Why is Queens Arcade Being Auctioned?

PICTURE: Dave Young
Queens Arcade, the glass-roofed walkway between Queens Road and York Gardens in Hastings town centre which has housed a mix of small trader outlets since 1882, isn’t just an aesthetically pleasing place to get a haircut or buy meat, fish and confectionery. In 1924 John Logie Baird was renting one of the units for his engineering workshop and there gave his first public demonstrations in televising pictures of objects in motion. As the plaque within asserts, it has good claims to be called “the birthplace of television”.
It is also, in these days of unprecedented retail challenge, and of exhortations to high streets to meet the threat of online competition by offering shopping ‘experiences’, an attractive enclave of old-style independent merchandising – not to be undervalued in a tourist town.

PICTURE: Dave Young
So why is the freehold building due to be sold at auction next week by Brighton auctioneers Clive Emson with so little publicity or marketing effort? The traders themselves seem to have heard nothing about the prospective sale until mailed with the news a couple of weeks ago. It’s a question raised in the last few days by many local people with an interest in how Hastings should conserve and exploit its historic and aesthetic character. The answer must lie with the trustee owners.
Trust history
The Went Tree Trust, set up under a will of 1926 made by former mayor of Hastings, Alderman Ben Harry Went Tree, has owned and managed the arcade for almost a century. The Trust has two peculiar and exclusive objects – one to purchase artefacts for show in Hastings Museum, the other to assist Hastings citizens to emigrate to countries of the British Commonwealth (originally Empire). It’s unlikely that income from the Trust has been applied to pay for any outward passage for quite a while. But it has certainly benefited the museum over its long history, including financing additions to the collection there relating to Mr Baird. And at least two of its three current trustees have close connections with the museum: Marion Purdy, who is also a trustee of Project Art Works, is a former museum chair; Catherine Hirst, formerly on its staff.
The trustees put out a formal statement to HIP last week: “It is with great regret that we have taken this decision to sell. We appreciate its historic value and the opportunities that it’s provided for local businesses for over 150 years. However, this move is necessary to secure the charity’s financial future and enable it to continue to support the charitable aims of its founder, Alderman Went Tree. We are confident that the arcade will thrive under new ownership.”
The financial pressure on the Trust is readily apparent from its published accounts. In the five years up to January 2020, i.e. even before any manifestation of the Covid-19 pandemic, these accounts show consistent losses – an average of £60-65,000 annual rental income, but expenditure well in excess, including losses of £66,000 in 2018-19 and of over £28,000 in 2019-20. It’s difficult to understand how such regular losses can have been allowed to repeat year on year despite the arcade continuing to attract a more or less full roster of tenants: according to the auction particulars, just one double unit out of 16 is described as “vacant”, though of course no ‘non-essential’ traders can open their doors during the current lockdown.
However, a glance at the accounts filed with the Charities Commission shows that in 2018-19 expenditure on legal and professional fees is recorded as over £37,000 in 2018/19 rising to over £53,000 in 2019/20, with a note showing that most of the latter sum was paid to solicitors Heringtons, of whom the third trustee Sally Kinsey is a partner. Over £38,000 is identified as legal fees referable to “rent and rent arrears” – an indication of management difficulties, if nothing else.
Clearly, if the Trust cannot manage its asset in such a way as to make a profit for the benefit of its charitable purposes, it must be right for its trustees to sell.
Community interests
But Adam Wide, a prominent local campaigner for community enterprises and trustee of Heart of Hastings (though he emphasises that he does not speak on this subject for HoH), questions why the Went Tree trustees are acting so precipitately. “Why only two weeks’ notice?” he asks. “Selling in this manner gives the local community no time to make a bid. Surely it would make more financial and charitable sense to market the property widely within Hastings to see what alternative ideas may be brought forward.”
Other postings on social media have wondered whether Hastings Borough Council could step in to make a bid. The council has access to government funds for town centre conservation (see page 3 of this issue). But although the arcade is not a listed building, it’s difficult to imagine that any new commercial owners would be allowed to change its aesthetic appearance – nor any reason to think they would want to do so. From the council’s point of view, it’s not obvious why it should be protected from falling into private ownership.
The issue is rather whether sale by the imminent auction, due to be conducted online next Wednesday 24th March, is the best method of securing the maximum price. The property is believed to have been valued in 2019 at or over £1m. The auction particulars state a guide price of £325,000-350,000. General high street values have undoubtedly been hit hard by the pandemic, but the extent of this loss, if sustained, is eyebrow-raising. The trustees should concern themselves with whether they are really acting in the Trust’s best interests.
The Ragged-Trousered Engineer
In his autobiography, John Logie Baird refers to Alderman Tree, his landlord in Queens Arcade, as ‘Mr Twigg’, and describes how he required him to vacate after an explosion in his engineering workshop there in July 1924. The two men argued on the pavement outside, Baird further entertaining the small crowd that gathered to watch the altercation by splitting his trousers. He left Hastings altogether soon after.
We hope you have enjoyed reading this article. The future of our volunteer led, non-profit publication would be far more secure with the aid of a small donation. You can also support local journalism by becoming a friend of HIP. It only takes a minute and we would be very grateful.
Whoever wrote this report obviously does not have any understanding of planning laws or of how developers think ! They naively state –
“But although the arcade is not a listed building, it’s difficult to imagine that any new commercial owners would be allowed to change its aesthetic appearance – nor any reason to think they would want to do so.”
If the arcade is not protected by any law a developer can exploit the building as they wish! That is precisely why buildings ARE listed ! That is why there are conservation laws. Without those laws, protecting a building can be impossible.
In the writers naive bubble world anyone buying it would keep it ‘as is’ & never consider exploiting the space for maximum financial return. So the council jolly well SHOULD be pulling out all the stops to protect it as no local community group with the arcades best interest at heart will have time to raise funds for next weeks auction. It is could be sold to any old investor in the wide world.
The council MUST act & protect this historical site. It is bonkers that they have sat on their hands up till now never thinking it would be a good idea to protect this piece of Hasting’s history.
I have myself been following the situation re Queen’s Arcade for a while, and share the concerns expressed about it.
Along with one or two others, I have been looking into the possibility of making an approach to the Went Tree Trust with regard to an alternative ownership model for the Arcade as a community enterprise, as I don’t believe the Council is at all likely to spend its resources on this kind of asset in the current environment.
Being realistic, the Arcade needs to be under proper business management so the income from the tenants supports not only the future of this unique bit of local history, but also the original intended benefits that the trust was established to secure.
At this late stage, it seems unlikely that the auction sale can/will be stopped, so it may mean that the Went Tree Trust could very soon be out of the picture with questions to answer, but no active future role with the Arcade itself.
So addressing the matter of the outcome of the auction is my immediate concern.
I believe this provides an opportunity for a citizen response to the situation.
I personally would be able to contribute something material towards a suitable consortium offer, but it would require a number of others to join in to reach the likely sale price in excess of £300,000.
If anyone shares my concerns and relates to the possibility of being involved in the purchase with a realistic investment towards that end, I’d be happy to hear from them. Could you call 07887 706574 as soon as possible. Time is short. Thanks.
Good feature. Nothing given to good causes by this trust for the last 5 years and possibly for many more years before that. However, tens of thousands spent on legal matters every one of the last 5 years. Hence large losses and now having to sell its only asset.
Doesn’t look good.
Who has bought the arcade?