UK: Last week I published an article highlighting the frustration of RAAC homeowners in Tillicoultry after months of silence from Clackmannanshire Council. 

Following that article, I wrote an open letter to Councillor Ellen Forson, Leader of Clackmannanshire Council, copying every councillor, the Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice and Housing, Shirley-Anne Somerville MSP, and officials within the Scottish Government Housing Directorate. 

The purpose of the letter was simple: to correct what I believed were several misconceptions in Councillor Forson's previous correspondence and to remind the Council of the assurances homeowners had received over the past six months. 

The response I received on 8 July was courteous and welcomed a future meeting with homeowners. 

UK: My open letter first challenged Councillor Forson's assertion that only "six working days" had elapsed before she provided a substantive response. 

While that may have been technically correct if weekends were excluded, it failed to acknowledge that almost two weeks had passed since her initial acknowledgement of Fran's email. 

More importantly, I pointed out that the issue did not begin with Fran's correspondence. 

Every councillor had already received numerous emails from me over many months outlining homeowners' concerns. Those emails were deliberately copied to local media to ensure there was a transparent public record of the issues being raised. 

As the recognised spokesperson for the affected homeowners, councillors had every opportunity to contact me directly with updates or clarification. 

None did. 

The reality is that homeowners have been waiting for meaningful communication since the meeting with the Housing Minister in November 2025. 

The Council Suspended Its Own Deadlines 

One of the most significant issues raised in my letter concerned the Council's own correspondence. 

Councillor Forson's previous email suggested that homeowners had delayed matters by failing to make decisions on the offers available to them. 

That does not reflect what Council officers themselves communicated. 

After homeowners sought clarification regarding the Council's acceptance deadline, Andrew Buchanan, Interim Senior Manager for Housing, wrote to me on 9 January 2026 stating: 

"Please consider the deadline as suspended with further information to follow as soon as we have it." 

He explained that the Council was reviewing its offers while continuing discussions with the Scottish Government following the meeting with the Cabinet Secretary. 

Homeowners accepted those assurances in good faith. 

Six months later, the promised update has still not arrived. 

Six Months of Waiting 

During those six months, homeowners have continued to incur significant financial costs. 

Many have remained responsible for mortgages, insurance premiums and other unavoidable expenses on homes they cannot safely occupy. 

At the same time, several important questions have remained unanswered. 

These include: 

revised purchase offers; 

the VAT liability each homeowner would face; 

details of environmental retrofit funding that had been mentioned by Council officers; 

clarification of any additional fixed payment the Council was considering. 

These are not minor administrative matters. 

They affect life-changing financial decisions for families who have already endured years of uncertainty. 

What Homeowners Were Actually Told 

One issue I felt particularly important to clarify concerned discussions with the Scottish Government. 

Councillor Forson's earlier email suggested that Scottish Government funding did not alter the offers available to homeowners. 

Nobody has ever argued that the Affordable Housing Supply Programme grant itself should be distributed directly to residents. 

That was never the proposal. 

Instead, following the meeting with the Housing Minister and subsequent discussions with officials in the Scottish Government's Better Homes Division, homeowners were given to understand that once remediation funding had been secured, Clackmannanshire Council would explore whether resources from elsewhere within its own budgets could be used to provide a fixed payment to affected homeowners. 

That understanding was reinforced by Council officers over many months. 

Indeed, as recently as March this year, Kevin Wells advised me that, depending on the amount of Scottish Government funding received, the Council was considering a fixed payment of between £10,000 and £15,000 for homeowners. 

My open letter therefore asked an obvious question: 

What changed? 

If homeowners were repeatedly encouraged to wait while those discussions took place, why are they now being told that no additional financial assistance is available? 

A Modest Proposal 

Recognising the financial pressures facing local authorities, my letter did not insist upon the figures that had previously been discussed. 

Instead, I appealed for the Council to consider a more modest payment of £5,000 per homeowner. 

For many families, this would simply clear their remaining mortgage balance. 

At the very least, it would recognise the additional financial burden homeowners have carried during the six months they were asked to wait while negotiations continued. 

The Council's Response 

Councillor Forson's reply acknowledges the concerns raised but largely avoids addressing them. 

She explains that she cannot unilaterally alter decisions made by the Council and that officers are implementing the agreed policy. 

That is not in dispute. 

However, my letter did not ask her to overturn Council policy alone. 

It asked the Council to reconsider its position in light of changed circumstances and the expectations created during months of discussions with both the Scottish Government and affected homeowners. 

Importantly, the response does not address any of the specific factual issues raised. 

It does not explain why Andrew Buchanan confirmed that deadlines had been suspended. 

It does not explain why homeowners have waited six months without the promised update. 

It does not explain what became of the proposed fixed payment discussed by officers. 

Nor does it explain why homeowners continue to await clarity regarding VAT liabilities and other outstanding financial matters. 

Instead, Councillor Forson in an email dated 8th July states that further correspondence is unlikely to be productive and that officers will arrange a meeting between homeowners, elected members and senior officials. 

The text of her email reads:  

Dear Mr Chowdhry 

Thank you for your further email. 

I note the points you have raised. 

As you will appreciate, the Council’s agreed approach was determined through the Council’s decision-making process. Neither I, nor any individual councillor, has the authority to unilaterally alter or override that decision. Council officers are therefore working to implement the decision taken by the Council. 

I recognise that everyone is keen to receive further information on the next steps. While I am not involved in the operational delivery of this work, I have made my views clear to officers that communication should be timely, clear and consistent, and that residents should be kept informed as matters progress. 

I recognise that everyone is keen to receive further information on the next steps. While I am not involved in the operational delivery of this work, I have made my views clear to officers that communication should be timely, clear and consistent, and that residents should be kept informed as matters progress. 

As I stated in my previous email, I agree that a meeting with elected members and senior officers would be helpful. I have asked officers to arrange this as soon as practicable - you have highlighted in your letter some of challenges at this time of year, but I understand they will be in touch with details once arrangements have been made. I hope this meeting will provide an opportunity for officers to provide clarity on the current position, explain the next steps and answer any questions that homeowners may have. 

I fully appreciate that this has been a lengthy and difficult process for everyone affected, and I remain committed to ensuring that communication is as clear and timely as possible within the Council’s role and responsibilities. 

I hope you will understand that, rather than continuing to exchange correspondence, I believe it is now more constructive to bring everyone together so that homeowners can 

receive a full update and have the opportunity to ask questions directly. I look forward to a positive and productive discussion. 

Yours sincerely 

Councillor Ellen Forson 
Leader of Clackmannanshire Council 

 

An Opportunity to Rebuild Trust 

I welcome that commitment. 

Indeed, homeowners have been requesting precisely this type of meeting for many months. 

However, after years of uncertainty, the meeting must deliver more than another general update. 

It must answer the questions that homeowners have patiently and repeatedly raised. 

Families deserve to understand why expectations changed, why promised updates never arrived and whether the Council is prepared to acknowledge the financial hardship caused by asking residents to wait an additional six months while discussions continued. 

Only through honest dialogue and transparent decision-making can confidence begin to be restored. 

Wilson Chowdhry, Chair of the UK RAAC Campaign Group, said: 

"I welcome Councillor Forson's willingness to bring homeowners, elected members and senior officers together. We have sought meaningful dialogue for many months, and I sincerely hope this meeting marks the beginning of a more transparent relationship between the Council and the families affected by RAAC. However, dialogue alone is not enough. Homeowners deserve clear answers to the questions they have been asking for months, and they deserve recognition of the financial hardship they have endured while waiting in good faith for decisions that repeatedly appeared to be just around the corner. We will attend this meeting constructively and with an open mind, but we also expect openness from the Council. Only by acknowledging what has happened and addressing the outstanding issues can trust begin to be rebuilt."