Letter: Consider Council House Maintenance When Voting

Published on: 2 May, 2026
Updated on: 2 May, 2026

From Dennis Paul

Reform UK candidate for Guildford East

In 2019 the Lib Dems, in a bid to wrest control of Guildford Borough Council, promised voters they would build 3,000 new social homes in a decade. The reality today is they have fallen far short of that target building only 250 of those homes promised.

At this election the electorate won’t be misled a second time. The new West Surrey Council will have approximately 9,150 applicants on its Housing Register (waiting list) with some applicants in larger households having to wait up to 9 years to get suitable accommodation if they are lucky.

For residents at this election, they have two votes, and they cannot wait for Lib Dem empty promises to be fulfilled. Their poor record on housing does not stop at delivering new homes for those in need.

The management of their housing stock came under heavy criticism and scrutiny two years ago when maintenance and improvement contract costs spiralled from £3 million to a staggering £16 million. A council-commissioned ‘Solum Report’ found there to be significant weaknesses in financial management and strategic oversight.

But the rot doesn’t stop there. Their handling of customer issues like damp and mould have come under government scrutiny of late. Guildford BC were cautioned by the Housing Ombudsman (Government Watchdog) for maladministration in relation to their handling of a resident’s reports of damp and mould and their complaint handling.

They were ordered to pay £600 compensation. This may only be one case, but since Awaab’s Law was introduced last year stronger measures are now in place to tackle landlords who fail to keep residents safe in their homes.

What matters most when it comes to judging the Lib Dem’s record on housing, is the experience of tenants whose homes the council manages. For a start, there are about 270 empty council homes in the borough – a neglected resource that is an affront to homelessness in the Borough and source of local frustration.

Tenants experience can best be summed up in the in the Social Housing Regulator’s comparisons of tenant satisfaction nationally. In 2024/25 (latest figures published) only 61% of tenants surveyed were satisfied with the overall performance of their landlord.

That ranks Guildford BC 296th out of 364 social housing landlords nationwide – languishing in the bottom 20% in terms of tenant satisfaction. An appalling verdict that chimes with what Reform UK are being told on the doorstep during this election.

I have over 30 years housing management experience working in the local authority sector. As a Reform candidate, I won’t be making false promises to buy your vote in Guildford East, but I am committed to work at changing the management culture to actively engage with residents in designing services they want, and ensure standards and performance improves across the new West Surrey Council.

There are significant savings to be made on rents from amalgamating five sets of top heavy council management into a flatter leaner structure that prioritises front-line services and protects real jobs while also securing cost savings. None of our opponents grasp this potential, and if council chiefs are not held to account – it won’t happen. Only a vote for Reform UK this time can bring about real change and a fresh start.

Responses to Letter: Consider Council House Maintenance When Voting

Jim Allen Reply

May 2, 2026 at 8:49 pm

I think he might just know what he’s talking about..
Peta Malthouse Reply

May 3, 2026 at 6:09 pm

Mr Paul does not say which authority employed him or whether he is professionally qualified.

Perhaps he could outline the rather top heavy structure he claims is in place in the GBC Housing Department. Last I heard, the Tories stripped out all the professional housing managers [in administrations before 2019] because they cost too much, leaving too few box tickers in charge of a major contract.

I understood spending got out of control because the contractors were doing additional work with, they claim, implicit approval of senior managers but without formal approval of the extra spending. Of course, who, as a council tenant, would say no to, for instance, a new kitchen if offered?

I recall that contracted officers had contracts terminated and two permanent council officers were suspended and later resigned. But although a police enquiry continues, years later, no charges have been brought. Those affected have proclaimed their innocence, as reported in The Dragon.
Dennis Paul Reply

May 4, 2026 at 9:07 pm

I’m afraid i may have understated the poor levels of service at GBC. it is much worse. These are tenants verdict from the annual survey GBC conducts and all there on this link to see. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tenant-satisfaction-measures-202425.

They show that only 60.8 per cent of tenants thought their homes were well maintained placing GBC in the bottom 14 per cent of results nationally or, put another way, 306th out of 353 in the national tables.

Only 21.8 per cent of tenants were satisfied with GBC’s complaint handling, an appalling figure placing them in the bottom 5 per cent nationally. It points to a cultural problem where residents needs are being ignored by a self-serving bureaucratic elite. Only 41.2 per cent of tenants’ views are listened to and acted upon, placing GBC in the bottom 5 per cent nationally on that question too. That’s the responsibility of the top-heavy elite.

Dennis Paul is a Reform UK candidate for Guildford East in the West Surrey Council election
Helena Townsend Reply

May 5, 2026 at 8:37 pm

It’s funny what people consider priorities to be. I think its important to keep council houses safe and compliant but I am not sure why there is such a push to keep upgrading houses which the council can never sell especially when there are so many other things falling into disrepair.

I heard that kitchens are often upgraded on a ten year cycle whether they need replacing or not. I am all for building new council houses but whether council tenants are happy or not will not be influencing my vote.