UPDATED Wandsworth Council has been accused of abusing its powers after threatening an 82-year-old Roehampton resident with eviction because of a single Facebook comment critical of its housing cabinet member.
Frances Bird, who has lived in her council flat for 41 years and is a well-known campaigner on the Lennox Estate, was told she could lose her home after posting a remark about Councillor Aydin Dikerdem, the council’s Cabinet Member for Housing.
Within days, Bird was pressured to step down as chair of the Burke Close Residents Association – despite the group having just been re-accredited by the council for 2025–27 with her listed as its representative. Then came an email from the council’s Area Housing Manager warning that her Facebook post had been reported to police, recorded as a “hate incident,” and could lead to legal action to evict her.
“You will likely be served with a Notice of Seeking Possession,” the email states, “I can not tell you when it will be served at this time.”
What the threat means
A Notice of Seeking Possession is the formal first step a landlord must take before attempting to evict a tenant through the courts. It is a legal document that sets out the grounds for possession, a timeframe, and the basis on which the landlord intends to proceed.
Councils often rely on grounds such as rent arrears, criminal activity, harassment, or serious anti-social behaviour. But a single Facebook comment is unlikely to amount to grounds for eviction. For the council to succeed, it would have to convince a judge that Bird had breached her tenancy agreement in a way that was serious enough to justify taking her home.
Supporters say this latest threat cannot be separated from Bird’s decades of challenging the council on behalf of her neighbours. She has repeatedly pressed housing officers over poor maintenance of the estate, raising a complaint about lack of cleaning and broken windows on the estate just last month.
Critically, she has also been one of the most outspoken voices against the council’s plans to build a huge residential tower on the estate’s green — a scheme personally championed by Cllr Dikerdem, and one that appears for the moment to have stalled under the weight of community opposition.
Bird was one of the first residents to speak out after a devastating series of gas explosions in Burke Close back in March destroyed three homes. “It looked like a bomb had gone off,” she told Putney.news at the time, accusing the council of ignoring repeated warnings about gas smells and electrical faults. Months later, residents are still waiting for a full explanation of what happened.
For many neighbours, Bird’s willingness to expose safety failings and challenge the council explains why she has been singled out now.
“An outrageous abuse of power”
Residents and campaigners have described the council’s actions as “an outrageous abuse of power,” pointing out that Bird now faces the prospect of defending herself in court simply for posting a critical comment online.
“This is about shutting down dissent,” one neighbour told Putney.news. “Fran has been a thorn in the council’s side for years — raising uncomfortable questions about cleaning, repairs, explosions, and fighting their redevelopment plans. They’d rather silence her than listen to her.”
Bird is a fixture of the estate, known for decades of voluntary work and support for neighbours. News that she faces eviction has spread quickly, with residents rallying behind her. Several have already provided written statements of support describing her as “kind, fair-minded and supportive,” dismissing any claim of racism as “baseless.”
One statement reads:
“When my family faced racism, Fran was one of the people who stood by us. Any suggestion she is racist is simply untrue. This attempt to evict her is nothing more than an attack on her character and reputation.”
From Facebook post to courtroom
The comment at the heart of the dispute was posted in July under a council-sponsored Facebook advert. In it, Bird made a comment about Cllr Dikerdem, which, according to the council, was flagged to police. Officers logged it as a “hate incident” – the council claims. “We have requested further information from them before considering what further action we take,” an email sent to her reveals. The police has yet to contact her over the post.
Despite that, the council escalated the matter — first attempting to force Bird out of her residents’ association role, then threatening to take her to court to recover possession of her home.
While social housing tenancy agreements allow councils to take action over “anti-social behaviour” both inside and outside the home, eviction on the basis of a single online comment is almost unheard of.
For Bird’s supporters, the case raises broader questions about freedom of speech and the balance of power between the council and its tenants. “If they can threaten Fran with losing her home over one Facebook comment, who’s next?” asked one neighbour. “This is about fear. They want people to be scared to speak out.”
Editor’s note: Several readers have asked about the specific content of the Facebook comment at the centre of this case. We are aware of what Ms Bird wrote, but have chosen not to republish it.
Our editorial judgment is that doing so would amplify offensive language without materially helping readers assess the central questions this case raises: whether the council’s response is proportionate, why police have not contacted Ms Bird despite the claimed “hate incident” recording, what due process has been followed, and why the Cabinet Member for Housing has refused to address any of these questions.
We believe the public interest lies in scrutinising the council’s use of its powers as a landlord, not in republishing offensive speech.
What happens next
Bird has not yet been served with a Notice of Seeking Possession but has been warned it is imminent. If the case goes to court, she would have to stand before a judge to argue why she should not be evicted.
In the meantime, residents are rallying support, gathering statements of good character, and preparing to fight alongside her.
“I’ve lived here for 41 years. I’ve raised families, helped neighbours, fought for this community,” Bird said. “Now they want to throw me out over a Facebook post. It’s shocking and frightening — but I won’t be silenced.”
Cllr Aydin Dikerdem, Cabinet Member for Housing, was asked to comment on this story and the eviction threat. He did not address questions about proportionality or due process, instead choosing to issue a personal attack on this publication and its editor. He provided no comment on the case itself.
Update Mon 6 Oct: Wandsworth Council has responded. A spokesperson said: “Wandsworth Council will not tolerate any form of hate speech on our social media channels, including discriminatory or offensive comments about race, religion or other protected characteristics. Ms Bird breached these rules and we have requested further information from the police before considering what further action to take. Ms Bird has not been served with a Notice of Seeking Possession.”
Update Fri 10 Oct: On 9 October, Cllr Aydin Dikerdem, Wandsworth Council’s Cabinet Member for Housing, published a video on his Instagram account attacking this article and Putney.news. In the video, he described the publication as politically biased and “filled with misinformation,” and denied that the council was threatening to evict Ms Frances Bird.
Putney.news stands by its reporting. The article quotes directly from an email sent to Ms Bird by the council’s Area Housing Manager stating that her Facebook comment had been “recorded as a hate incident” and that she would “likely be served with a Notice of Seeking Possession.” This is the formal first step in potential eviction proceedings.
The article does not claim that an eviction has already taken place, only that such action was being considered. Putney.news invited Cllr Dikerdem and the council to clarify their position before publication; neither provided a substantive response to the questions asked.
We remain open to publishing any further factual clarification or correction from Wandsworth Council regarding the handling of this case
Without seeing what Frances Burd actually wrote (and i! can see that you couldn’t reproduce it) it’s hard to judge, but unless the comment was racially abusive – and even then – threatening eviction is *very* concerning and seems completely over the top.
If she has not already done so, I suggest Frances Bird contact The Free Speech Union at freespeechunion.org