Ebury Bridge residents campaigning against the demolition of one of Westminster’s largest estates

• HERE we go again – social housing residents demanding the right to vote, (‘Let us vote’ plea from residents fighting estate demolition, July 13).

With damning frequency similar things happen throughout the borough. Church Street Village, NW8, where I live, are currently engaged in their own judicial fight for a vote on the long-awaited regeneration scheme which has turned into a non-consensual gentrification programme.

As with the Ebury Bridge residents in Pimlico, Church Street, NW8, people in social housing dwellings are facing a loss of abode, despite it being assigned for occupation under legislation dating from 1948.

Who stands to gain from the forced exodus of communities where assets which are owned by the public sector are removed from the taxpayer?

For instance, with properties in the private sector in the way of the new runway proposals at Heathrow, questions will arise about their market values, and concerning consents to enable them being taken over and about change of use. Is there a difference of judicial probity here?

A displacement of people from their homes should not be acceptable in either case without some consent being reached. There is also the question of the right to “hinder, transgress or squat” to consider.

Ebury Bridge residents must have a vote. So should Church Street Village, NW8. What are we thinking of in the UK when, with impunity, the authorities make land-grabs and render persons displaced? You would think we have become lawless in Westminster.

NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED