‘Where am I going to go with the kids?’ Mum-of-three left homeless after reporting threats to police
As mother-of-three Danielle pushes two prams down the street in south London, her only thought is where will they all sleep tonight?
The 21-year-old, whose children are all under the age of five, had a council house in Southwark but had to move out because she faced threats of violence.
“I didn’t know that going to the police would end up with me being homeless,” she says.
Heartbroken and panicking, with nowhere else to go, Danielle is in a park with her three children – two daughters, aged one and four, and her two-year-old son.
“I’m so sorry, I wish this could all be better,” she tells them. Her eldest clutches a plastic toy and asks when they are going home.
“We don’t have a home anymore,” Danielle replies. She can’t hide the truth from her any longer.
Danielle, who has long dark hair and is wearing a puffer jacket, is pacing, her mobile phone pressed to her ear, making a series of desperate phone calls, pleading for help.
“Where am I going to go with the kids,” she asks a housing officer. “I have nowhere to go.”
At this point it’s around 3pm and council offices will soon be closing. As her phone dies, Danielle, now sitting on a bench, her eldest daughter comforting her siblings in their buggies, breaks down in tears.
Her story exemplifies a national housing crisis where currently more than 150,000 children in England are living in temporary accommodation.
It is hard to imagine someone more vulnerable; a 21-year-old, at risk of violence, a care leaver herself, mother-of-three. If she’s fallen through the net, then who is it catching?
Initially, Southwark council paid for her to have temporary accommodation elsewhere.
But things changed when police informed them it was too dangerous for her to come back to the borough.
“To sit there and tell a four-year-old little girl we can’t go home because we don’t have a home, that’s very upsetting as a mum because I brought her into this world to love her, protect her, to give her a home, and me being a mum telling her I can’t do that right now, it breaks my heart, but I know it’s not my fault,” she tells Sky News.
“Last Tuesday, I got a call to say they could no longer fund my accommodation because the police said it’s no longer safe to return back to Southwark, so they don’t owe me a duty of care.”
The council emailed her a letter which implied she was being made homeless for her own protection. The letter instructed her to present herself to another “local authority homeless person unit to seek rehousing outside of Southwark,” it said. “This is on the grounds of personal protection for you and your children.”
The letter, dated 30 September, explained her current accommodation would terminate on 9 October.
But, when Danielle approached another council, they wanted more details from Southwark. In the meantime, her landlord said Southwark had stopped paying, so he evicted her and changed the locks.
“We are just going around in a loop and in the meantime me and my children are homeless, and nobody seems to care,” she told us when we found her on 10 October.
“They are not protecting me or my children, they’ve put us at an even more high risk, but they don’t seem to acknowledge that.”
As we sit on the park bench together, a Southwark housing officer calls confirming that, despite her being on the streets, they would not extend the temporary accommodation. The person on the phone says it was a management decision.
At this point, we call Southwark’s press office and get a very different tone and a sense that the situation isn’t acceptable.
After an anxious wait, by late afternoon Danielle is told she can return to her temporary accommodation.
But while Danielle was on the streets, she took her child for a routine vaccination and was flagged with children’s social services, which adds to her worries.
“I know I am a good mum,” she says. “A doctor might have thought my nails were dirty or I didn’t look like a normal person, but she has to understand, I had nowhere to go that day.
“I had no keys, nowhere to live. I was living out of a black bag in my grandad’s shed. So, what do you expect?”
In a statement, councillor Sarah King from Southwark told us: “This has been a very distressing situation for Danielle and her children, and I hope that she is at least relieved to be in safe accommodation now. We will be working to resolve her housing situation permanently and continue to support her until that happens.”
The council she was applying to told us they believed the issue was now being dealt with by Southwark.
Read more:
Number of children in temporary accommodation hits record high
Temporary housing spending for homeless people soars in London
Housing lawyer Simeon Wilmore told Sky he’s come across this kind of thing “many times” and believes both councils have behaved badly.
“Southwark should have been in contact with the receiving party or receiving local authority and it should be more managed and structured, and she should be at the centre of the decision making,” he said.
“If they have reason to believe she may be eligible for priority needs then the duty of care kicks in. They must accommodate.”
The problem is councils have run out of homes. In Southwark alone 17,700 people are on the borough’s waiting list, nearly treble the figure over five years ago.
On average councils spend 1% of their budget on temporary accommodation, but research by Sky News has found 30 councils spend 10% or more, with several spending over 20% of their overall budgets on homelessness. This is council money going to private landlords.
Adam Hugg, head of housing at the Local Government Association, says the numbers of people needing support “are going through the roof” and the lack of available homes “creates a real challenge”.
He says there is a need for long-term investment to build more council houses as well as reform to housing benefit to make sure more people can be kept in their homes.
Danielle has few home comforts in her temporary flat, which has plain white walls and a TV on the floor. Her wish is for a place she can make her own and paint her daughter’s bedroom walls pink.
She has Halloween decorations on a shelf, while in a corner of the living room there is a long box containing a Christmas tree. On top, there is a child’s yet-to-be-filled-out wish list for Father Christmas, while a pack of red and white baubles and a can of snow spray sit nearby.
“These are all my little Christmas bits I’m going to do with the kids when we eventually have a home,” Danielle says, but she still has no idea when that might be.
“They have told me I’m not going to be here for Christmas,” she says. “So, I don’t know where I’ll be. I just hope it’s not on the street.”
It seems the housing crisis has reached a point where even extreme vulnerability is no guarantee of help.
Councils want more secure longer-term government funding so they can build more homes, but with more children than ever living in temporary accommodation, this is a chronic national problem that will take more than one Christmas to solve.
A “British man” has died after being beaten and set on fire by a mob in Ecuador, according to reports by media in the South American country.
According to reports, the man – who has not been officially identified – had been detained by police after being accused of being involved in a fatal shooting.
Ecuadorian news outlet Ecuavisa reported that the man had been taken to a police station Playas del Cuyabeno, a remote village in the Amazon rainforest.
While there, a group broke into the station and took the man away. He was then set on fire in the street, it is reported, and died from his burns.
The incident reportedly happened in the Playas del Cuyabeno area of Sucumbios province
Another local report, from EXTRA.ec, said that specialist police units had been slow to arrive due to the geographical conditions of the area – which is accessible by river.
Read more from Sky News:
IDF finds ‘failings’ over attack on aid workers
Pope blesses Easter crowds from popemobile
According to reports, police officers at the station apparently decided they could not intervene when the mob arrived out of concerns for their own safety.
The UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has been approached for comment.
Premier League match tickets at Chelsea have been selling for more than twice the price of a season ticket on an American exchange website with a familiar director and investor to supporters – club chairman Todd Boehly.
Amid growing fan fury, Sky News was able to access the Vivid Seats platform on different devices last week from London – and saw tickets for the visit of Liverpool on 4 May, priced by Chelsea at a maximum of £80, being sold for between £537 and £2,666.
Some tickets were listed as being sold by traders.
Chairman of Chelsea Todd Boehly. Pic: Reuters
Chelsea’s official website appeared to show no availability for this premium fixture, with the Blues battling for Champions League qualification and Liverpool potentially celebrating being crowned Premier League winners.
The most expensive Stamford Bridge season ticket for this campaign was £1,015.
Vivid is listed by the Premier League among “unauthorised ticket websites” with a message: “We would urge fans to exercise extreme caution when dealing with these websites.”
Vivid insisted it adheres to laws and regulations in Britain
The Chelsea Supporters’ Trust has written to the Premier League to ask that Vivid – given its ties with a club’s shareholder – “ceases facilitating the sale of tickets for significantly above face value”.
Mr Boehly – part of the consortium that replaced Roman Abramovich as owner in 2022 – has not addressed accusations of a “conflict of interest” or claims he is undermining efforts to combat ticket touting.
There are anti-touting warnings on signs in the streets approaching the stadium.
Sky News found some tickets for more than £2,000 on Vivid Seats
An official Chelsea Ticket Exchange allows season ticket holders to sell their tickets “at the pro-rata price of season tickets” to a club member “in a safe, secure environment”.
While Chelsea’s website says to only buy tickets in the UK from official sellers, it adds: “Many of the websites that advertise and sell tickets online are not within the jurisdiction of UK law.
“This means, while we report these sites when we see Chelsea tickets on them, there is little we can do to shut down the sites.”
Sign at Stamford Bridge warning against ticket touting
On Vivid, we did see warnings telling visiting users not to buy seats in the home sections and a pop-up eventually appeared after browsing the availability, saying: “Tickets for the EPL matches are not currently available for purchase in your location.”
No attempt was made by us to buy tickets. But should we have been able to see the listings at all?
Sky News first asked for comment from Vivid last Monday and continued to see ticket listings with variable prices in pounds during the week. It took until Friday night for any form of response.
“Vivid Seats respectfully adheres to the laws that are in place in the United Kingdom and is not in violation of any regulations around EPL tickets,” the email read in part. “As such, Vivid Seats’ policy restricts the sale and marketing of EPL tickets in the United Kingdom.”
Pic: Reuters
When Sky News checked the website again on Saturday the listings for Premier League matches were no longer visible as they are from outside of Britain.
Asked if they were no longer visible after our inquiries, Vivid’s official replied: “The conclusions that you are drawing are factually incorrect.
“We understand that people will try to find ways to circumvent technology and as such, we have validation protocols in place in order to restrict the sale and marketing of EPL tickets in the United Kingdom.”
Again, Vivid insisted it adheres to laws and regulations in Britain.
But the same official did not respond to an email detailing how we were able to view the tickets listings from London on separate days, without using VPN software that can make your browser seem as if it’s accessing the internet from another country.
Chelsea’s match against Ipswich at Stamford Bridge. Pic: Reuters
‘It’s the only way I was going to get here’
Ticket exchange websites can be the only way for some fans overseas to come to matches.
When Ipswich played at Stamford Bridge on 13 April, Baz Gillespie was able to watch after 20 years living in Cyprus by paying a vastly-inflated £300 for two tickets on a website other than Vivid.
“The only way I was going to get here was that way,” he said, remembering the days he could just queue up and pay a fiver for a ticket.
The same match was Martin van Dijk’s first-ever game at the Bridge, having come from the Netherlands after paying €150 (£128) on another exchange website after initially trying through Vivid.
“If there’s no other option, and you want to visit, it’s the only way, but I’d rather get it through like the normal way,” he said.
Chelsea fan Martin van Dijk paid €150 for a ticket on a resale website
‘An absolute disgrace’
It is the “normal way” that so many supporters want to protect and are aghast at Mr Boehly’s links to Vivid, predating his purchase of a stake in Chelsea.
“It’s an absolute disgrace,” supporter Ben Grey said. “He shouldn’t be involved in Chelsea and a reselling website. It’s unethical from a basic perspective.
“The club are coming out with communication saying that they’re against ticket reselling and our semi-majority shareholder [has a website] reselling tickets to our games.”
Asked what the Premier League should do, he replied: “I’m a massive Chelsea fan, I don’t want Chelsea to be hit hard by anything.
“But the fact of the matter is they need to sort that out and if they’re allowing there to be an owner of a club who’s reselling tickets, it’s a disgrace.”
Fan Ben Grey said Mr Boehy shouldn’t be involved in Chelsea and a reselling website
‘Not a very good look’
Another fan, Rich Still, called it “21st century greed”.
The issue is resonating with young children.
Rhys Edwards, watching with his father, said: “It doesn’t look too good on Chelsea and their owners to be fair.
“Saying that [the website] is not authorised by the league they’re playing in isn’t a very good look.”
Officials with Chelsea, the Premier League and Mr Boehly declined to comment.
The Vivid statement to Sky News stressed: “It is important to note that Vivid Seats does not set the base price for tickets sold on its marketplace or receive any revenue from that base price; only the seller sets and receives the base ticket price.”
Labour MP Rupa Huq has proposed a law change to improve pricing transparency
‘It’s like the Wild West’
Vivid highlighted to Sky News its “long-standing partnership”, including being a backer of a 2023 summer tour of the United States.
Chelsea’s website featured a quote saying: “We are pleased to join with a company committed to becoming the ultimate partner for connecting fans to the live events, teams and artists they love.”
The government has launched a consultation to prevent people from being ripped off in Britain by the resale of tickets.
Read more:
Chelsea star’s £160,000 car seized
UK set to host 2035 Women’s World Cup
The limit could range from the cost of the original ticket to a 30% uplift to stop the public being “fleeced” by professional touts.
Labour MP for Ealing Central and Acton, Rupa Huq, has separately proposed a change to the law to improve pricing transparency on secondary ticketing sites.
“It’s an unregulated market,” she told Sky News. “It’s like the Wild West. It needs getting back into control.”
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway