Was die diligence carried out on Fletcher

    ReplyDelete
  14. Is Downes a descendant of Downes, the regicide and friend of Oliver Cromwell? Downes was a very greedy man who died in the Tower

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not greedy at all. Very religious and did try to save the life of the king

      Delete
    2. This comment has been made before - presumably by the same person. It is completely ridiculous and irrelevant - what possible connection can there be between oneself and one's gggggggggggrandfather?

      Delete
  15. It seems it’s definitely council mates that get helped not the normal business. Cllr Faulks and her colleagues are busy trying to get Business groups in areas to form BID's, and that means if a majority vote for it you all have to join like it or not, well you get charged a supplement on your business rates whether you join in or not

    We might ask why they are so keen, well that much is obvious, its because some business groups have received money from developers Section 106 money, just the sort of thing it was for, but council having already not ring fenced the cash and kept it in their general account do not want to give it to such groups to help them gain business and improve the area they want them to pay for it themselves even though they cannot afford it. What plans they have for the Section 106 cash is anyones business ? ( or not as the case may be )

    RBKC at its finest

    ReplyDelete

Comments are your responsibility. Anyone posting inappropriate comments shall have their comment removed and will be banned from posting in future. Your IP address may also be recorded and reported. Persistent abuse shall mean comments will be severely restricted in future.