Should every Allotment have an ACV?

Assets of Community Value (ACV) were established under the Communities Act of 2011 and were aimed at identifying and nominating buildings or other assets such as land that have a main use or purpose of furthering the social well-being or social interests of the local community. Like a listed building it affords them some rights and protection but only part of the answer. Many of the first people to take advantage of this new registration were real ale pubs under the CAMRA umbrella.

Local authorities must validate ACV applications to a stringent critique but once registered, the local community will be informed if they are listed for sale, disposal, or a change of use within the five-year listing period. The community can then enact the Community Right to Bid, which gives them a moratorium period of six months to determine if they can raise the finance to purchase the asset. However, it does not give the right of first refusal to community organisations to buy an asset that they successfully nominate for inclusion on the local authority’s list.

Does it replace the 1925 Allotment and associated acts? No, it complements the statues and adds extra gravitas and a bit of extra protection.

Does it stop Local authorities or other freeholders from selling off allotments? No, but it gives allotments a say and right to bid and stops the rug being pulled literally from under their feet. Importantly it puts a clear stake in the ground which can warn off developers and other land grabbers.

However, one the biggest benefit it gives individual allotments is a framework to fully evaluate and document their value and how they fit into the community.

In order to get our ACV we had to research our history and current status and separate the urban myth from reality. We had to think about the environment and contribution to its improvement. We had to think about our involvement with local groups, with schools and with the heath and well-being of plot holders and their families and the community. Just documenting this and structuring it to compete the ACV submission was an eyeopener not only to what we did but also what we could potentially do.

For some it may be the first step on the road to self management.

This work and wording is also vital to being able to secure sponsorship, grants and can influence funding decisions irrespective of what type of allotment you are. It can also support any appeal to a local authority and even to the Secretary of State.

We were one of the first allotments to go through this process and had to do it because we had an incorrect lease imposed over us in 1994. Under this lease some would say the Borough effectively disposed of us incorrectly. The granted lease was effectively unworkable with respect to the allotments and resulted in 20 years of friction and misunderstanding between all parties. When the leaseholder wished to enter into a new lease with the Borough and extinguish the current one in favour of a longer-term lease, we said no. We wanted a separate lease and clarification on our status.

The Borough formally acknowledged that they had not disposed of the allotments. They fully recognised them and that any disposal would have had to go through a section 8 notice to be signed off by the Secretary of State. In other words they accepted us as being Statutory under the 1925 act which up till then they had always avoided admitting. When the negotiations were getting heated and the leaseholder tried to say they wanted to go ahead without us being separated, we just pulled out the ACV and reminded the Borough of our statute status and the ACV. The result gave us a 99-year lease, peppercorn rent, self-management and full recognition of our statuary status. This could not have been achieved without that ACV.

Today you may think you don’t need one, you do. You may think you can wait until a developer comes knocking, but an ACV is only effective if it is in place before the developer submits an interest.

So why wouldn’t all allotment sites get registered as Assets of Community Value? It costs nothing but some time. The National Allotment Society has now got a lot of experience with the statute, submissions and can help. Sites such as ours are also willing to help and give guidance. 

Today a growing number of sites all around the country have done it, so look up the process as listed under your local authority and do it – you know it makes sense.  

Our Journey to Securing a 99 Year Lease: Part 2 ACVs, Leases and Co-ops

Yesterday I covered the research and findings into our 130-year-old history. Today I cover the actions we took to secure the allotments future.

ACV (Asset of Community Value) Under the Localism Act 2011 land or property of importance to a local community can be recognised and provided with additional protection from development. Voluntary and community organisations can nominate an asset to be included on their local authority's ACV register.

I had come across this relatively new statute in two other community projects and knew the value of registration. I established contact with the National Allotment Society to enlist their help and learn what experience allotments had with the new law. We were in fact one of the first allotments to seek this status which to date had been mainly taken up by real ale pubs! Today a growing number of allotments have registered as ACVs.

The Act only offers limited rights, but importantly puts a clear stake in the ground, such that the land can’t be sold, developed, repurposed, released without community consultation with the registered group who also have a right to bid. There is also a moratorium period which reduces the risk of being driven by other’s timescales and agenda. Importantly these rights are diluted if obtained after a development proposal has been lodged. It doesn’t impact the allotments rights under the 1925 statute but complements them. For ourselves it was a case of stating who we were, the historic value to community, the usage of the land, the benefits it gave al,l and importantly ensured the land was correctly identified.

Each council will have its own process and any application must pass several tests to be accepted. To say our submission was comprehensive is an understatement. We ensured we ticked all the relevant boxes and supplied a host of supporting material. The detailed ACV evaluation and grant by the Borough is available on our website www.iodadas.com/legal-and-other-refernce

The Lease: I discovered quite by chance that Mudchute Associates wished to extinguish their current 30-year lease early and seek a new and longer term. Our ACV gave us the opportunity to place a foot in the Borough’s door and seek our own lease arrangements and in doing so redress the debacle of 1994. I will spare the meetings, the elongated process that took place, having to explain the Allotment statutes and ACV to some who had not heard of either.

At all stages we were advised and supported by the National Allotment Society. The London Regional Representative also attended several our Borough meetings. The key breakthrough came when others dug their feet in to try to circumvent our involvement. We reminded all of the ACV and that brought everyone back to the table.

It was going to prove fraught and complex to hold out for a totally independent lease and we suggested the use of a Head lease with subleases under it. We had many detailed discussions over some very contentious issues. It was clear that this was a different type of lease with the Borough holding the freehold and certain liabilities directly with the allotments, whilst the head lease covered more of the farm business. Our sublease was to all intent was somewhat an independent lease with stronger ties to the freeholder and the head lessee who could take action against the allotments with the full backing of the Borough, who were still bound by the 1925 statute. To cut a long story short we agreed and signed off on formal terms of contract for a lease. It was to be 99 year minus one day, peppercorn rent, self-managed, recognised our statutory status and as long as we didn’t breach the lease, we were secure. We even got assurances re transfer of the Head lease and in the event that of the head lessee became insolvent, our sub lease would revert direct to the Borough.

The protracted discussions would not have achieved what they did without the free legal advice and support given by the National Allotment Society.

In June last year, the proposed lease framework for both the Head Lease and our lease was proposed to the Borough cabinet by the Mayor and passed. 

The Society mandate: We kept all members informed throughout the journey asked them to vote on the lease terms offered, the move to an incorporated entity, as well as the constitutional changes we needed to make. We needed to explain in detail the options, and specific steps. The votes taken involved all members and easily achieved the 75% threshold required within our constitution.

The Move to a Co-op: To hold a lease we had to be a legal entity. There were several options ranging from a limited Company, to an incorporated Charity, or even a Trust. None of these appealed. Limited companies can become fiefdoms and directors can become once removed from shareholders. A CIO (Charitable Incorporated Organisation) had an appeal over the CIC (Community Interest Company) but allotments aren’t charities and it was felt we would be abusing the ‘charity’ status. This was our opinion and we respected that many allotment Societies have taken these routes.

We were about to give up when the National Society pointed us to the new Cooperative opportunity under the new Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies Act 2014, which comes under the FCA mutual and society arm and not Companies House nor the Charity Commission. Our membership agreed that the mutuality of a Coop was the way to go and better still we could do this by going under the National Society’s sponsorship and template Rules.

However, we didn’t wish to adopt the template Rules agreed between the National Society and the FCA for sponsored entities. They would require several amendments to fit and every line you altered cost money and had to be sanctioned by the FCA. So, we had to get the mandate from the membership to transfer under the template rules then immediately apply to the FCA for our amendments with the associated formal approvals from our membership to be submitted and sanctioned by the FCA. Once a registered company, this two-staged process was free.

Again, we did it and got our FCA seal and formal approval on the amendments. The Rules are important and the FCA scrutinises and ensures that any Rule changes have followed due membership process and are acceptable under the cooperative mutual approach. We also got the new Rules approved by the Borough and Head lessee by adopting an open and transparent approach.

The hardest thing was moving the new Cooperative to a new Bank. Several banks were unfamiliar with the 2014 statute and did not accept our ‘not for profit’ status and wanted to charge us business rates to bank with them. Only one bank recognised our FCA seal and number straight away and after checking our documents, gave us free banking.

The journey was a hard one, took us four years but was well worth it. We are secure from the developers who are building on the land around us. We now have a very productive and new relationship with the Mudchute Farm that is delivering the obvious benefits we never had. We can now seek to build on our sponsorships and funding to help us with our environmental and community outreach projects. Importantly, those members who follow us now have security of tenure for their lifetime.

We just need to issue the member’s shares certificates and re issue member’s packs, but until the virus eases, that is on hold.

I hope these two articles help others understand what can be done and some of the options available. To date its cost us less than £100 in registration fees with FCA and Land Registry. I cannot stress enough the support, guidance and value the National allotment Society has given us.