A group of residents has questioned the integrity of Hammersmith and Fulham Council and accused it of 'failing the borough' after losing their bid to bring the Sands End Community Centre back to life.
The Sands End Community Association (SECA) wanted to buy the Broughton Road building from the authority after it was shut down and put out to tender earlier this year.
Their £2.2m offer was to be funded by local businessman John Goddard, who was going to give the rear of the building over to the group and allow them to recommence classes and activities, while the rest of the property would be turned to flats.
But the council snubbed their offer and went for a higher bid and it is now expected the entire building will be made into luxury homes.
Ann Rosenberg, instrumental behind SECA's vision, says the group is prepared to fight on as it doesn't believe the council gave their bid due consideration.
The authority was duty bound to consider lower bids that 'added value' to the community but Ms Rosenberg doesn't believe this was done, pointing out the bidding process was 'sealed', as well as the council's failure to enter into any dialogue with SECA once it had submitted its bid.
In fact, she doesn't believe SECA's bid was studied at all. "We had no chance - it seems obvious now that right from the beginning the only bid the council was interested in was the highest one," said Ms Rosenberg.
"They have no regard whatsoever for the quality of life of people in Fulham and are more interested in developers and what they can get. Their slogan, 'Putting Residents First', is not accurate."
SECA is seeking legal advice as to whether their bid can be re-examined on grounds the council didn't comply properly with planning rules.
"This is a public building so we cannot understand why the bidding process was so secretive. We also feel there was a conflict of interest in that estate agents were consulted with the offers.
"We had no idea what we were up against. We weren't once consulted and asked for a meeting."
Ms Rosenberg now feels the decision has deprived residents of much needed facilities and fears any new property development will be unaffordable and out of reach for ordinary locals.
"We would have offered a place of ongoing benefit to the community, including a catering school, affordable gym facilities and alibrary. The flats would have been affordable.
"The council's decision flies in the face of the big society philosophy."
The authority insists it did look fully at all 20 bids and said legally it was obliged to get the best deal for tax payers. The bid was sealed because the deal was commercially sensitive, which it says is standard practice.
Councillor Nick Botterill, deputy leader and cabinet member for environment and asset management, said: "We have a huge number of volunteers in this borough and we work closely with H&F Volunteers Centre to get more people helping out in their neighbourhoods. We are fully supportive of community projects, having given away more than £8m to voluntary organisations in the last two years, which makes us one of the most generous councils when it comes to funding the voluntary sector in London.
"We believe that Big Society means extending it out to include wider society. Community is about more than bricks and mortar - it is about frontline services and every single service that was in Sands End has been re-provided elsewhere in the borough - in most cases, within less than a mile.
"The reality of the bid from London Property Lettings and Sands End Community Centre Association was that they were trying to preserve a crumbling building, used by a minority of people, that was costing taxpayers large amounts of money to maintain each year."
The authority added it can't name the winning bid as contract negotiations are ongoing.