News

Residents of Nairobi estate sue NHC over services

skyline

Nyayo Highrise estate in Nairobi in this photo taken on October 17, 2018. FILE PHOTO | NMG

Home owners in Nairobi’s Nyayo Highrise Estate have sued the National Housing Corporation (NHC) for allegedly terminating key amenity services due to them since last week.

Through an umbrella body, the Nyayo Highrise Owners Association, the landlords claimed that the NHC decision had inconvenienced 10,000 residents of the expansive estate in Kibra Constituency since March 31.

They now want the High Court to stop the NHC from terminating the provision of amenity services that include security, garbage collection, cleaning and sewerage, maintenance of common areas, payment of electricity bills for the common areas and the payment of rates to the county government.

“Pending the hearing and determination of this suit, a temporary injunction be issued restraining the defendant from terminating the provision and management of services to the home owners of Kibera High Rise flats,” partly read the order sought by the residents.

Lady Justice Margaret Muigai directed the residents to serve the NHC.

The litigants claimed that the NHC had for some time provided lacklustre services before terminating them altogether in violation to their constitutional right to a safe, clean and healthy environment.

Uncollected garbage

The residents claimed the action by the NHC had resulted in piles of uncollected garbage in the estate, upsurge of crime and mushrooming of illegal bars and drug dens.

The residents, who purchased the houses from the NHC about 15 years ago, alleged they had a deal with the State firm to incorporate a management company and co-opt all the home owners as shareholders.

The company was to take care of the provision of services but NHC allegedly failed to incorporate the outfit and opted to undertake the work itself and started incorporating third party firms to provide the services.

The NHC is further is accused of failing to process sectional title deed for some home owners.

The group claimed that despite paying service charges to the State firm, it had failed to meet its end of the bargain and remained unco-operative on the matter.