CROYDON IN CRISIS: The Public Interest Law Centre is bringing a Judicial Review against the council claiming it is failing to meet its statutory responsibilities and is acting in a discriminatory manner
EXCLUSIVE by STEVEN DOWNES
Public servant: council CEO Katherine Kerswell announced the closure of Access Croydon to staff with just one day’s notice
Tory Mayor Jason Perry and Croydon Council are facing another day in the High Court, this time over their abrupt, no-notice and potentially unlawful closure of Access Croydon.
In March, at barely one working day’s notice, Katherine Kerswell, the council’s £204,000 per year chief executive, announced that Access Croydon, the ground-floor level area where the public were once able to seek assistance with a range of council services, would become No Access Croydon.
At the stroke of the borough’s highest-paid bureaucrat’s pen, actual face-to-face access to council staff at the council building became no longer possible without a prior appointment.
“The changes to Access Croydon are part of the council’s action to protect local services for residents,” Kerswell claimed.
Within days, Kerswell was issuing warnings to staff over their conduct, as flashpoints around access to Fisher’s Folly had seen the building’s security staff suffer abuse from under-stress council workers.
No Access Croydon: the public access area of Fisher’s Folly was closed to the public in March. Homeless people were directed to Central Library to book appointments
Staff forced to endure Kerswell and Perry’s new appointments-only system described the scene at Fisher’s Folly in one word: “Chaos”.
Worst affected by the closure of immediate access to council officials have been the homeless, many of whom found themselves directed away from the council offices to Croydon Central Library, where they are expected to queue to use one of the public computers so that they can… book an “emergency” appointment.
Almost 30 voluntary and charity sector organisations working in the borough wrote to Mayor Perry and CEO Kerswell demanding an immediate re-opening of the council offices to the public. They said that the council’s decision to close Access Croydon to anyone who does not have a pre-booked appointment is “denying residents access to vital support”.
Among the signatories were the Croydon BME Forum, Croydon Nightwatch, the London Renters Union, the South Norwood Community Kitchen, the South West London Law Centre and Croydon Voluntary Action.
With Kerswell and Perry ignoring the letter, now the Public Interest Law Centre has taken up the case, seeking a Judicial Review of the council’s ill-considered, snap decision to close Access Croydon.
Lawyers at PILC say that their High Court claim against Croydon Council “raises important issues about the modernisation and digitisation of the services provided by local housing authorities”.
PILC says: “Although local authorities hail digitisation as cost-effective and efficient, we argue that this change amounts to discrimination against those with limited literacy or nor internet access.”
PILC has been preparing its claim against Croydon Council for almost six months.
Leading the fight: Emma Gardiner of community group SNCK
Those working for charities and in the third-sector have expressed concern over the council’s closure of Access Croydon, suspecting that it is a deliberate ploy to cut costs simply by making it more difficult for people to get the help that the council is legally required to provide.
Emma Gardiner, from South Norwood Community Kitchen, one of the letter signatories who is supporting the Judicial Review against the council, says that in the months since the closure of Access Croydon, SNCK has seen “a massive increase in the number of people coming in seeking housing support, from us and other local organisations”.
And Gardiner said: “We’ve also seen an increase in the number of people unable to get the support that they need from the council… a lot of that is what the council is legally obliged to provide.”
Gardiner says that the closure of Access Croydon is a method of “gate-keeping” by the council which excludes the many people unable to use the internet or fill out online forms.
“What they are hoping is that less and less people will put in housing applications and therefore reducing the number of people they are having to support.
“It’s only when [the council] is legally challenged that they seem to actually take notice and meet their legal duties and make sure everyone can access the services that they have a right to.”
Read more: No Access Croydon: 30 voluntary groups demand reopening
Read more: They voted to raise your Council Tax, then to increase their pay
Read more: Top Tory admits Fairfield Halls could be sold for the right deal
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
The Croydon Advertiser sold an average of just 742 copies per week last year (ABC 2024 audit).
Inside Croydon is read by an average of 10,000 people every weekday
TO ADVERTISE your services, products or event to our readers to the site, as featured on Google News Showcase, email us inside.croydon@btinternet.com for our unbeatable ad rates
- Inside Croydon has moved to Bluesky. Click here to join us there for latest updates and insights
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here
