Irvine tenants throw out charity move

Jan 29 2010 by Lex Brown, Irvine Herald

SHAREHOLDER tenants left their landlords with a bloody nose after plans to turn Irvine Housing Association into a charity were kicked out.

The association failed to get the necessary 75 per cent majority to push through the move.

They required 138 votes at a special meeting in the Menzies Hotel, Irvine, last week.

But just 56 members thought the move was a good idea. The association said there were substantial advantages to the charitable status move.

They claimed it would unlock new sources of funding as well as saving them up to £40,000 in tax.

The rebels claim several former chairmen, board members and one former chief executive were against the move.

Eileen Kerr, chairwoman of Pennyburn Tenants’ and Residents’ Association and a shareholder, said: “We let the association know in no uncertain terms how much we are against their current actions.

“This only confirms the strong opposition tenants, residents and shareholders have been expressing about Irvine Housing Association.

“They must surely now start listening and stop trying to pull the wool over our eyes, especially in relation to this takeover by Riverside from Liverpool.”

But the association denied the crushing defeat would scupper the proposed merger with Riverside.

Chairman Tommy Farrell said the main purpose was to change the rule of association to allow it to obtain charitable status.

He said: “This was an extremely disappointing result for the association and its tenants.

“We spent a considerable amount of time pursuing the move to charitable status.

“There were a number of points raised at the meeting which were inaccurate.”

Mr Farrell said they would be writing to all shareholders and tenants “to ensure clarity on a wide range of matters.”

He went on: “I would encourage tenants and the wider communities to read the factual information we produce.”

Finance boss Patrick Shaw said they could have made up to £40,000 worth of savings every year if the plan had gone ahead.

He said: “This outcome was surprising and disappointing for staff. If approved it would have meant new bathrooms or kitchens for our tenants.”