One of the residents had submitted plans for the refurbishment of his bathroom
According to the plans, there would be no structural work or major changes to the plumbing.
The resident also planned to replace the existing boiler with a combination boiler.
The chairman had informed him that the condensate pipe should be routed internally.
Subject to compliance with this condition, the Board approved the work.
Gardens
The Gardens director reported that the compost area had now been
cleared for the Autumn. The skip had been removed.
Connick Tree Care were scheduled to prune the wisteria on Tuesday
04 October. As previously mentioned, they will be using secateurs,
rather than chain saws. The chairman mentioned that Connick had worked
on the only listed wisteria in the UK, dating from 1830, at the former
Royal Sussex Hospital, Chichester, when it had been converted to the
Forbes Place flats in the 1990s. Connick would check with Kingston
Council, and obtain consent for the proposed work, should it be required.
(There is no Preservation Order on our wisteria.) A paper notice would
be circulated to residents affected by the work.
The Gardens director said that there were plans to apply manure
to the flower-beds in the next few weeks.
Premises
The chairman provided an update on the leak in the mains water stopcock
servicing Flats 18-20 and 21, 23 & 25. Thames Water had advised that it would
have to be repaired and paid for. A quote from Thames Water was still awaited.
The controlling stopcock for Surbiton Court is located in St Andrews Square.
When the leaking stopcock is repaired the water supply to the whole building
will have to be interrupted for a short time.
Maintenance and restoration work on the first open balcony (Flats 27-41)
was nearing completion. Shane and Gene were now working on the ground floor.
Shane had drawn the chairman's attention to the fact that parts of the balcony
floor were on different levels and likely to create problems with drainage.
It was possible that differential settlement of the building could be the cause.
Shane had recommended a building surveyor who had now been invited to
inspect and report on the problem.
Shane’s next task would be attending to the pointing around the building.
Work on the second open balcony (Flats 36-41) had been postponed until
next year.
Services
All the garage doors had recently been cleaned.
The company responsible for cleaning the common parts had given notice
that they would be increasing their charges. They were negotiating with the
Services Director.
Construction on the site adjacent to Surbiton Court 2
An email had been received about the naming of the new block.
(This had been one of the main concerns expressed by those who attended
the meetings with the developers. They had agreed not to use ‘Surbiton Court’
or anything remotely similar.) SCRA had been offered a shortlist of names
for consideration: Tangerby House, Burdett House, and St Albans. Tangerby
House was the clear favourite – it is sufficiently distinct, and has a
historical connection with the site.
AGM
Glenmore House had been booked for the AGM on Thursday 27 October.
Light refreshments would be provided after the meeting.
AOB
One of the residents had reported that liquid was leaking periodically
from under the door of one of the cupboards on the ground floor of staircase
21-26. The Directors agreed to monitor this.
The chairman had been informed that two of the flats in Surbiton Court Mews
(Nos 114 and 116) had been sold. As access to these flats would be affected
by the installation of a gate or barrier at the front entrance, the chairman
proposed that such installation should be delayed until it became clear what
the new owner(s) of these flats intended to do.
Next Meeting
Thursday 01 December 2016 (subsequently postponed to 12 January 2017).
Residents in one of the ground floor flats had complained about
foul water backing up and overflowing onto the floor. This was
caused by inappropriate food waste being put down sinks. Shane
Williams had cleared the blockage.
A newly-arrived sub-tenant had recently met the chairman and said
they knew nothing about the website or Handbook. The chairman emailed
the owner who confirmed that his tenancy agreement specifically
details the website and Handbook.
Another resident had made an appointment to have his cable TV/phone
connected but, as he had not contacted the Board to arrange roof access,
the engineer had been unable to connect his service. The resident
had been made aware of both the website and Handbook by his landlord,
and apologised for not having read them. He would arrange another
appointment. The Technical director would superintend the engineer’s
access to the roof.
Gardens
The Premises director asked that a dead tree at the back of the
block should be removed.
The chairman and the Gardens director had discussed the wisteria.
Current refurbishment of the balconies has highlighted the fact that
the wisteria has grown very large over the years, and has only had
occasional light pruning. The chairman was concerned about its impact on
the building, both to the brick structure and to the wrought iron
balconies. There appeared to be some brittle wood, it might need
some type of support, and perhaps more regular maintenance. The Premises
director said that he would hate anything to happen to the wisteria,
as it was an iconic part of Surbiton Court. The chairman fully agreed,
and said that that was all the more reason why we needed to seek
specialist professional advice: it was imperative to maintain the
isteria as one of our main assets, without potentially causing damage
to the building. (This had been one of the issues discussed at the
last AGM during discussion on the planned refurbishment of the open
balconies this summer.)
The chairman had also contacted Ben Morgan, Kingston Council’s
Tree & Landscape Officer, and the Royal Horticultural Society for
guidance: both had advised only using tree surgeons or consultants
who were registered with the Arboricultural Association
(www.trees.org.uk).
Premises
For several weeks, activity has concentrated on the refurbishment
of the open balconies leading to Flats 27-35. The work is being carried
out by Shane Williams and his assistant, Gene. This is not merely a
repainting job but restoration and refurbishment, and any lessons
learned will help with the next phase, the open balconies leading
to Flats 36-41.
The chairman detailed the work that had been done or was in progress:
The second floor balcony flooring tiled and sealed against leaks percolating to the floor below
The second floor balcony ceiling covered with marine ply, painted and new lights fitted
The columns on the ground and first floors refurbished: exposed steel columns treated with ‘Hammerite’, the holes filled and each column sanded down and repainted
The first floor ceiling scraped down and repainted
Woodwork had been repaired on all floors
The frieze plaster and paintwork scraped down, redecorated and the iron railings treated for rust and repainted
The Technical director asked that when the stairs are repainted
a darker colour could be used. This would help to hide the dark patches
that develop through normal wear and tear. The only way currently of
improving the appearance of the stairs is to use a jet-wash (though
that can also loosen paint and weaken seals). The Board agreed that
a darker paint should be used. For the other staircases, the Premises director
recommended the use of oil-based paint rather than water-based.
This would be harder wearing.
With regard to controlling costs, the chairman again emphasised
that materials were ordered on account, which enabled close monitoring
of expenditure.
Services
The Services Director reported that there appeared to be more
cleaners doing the cleaning. They now came in two vans.
He also reported that failed light bulbs were being replaced as,
and when, necessary.
The chairman mentioned that another official from Thames Water
had been to inspect the leak in the mains water stopcock servicing
a number of flats, which he had reported at the previous
meeting. We are still waiting to hear from Thames Water.
Construction on the site adjacent to Surbiton Court 2
The Technical director reported that he had been contacted by the
developers a couple of days previously, asking if Surbiton Court residents
had experienced any problems with the building work. The Technical director said that he
had not been aware of any recently. He also raised two items of concern:
He had emailed the developers’ contact at BT, requesting
notification when they intended to enter our land to pull cables
for the new block, but had not received a reply. The developers said
they would raise the issue at a forthcoming meeting with their contractors.
SCRA remained concerned about the naming of the new block. The developers
said that they were still working on that, but they were already committed
to excluding the words ‘Surbiton’ and ‘Court’ from the name.
AGM
The chairman suggested booking Glenmore House for the AGM, and
the Board agreed. The date agreed, provisionally, was Thursday 27 October.
AOB
After some discussion about a recent incident where a sub-tenant's activity
could be equated to running a business, it was agreed that Services
director would draft an email to letting the
agents, asking them to ensure that, in future, they did not let to
tenants who would be running businesses from their flat.
The Premises director had recently phoned Kingston Council about
the bicycles attached to the railings in St Andrews Square. (This had
been one of the issues raised in the meeting with Councillor Diane White.)
He had been informed that all complaints to the call centre were logged,
therefore the greater the number of calls about any issue, the more likely
it was that remedial action would be taken.
The chairman had received some correspondence concerning
the (unnecessary) pruning of the maple tree. His reply explained
that this had been down to the negligence of the Tree Surgeons
company - they had failed to consult SCRA before starting work,
appeared unannounced and worked on the wrong tree. The company
would not be appointed again.
The same correspondent had also remarked on the condition of
the open balconies. The chairman pointed out that this had been
discussed at the last AGM and the work was scheduled to be
undertaken on the balconies this summer .
In correspondence with the owner of a flat where a replacement
boiler was being installed, the chairman observed the work had not been submitted to the
Board for approval. He was concerned about the routing of the
flue and condensing pipe, and potential damage to the brickwork.
The web site of a local estate agent had advertised flats
in Surbiton Court No 3 as having ‘stunning gardens’. The chairman
emailed the agent and asked for the wording to be changed as it was
misleading and suggested that prospective purchasers had rights
to our grounds and gardens. The agent agreed to amend the wording.
A similarly misleading advertisement for a flat in SC3 put up by another estate
agent was also amended.
Gardens
The Gardens Director reported that the bush close to
the building outside Flat 66 had been removed.
She also gave an account of the incident (mentioned above) in which the
tree surgeons had, against all instructions and expectations,
pruned the maple tree in the inner Court. Not only was it
the wrong tree, they had not followed the legal requirement
to apply to Kingston Council’s Planning Department for consent.
The chairman had subsequently lodged a complaint against the
tree surgeons with Kingston Council. When consulted, the Council’s
Tree & Landscape Officer, Ben Morgan, had advised that the tree
which should have been pruned (adjacent to Surbiton Court
No 2’s drive) should not be cut back until the Autumn.
The Insurance Director informed the Board that he had noticed
that a number of vehicles had been turning on the back roadway
near the greenhouse, risking damage to our plants and lawns.
He recommended that more tree stumps should be put down
to reduce this risk.
Premises
The Chairman reported that the complete refurbishment
of the hallway to Flats 54-59 was nearing completion.
The Association’s surveyor had been invited to inspect
and comment on the condition of the open balconies (on staircases
27-35 and 36-41). He noted that water was percolating from
the second floor down to the first and recommended that the
balcony floors should be sealed as a priority. This would
involve removing the existing screed, then applying sealant,
followed by the laying of non-slip tiles. The tiles would be
chosen to complement the adjacent fabric of the building.
After the floors had received attention, the rest of the
balcony fabric (mainly the ceilings) should undergo general
restoration and re-plastering
Following the restoration of the balconies, one more
hallway would be refurbished, time and weather permitting.
Services
The Services Director invited the Board to comment on the
standard of cleaning in recent weeks. Two directors remarked
that the architraves in the hallways required some attention;
it looked as though a dirty cloth had been used to wipe them down,
leaving smears and streaks. The Services Director said he would
speak to the cleaners about it.
The Gardens Director had recently cleaned the ‘Surbiton Court’
signs at both the front and back approaches.
The Technical Director reported that a resident had complained
that the picture on their television was tending to break up,
especially when a strong wind was blowing outside. He had investigated
and suspected that the aerial cable to the resident's flat had
sustained damage. Many of the cables (Freeview TV, Virgin cable TV,
and the BT telephone and broadband) were loose, coming away
from the walls and entangled with plants growing up the walls
of the building. He had invited the aerial company to inspect and
provide quotes for correcting the faults, tidying up the cables
and sorting out the Freeview TV reception equipment for the block.
Quotations had now been received and the Technical Director asked
for the Board’s approval to proceed. The Board agreed.
Construction on the site adjacent to Surbiton Court 2
The developers of the new building had been in contact.
To provide telephone and broadband services to the building,
they had been advised by BT that the cables would be taken
through the existing BT ducts on Surbiton Court land. The
developers therefore requested SCRA for permission to lay
a new duct from an existing BT ‘chamber’ to the boundary of
the building site. This would involve digging a short trench
across our lawn. He said that if the developer’s contractor
did the work, they would ensure that the minimum amount of
damage was caused. Permission had been granted. The work had
been completed by the time of the Board meeting and it appeared
to have been carried out to a high standard.
Website
After several months of development, the new website
was now ready to be launched at www.surbitoncourt.com.
The new site had been designed to be responsive to new devices
such as smartphones, tablets, and notebook computers, which
did not exist when the website was launched in 2005-6. In
addition to the use of new software technology, the content
of the web pages had been reworded to make them more concise.
The Board agreed that the new site should go live on
Wednesday 15 June.
AOB
The Services Director had observed that one of the residents
had put up a notice asking smokers to refrain from smoking
in his staircase. He would make further enquiries and report
back to the Board.
The Chairman reported on the meeting that he and two fellow
directors had had with Diane White, one of the Councillors for
St Mark’s ward. They had discussed the condition of the pavements,
the numerous bicycles attached to the railings, and debris from
recycling and landfill bins being strewn round St Andrews Square
by animals and the wind. Councillor White said that the pavements
were inspected every 6 months, and at the last inspection St Andrew’s
Square was considered satisfactory. The criteria is that, if reported,
paving stones which protrude more that 15mm will be repaired within 24
hours. Notices had been put on the bicycles currently attached to the
railings, and permanent signs would be put up to prohibit attaching
bicycles to railings, similar to the signs in London. One director
had suggested that bicycle hoops be provided inside St Andrew’s
Square, near the entrances. The Council would write to residents
of St Andrew’s Square asking them to ensure that their recycling
and landfill containers are securely closed, especially the food
waste containers. A further meeting with the Council’s civil
engineering department had been planned, but had had to be cancelled
owing to long-term sick leave in the department.
The Chairman had received a complaint from a resident
re loud noise emanating from an adjacent flat over
the Easter Bank Holiday. The Chairman then spoke to
one of the sub-tenants in that flat and drew his
attention to the noise restrictions.
There had been an enquiry about possible restrictions
with regard to pets. The Chairman had replied that whilst
there were no restrictions on pets in the Lease, there had
been issues in the past with dogs barking, etc. This would
certainly breach the noise and nuisance clauses in the
Lease. In such a case the Board would have no alternative
but to act to protect residents’ rights to peaceful
and quiet enjoyment of their property.
A resident had expressed concern about the condition
of the brickwork and pointing in the communal areas around
the open balconies. The Chairman drew his attention to the
Minutes of the last AGM, in which the refurbishment/redecoration
of the open balconies had been discussed, and which was
scheduled to be undertaken this year. SCRA’s approach
to maintenance is pro-active rather than re-active,
and the Board continues to follow a pro-active
schedule of preventative maintenance. This
involves prioritising work on a rolling programme
basis. With regard to the pointing and brickwork,
some areas are currently being addressed: in a structure
the size and age of Surbiton Court, they can only be
addressed on a priority/modular basis
Gardens
The Gardens Director reported that growth in some tree
stumps adjacent to the boundary wall had been affecting
an adjacent property. These were being dealt with.
She also reported that three companies had been invited
to inspect the boundary along Surbiton Court No 2’s driveway
and submit bids for carrying out tree surgery
A bush outside Flat 66, which was very close to the building,
had been removed. It could be replaced with a new bush, but
planted further away.
The hibiscus bush outside Flat 1 was very old and
needed to be removed.
The Directors for Premises and Insurance both commented
on the presence of parakeets nesting in the upper branches
of the ash tree next to Flats 1-4. At times the birds make
a great deal of noise. They suggested that the nest hole in
the tree should be blocked up.
The Gardens Director explained that logs and tree stumps
had been placed along the back roadway. This was to deter
delivery vans and other vehicles from damaging the plants
and the lawn in that area. Since construction work had
started on the development site, there had been less
parking on Surbiton Court No 2’s driveway and vehicles
were using our roadway instead.
A Surbiton Court No 2 Director had reported that part
of the boundary hedge along the driveway had been damaged.
The Board agreed that the broken plant(s) needed to be
tidied up and allowed to re-grow. The Premises Director
said he was in the process of obtaining quotes for installing
extra steel fence posts along that boundary. This included
the installation of a post that would support a gate to
the footpath leading to the back door to entrance 42-47.
Premises
The Chairman reported that Shane Williams had spent
the past weeks repointing the brickwork around the inner
Court while waiting for improved weather conditions
Once warmer, drier weather had arrived Shane would
commence work on the staircases as discussed at previous
meetings. It had been agreed with Shane that he would
undertake the electrical wiring, chasing into the
plasterwork in the stairwells and repainting.
He would then progress to the open balconies, scraping
off existing paint and broken plaster, followed by repair,
sealing and making good.
The Premises Director recommended that it would be best
to use a ‘cherry picker’ for the outside of the balconies
to avoid any damage to the wisteria by scaffolding, and
he could obtain a quote for the cost of hire.
The Premises Director repeated his request (made at
the last meeting) that the floor of the landing outside
Flats 50 and 51 should be repainted in a harder-wearing
paint. The Chairman said that he would instruct Shane
accordingly.
Services
The Services Director had noticed recently that the
light on the middle floor of entrance 60-65 had gone out
again. The fault was likely to be in the electrical
circuit wiring, rather than the bulb or the light fitting.
In the past, Shane Williams had looked into the problem,
but had failed to identify the cause. The Premises Director
offered to contact an electrician to diagnose the problem.
The Chairman asked that the ‘cold white’ bulb outside
Flat 32 be replaced with a ‘warm white’ one to match the
other lights: currently it looked unsightly. The Services Director
said he would arrange for it to be replaced.
The Chairman observed that while the general standard
of cleaning had been acceptable since the last meeting,
that had not been the case the day of the meeting: some of the doormats
had not been lifted and cleaned under, and the stair rail
and upper stairs in entrance 5-10 had not been cleaned.
The Services Director said he would contact Mr Marsh,
the proprietor of Crystal Clear.
Construction on the site adjacent to Surbiton Court 2
Since the last meeting, the developers had circulated
a second newsletter.
The hoardings around the site had now been repainted
dark green in response to the request from SCRA..
The Insurance Director reported that the builders’
contractors had been using the garage area behind Surbiton
Court No 2 as a turning and waiting area for heavy plant.
He pointed out that the road surface in that area had been
damaged and it was becoming dangerous. As an owner of one
of the garages, he was concerned both for himself and for
other Surbiton Court residents who rented some of the
garages. The Premises Director said he would contact the
landlord for the majority of the garages (Nightingale
Page Hickman & Bishop) and ask them to address the issue..
The Insurance Director asked if SCRA would be objecting
to Kingston Council about the building development of a 4
storey block on Brighton Road. It was observed that it
does not actually back onto Surbiton Court (although
it does to Surbiton Court No 3). As planning had already
been granted, and building had started, it was agreed
that SCRA would not lodge any objections at this stage.
AOB
The Chairman said he was scheduling a meeting with
councillor Diane White, St Mark’s Ward, to discuss the
issues raised in our email to them. He invited other
Board members to attend..
The Premises Director enquired whether there was
interest in a residents’ Summer Party this year. The
Board were all in favour and suggested some dates.
Next Meeting
To be decided (This was arranged later for 09 June 2016).
The Gardens Director reported that the area behind
the greenhouse had been cleared and the refuse removed.
Unknown persons had been trampling on some of the
lavender bushes at the back of the building. All residents
should be vigilant in case of a recurrence.
Surbiton Court No 2 had drawn attention to one of our
trees which was overhanging their driveway, and needed trimming.
The hedge, adjacent to their driveway, also needed trimming,
so that it would not obstruct the traffic going to and from
the development site.
The Premises Director had invited estimates for the
cost of back gates leading onto Surbiton Court No 2’s driveway.
He had also solicited estimates for re-laying the pathways
from our back doors to the proposed gates.
Premises
The Chairman reported that Shane Williams had cleared
a seriously blocked drain outside one of the flats: this
had been due to a combination of fat, rice and a polyfilla-like
substance, the latter of which might have been there for
a considerable period.
The next staircase scheduled for refurbishment/redecoration
was 54-59. Shane was obtaining an estimate for re-plastering work.
He was also researching quick-drying paint for
the front doors.
Shane had been asked to use Correx floor sheeting whilst
carrying out this work in order to minimise the dust
and debris.
The Premises Director requested that the floor of the
landing outside Flats 50 & 51 should be repainted in a
harder-wearing paint. He suggested that an oil-based paint
would last longer than a water-based one.
The Chairman gave the Board a quick outline of this year’s
proposed refurbishment programme, which would focus on the
refurbishment/redecoration of entrance 54-59 and the
open balconies.
A new leaseholder had submitted an application with outline
plans for the refurbishment of their flat before they moved in.
The Board were in the process of examining these.
Services
The Services Director asked whether there had been any
further problems with the lights on staircase 60-65, middle
floor. They appeared to have functioned without fault
since the last meeting.
No other light bulbs had failed in the last 2 weeks.
The Chairman observed that not all the doormats had been
lifted and the floor swept underneath during the weekly
cleaning. The Services Director said he would speak to
the cleaners.
Construction on the site adjacent to Surbiton Court 2
H A Marks, the contractors for the development site,
had painted the hoardings in their corporate colours of
black and pillar-box red. A number of residents had found
this oppressive and had complained. Mr Tom Hickman. for
the developers, had been contacted bout this and
a reply was awaited.
The contractors had circulated a leaflet about
themselves to some of the Surbiton Court residents.
AOB
The Premises Director had now drafted a letter
to be emailed to the leader of Kingston Council and
the councillors for St Marks ward. The draft highlighted
a number of issues including: the state of the pavements
in St Andrews Square, litter from the domestic
recycling bins, bicycles chained to the railings,
and cycling on the pavements. He would circulate the
draft to the Board for input. It was agreed that the
final version of the letter would be signed by the
Secretary of SCRA.
The Premises Director reported that he had encountered
and challenged a resident of Surbiton Court No 2 trespassing
in the inner Court and smoking a cigarette.
It had been reported that a taxi cab was regularly
entering the inner Court at 4.30 am to pick up a resident
from entrance 42-47, leaving the engine running until the
passenger appeared. The noise was disturbing the other
residents. The Premises Director would try to identify
the resident and request that the taxi waited outside
the Court.
Finally, someone was delivering Sunday papers to a
resident in the same entrance. The paper was just thrown
onto the roadway, causing a litter hazard.
Included under this Topic was a request by the chairman
to one of the local estate agents to concerning an advertisement
for a flat in Surbiton Court No 3. This showed a photograph of
the sunken gardens in Surbiton Court (flats 1-69) to which the
residents of SC3 have no rights of access. A representative of
the estate agent in question confirmed that they would remove
the incorrect photograph immediately and ensure that their
colleagues were fully conversant with the distinctions between
ourselves, and Surbiton Court Nos 2 & 3.
Insurance
Under this topic, there was discussion about the apportionment
of payment of the insurance premium between the block fund and that
for the 23 garages which are owned by SCRA.
Gardens
The Gardens Director reported that recent activity in the gardens
had comprised mainly routine maintenance because of the winter weather.
Several large bushes close to the outer walls of the building
would be removed to avoid any potential damage to the drains. Some
of the plants could be replanted in beds further away from the building.
The Gardens Director reported that recent activity in the gardens
had comprised mainly routine maintenance because of the winter weather.
Two skips would be required in the near future to receive garden
waste, including a large amount of ivy which had been removed from
behind the garages.
The Premises Director said he would like to see the lawns mown
rather straighter. He also felt that the red robin hedge on the
boundary with the waste ground / development site had not been
trimmed very well. The same applied to the hedge on the corner of
the driveway belonging to Surbiton Court No 2.
The Chairman observed that the sign at the entrance to the
footpath to staircase 42-47 was now completely obscured by the
hedge. He would arrange to have it moved to a more visible
position.
Premises
With large projects in suspension over the winter, Shane Williams
had been carrying out some smaller items. These had included digging
out and repairing a soak drain outside Flat 1, and removing tarmac
around the footings of Flats 61 & 66 to allow rain water to drain
away. This was a recommendation following Bartholomews’ survey of
Flat 61 in January 2015.
As the weather improved, Shane would resume the larger projects,
including the refurbishment of entrance 54-59, and the refurbishment
of the remaining windows on the outer Court.
Refurbishment of all the window frames and sills in the inner
Court was now complete.
The Premises Director commented on the state of the lamp standards
in the inner Court. He would look for replacements in keeping with the
style of the building.
The Premises Director also thought that the lighting of the footpaths
at the back of Surbiton Court was poor. He suggested that additional
lighting should be installed. He remarked that he found the spacing of
the stepping stones was inconvenient – though this depends on who it
is using the paths.
The Insurance Director suggested that the lighting along the roadway
running past the greenhouse should be improved.
Services
Two lights on staircase 60-65 were going out intermittently. This
had been reported before and could be down to a faulty circuit.
Shane Williams (or a qualified electrician) would be asked to investigate.
The Services Director asked to be kept informed.
Construction on the site adjacent to Surbiton Court 2
The developers’ contractors had started to clear the ground. Hoardings
were being erected around the site and three of the horse chestnuts
were in the process of being removed.
AOB
The Premises Director noted that a number of break-ins had been reported
recently in the neighbourhood. These had all taken place on the ground floor.
The Premises Director said he intended to write to the local councillors
about St Andrews Square: the state of the pavement outside nos 7 – 15 (approx.),
bicycles chained to the railings, overflowing recycling bins and rubbish strewn
across the street on many occasions. The Chairman suggested that the letter might
receive more attention if it came from the SCRA secretary. The Premises
Director agreed to send his draft to the secretary.
The Insurance Director asked about the state of the garage area managed
by Nightingale Page Hickman & Bishop (behind Surbiton Court No 2). He had
invited a local surveyor to inspect his garage which is adjacent to that area.
The surveyor had commented that the tarmac in that area was in a very poor
state and could constitute a trip hazard, especially with the lack of lighting.
The area really needed to be resurfaced. Several residents of Surbiton Court
rent garages in that area. The Premises Director offered to write a letter
on behalf of all those renting.