The claims against Renaker and Andy Burnham’s Greater Manchester Combined Authority were made in court this week
Renaker is behind many of Manchester’s skyscrapers(Image: Renaker/SimpsonHaugh)
One of Manchester biggest developers has been accused of using ‘different figures’ to avoid having to build affordable housing.
Renaker, which has built many of Manchester’s skyscrapers including the city’s tallest buildings at Deansgate Square, has repeatedly wriggled out of having to build affordable housing as part of its developments of luxury flats.
The developer has successfully argued the schemes it has put forward would not make enough profit to be ‘viable’ if it included affordable housing as per council policy.
However, a court heard this week that the developer allegedly uses a ‘different set of figures’ when seeking loans with ‘modest’ interest rates.
It comes as the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) defends itself against claims brought to the Competition Appeal Tribunal that it loaned £120m to Renaker through its Housing Investment Loan Fund (GMHILF) with ‘no lawful or proper process’.
Rival developer Aubrey Weis, who is behind the legal challenge, claims the GMCA created an ‘unlevel playing field’ by giving Renaker lower interest rates on loans for two schemes – Trinity and Jackson, also known as Contour – which are currently under construction.
The loans for these developments make up just a fraction of the money the GMCA has loaned to Renaker so far through the GMHILF.
Contour was one of the developments involved(Image: Copyright Unknown)
Representing Mr Weis, Joseph Barrett KC told the court on Tuesday (May 27) of a ‘striking practice’ that ‘appears to be in play’.
He accused Renaker owner, Daren Whitaker, of claiming his developments have a ‘very low profit margin’ to argue that it should be exempted from a council policy which states that at least 20 per cent of residential schemes of a certain size should be affordable.
However, when applying for loans from the GMCA, the developer says the same schemes have a ‘high profit margin’, the court heard.
The GMCA denies the allegation that it has given out loans through the GMHILF at less than the market rate or on ‘preferential terms’.
But Mr Barrett told the court that the decision-making process behind the loans for Trinity and Jackson was ‘flawed’ and ‘unlawful’.
He said: “When one considers the evidence, what it demonstrates is a small group of officers who have become objectively too relaxed in the manner in which they deal with Mr Daren Whittaker.
“And in this case, I do say this has come at the cost of maintaining a proper, transparent, lawful, decision-making process in a matter of significant public interest, loans involving £120m of public money.”
A GMCA spokesperson said: “We refute any suggestion that the loans from the Housing Investment Loans Fund have been given at less than market rate or on preferential terms and we are confident in the case we will be making at the Competition Appeal Tribunal.”
Renaker declined to comment.