Illustration by John Sadler www.johnsadlerillustration.com 

• SOME years ago, without warning or consultation, Islington Council sanctioned the installation of multiple masts on the roof of my block in a deal with a major telecommunications conglomerate.

The council were coy when questioned if the moratorium protecting public residential blocks was still in force, but adamant that roof maintenance would continue unimpeded.

Fast-forward to the present and my flat has a persistent roof leak whose source is below a mast and cannot be repaired, while my neighbours are plagued by dampness.

I was told that the mast would be moved but a month has passed with management ignoring requests for updates or explanations.

Given Islington Council’s duty of care as landlord, and a roof leak response time of “within 24 hours” (housing repairs guide), an instruction to move the mast should be actioned within days unless the conglomerate has the power to do otherwise.

Could it be that the deal ceded control of roof works (and by extension the health and welfare of residents) to the conglomerate, which can now act as surrogate landlord and call the shots?

If so, doubt is cast over the council’s capacity to tackle disrepair in similar cases and the malaise could go viral among the many blocks which sport masts.

With the council tight-lipped on the delay, while residents pay the price, a Freedom of Information request seems necessary to unmask the devil in the detail of the deal and the balance of power between the council and conglomerate.

Outsourcing work is one thing, but outsourcing agency over residents’ wellbeing is something else entirely.

NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED