Solitaire Property Management Prosecuted
By admin | November 3rd, 2009 | Category: Past Articles | 10 commentsA contributor to TheTruthAboutSolitaire has brought to our attention a recent legal matter relating to Solitaire Property Management and I quote the following:-
Solitaire Property Management have recently been fined £1500 plus costs of £2000, after pleading guilty to two offences at Southampton Magistrates Court, relating to charges of the company’s failure to comply with fire safety law.
Solitaire Property Management Limited failed to respond to a number of requests for information relating to a premises in Ocean Village, Southampton under Article 27 of the Fire Safety Order.
The successful prosecution was taken forward by Hampshire County Council solicitors for two breaches and Solitaire Property Management received a fine of £750 per offence and ordered to pay £1000 to Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority and £1000 to Hampshire County Council.
Sources: http://davidsimpson.mycouncillor.org.uk/2009/11/02/hampshire-fire-prosecution/
and http://www.hantsfire.gov.uk/stories.htm?newsid=51350
This is yet another example of Solitaire Property Management’s failings and it is pleasing that they were finally brought before the judges for their failings. It’s just disappointing that the fines imposed were minimal and will probably be paid for by the residents of Ocean Village.
At this point, we’d like to refer visitors to the post ‘Inaction by Solitiare ‘could’ Endanger Your Lives’ that we published on the 26 June 2009, where another landlord had been prosecuted for breaches of the fire regulations and we recommended that anyone with a concern about Health & Safety should raise these concerns.
I’d also like to refer people to “Andy’s” reply that was as follows, and it brings us to raise the point of whether this information was produced, following the above case being brought against Solitaire?
I read admin’s posting on Health & Safety last week when I was helping the guys prepare for the Peverel Property Management operations conference that took place over a day and half on Wednesday & Thursday. As Tom our Health & Safety manager was due to be presenting at one of the property manager training sessions I asked him to give his response to the questions raised in the posting which he did on Friday morning:
“Whilst the primary piece of health and safety legislation in the UK is the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, below this Act are many pieces of secondary legislation, covering areas such as fire safety, asbestos, work at height etc.
Solitaire are absolutely committed to complying with all relevant legislation, and with maintaining high levels of health and safety in general.
As pointed out in a recent thread, the first custodial sentence was given in 2008 for breaches to the (relatively) new Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, which is now the main piece of legislation relating specifically to fire safety in the UK. The fact that the first person to receive a jail sentence was a landlord demonstrates that local fire authorities take compliance within the housing sector very seriously, as is only right.
Whilst the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order itself does not prescribe the servicing and maintenance arrangements which should be in place for fire detection systems, there is a British Standard (BS 5839) which offers specific details on the arrangements for the installation, repair and maintenance of fire and smoke detector systems.
Solitaire ensure that where a fire or smoke detection system is present within the common areas of a property, the requirements of the British Standard are complied with and they are serviced and maintained by a competent contractor on a regular basis (at least every 6 months). Servicing and maintenance programmes are also arranged as required for other fire safety equipment – e.g. emergency lights, automatic opening smoke vents, dry risers etc.”
Tom’s response came before the dreadful fire in a council owned and managed block of flats in Camberwell built in the 1960’s.
When our Property Managers identify faulty fire alarms they should immediately instruct specialist contractors to resolve the problem. There are no half measures here – if you are unhappy with the way your enquiry is being handled please don’t hesitate to email me direct at: andy.soltairepm@peverel.co.uk and I will pass it on to the relevant people.
Once again, TheTruthAboutSolitaire were making people aware of how Solitaire could endanger your lives by their inactions.
If any residents of Ocean Village, Southampton, are visitors to TheTruthAboutSolitaire, we would welcome your comments on their performance and the actions that lead to Hampshire County Council taking them to court.
Quote: “Solitaire Property Management Limited failed to respond to a number of requests for information…”. Does this sound vaguely familiar to anybody else…???
It’s bad enough when they don’t respond to resident’s communications, but when the “request for information” comes from a Fire Brigade or Local Authority, and is directly connected to a piece of legislation (in this case, the Fire Safety Order), then you have to wonder about the thought processes being employed.
Anyway, they’ve now been fined as a result of their failings. The fines imposed should NOT be paid out of the reserve funds for the development in question – why should the residents pay the fines, it’s not them who have been negligent…??? Perhaps Andy could confirm that the fines have / will be met from Solitaire’s own coffers, and not from the reserve funds for the development…???
Quote from Andy’s previous post, as re-printed above: “Solitaire are absolutely committed to complying with all relevant legislation, and with maintaining high levels of health and safety in general”. If this is the case Andy, why is it that Solitaire have been issued with these fines…??? Clearly you haven’t provided information as required, and therefore you haven’t complied with the legislation – the very fact that you have been fined confirms this…???
I have just found this website, a great effort guys. I have been in a new development managed by PeverelOM for about 18 months now and have seen the bare minimum of work being done, despite being charged £137 a month … I am in the process of completing ARMAs complaints procedure.
Thanks to this site I have also just realised that Cirrus Comms is also part of the Peverel group, unbelievable … the invoices I have seen are mostly made up from them!
I am quite sure Peverel have broken the Landlord and Tennant act several times over to me alone, never mind the hundreds of flats in my development! The PM is useless despite putting on a nice smile and friendly manner. I am yet to understand how they charge me that amount as the invoices they have sent me do not add up at all (but atleast I got invoices, but 1 month after the month they have by law!).
I will continue to watch this page with interest, if there is anyone else out there in the Bridge Wharf development then get in touch!
Hi everyone,
I think it’s worth providing some background information to the prosecution in question so we can clear up any misunderstanding. This issue was not, in fact, about standards of fire safety at Ocean Village, so I’d just like to reassure everyone concerned.
Back in March this year, the Hampshire Fire Authority sent three letters to the Solitaire office in Barnet. They were simply requesting confirmation of the name of the owner/freeholder of the Ocean Village property and their address. Due to an administration error that we freely admit, this was not brought to the Property Manager’s attention when it should have been.
When a Fire Officer rang Solitaire in August about the lack of a response, the Regional Property Manager got involved and immediately supplied the relevant information. We also apologised to the Hampshire Fire Authority for the poor administration.
The prosecution brought by the HFA came under the terms of the Regulatory Reform Fire Safety 2005 legislation – which translates as a failure to supply information to the Fire Authority “when asked.” But I’d like to highlight that such fines are paid by the companies concerned, and the residents of Ocean Village were never going to be affected by this judgement in any way.
This prosecution was not about standards of fire safety at Ocean Village, nor about failing to have a Fire Risk Assessment (which the property has had). It was simply because information was not supplied when it was requested.
As we have said in previous postings, Solitaire has suffered from operational shortcomings that needed to be addressed. Poor office administration at the Barnet office was a key issue, but the transfer of all customer service and administration support teams to Luton from this week is designed to correct such issues and deliver a better standard of customer service.
Our website – http://www.solitairepm.co.uk – has been updated with the new Luton address details. However, the customer services telephone number and email address are unchanged.
I’d like to urge anyone with concerns about Health and Safety issues to get in contact with me – similarly for anyone wishing for further clarification.
I hope I’ve been able to clear this up!
Thanks
Andy
Solitaire Online Feedback Manager
Andy, I’m interested to note that you say `such fines are paid by the companies concerned, and the residents of Ocean Village were never going to be affected by this judgement in any way’. Could you please explain then why residents at my site have borne the cost of court charges and interest incurred through late/non payment of invoices by Solitaire?
I have copies of expenditure sheets which clearly state that Solitaire incurred these charges and then passed them onto the residents!
This is just one of the numerous account queries which I have raised and which have been outstanding for many many months, yet I am constantly ignored.
Hi Everyone…
We’d like to advise everyone that we have contacted David Simpson from the LibDems, in regards to Andy’s reply and he has told us that he will be contacting HFRA (which he is a member of) for the clarification of whether the information Andy has provided above is correct.
We have referred David to the above post and Andy’s comments and will update everyone accordingly. Hopefully the information Andy has provided is correct and I dread to think of the consequences for Solitaire, should Andy’s reply be false.
We’ll keep you informed, once we have received a reply.
Admin @ TTAS
So Andy has confirmed that the prosecution came about as a result of an “administration error”, and that the residents of the development involved will not be paying the fine. Glad to hear it. Rather expensive admin error, I’d say – has it been traced back (somebody must have been to blame) I wonder…??? Not only an expensive error, but it has lead to a prosecution which will do further damage to Solitaire’s reputation…..
Considering Andy’s comments above, Berni’s subsequent comment states that he & his fellow residents on his development HAVE had to pay Solitaire’s court charges & interest – surely this is the same as a fine, in which case the residents should NOT have to pay court charges & interest when it’s down to Solitaire’s c0ck-up…??? Perhaps Andy can comment further on why these costs have been charged to the residents of Berni’s development…..
We await with interest the further comments from David Simpson & HFRA. I’m sure what Andy has said is totally accurate – surely he would not post false or misleading information on a public forum…??? To do so would surely be extremely foolish, and potentially illegal…???
In my block side access road is blocked to store bikes ( see my entry under Arma for full details) which is blocking the entry to get in or out. Where the law does stand on that?
Nicky Vogg
[...] In November 2009, following an investigation by Hampshire Fire & Rescue, we publicised the successful prosecution of Solitaire Property Management for failing to comply with fire safety [...]
I have been in my apartment for 2 years and have had no end of problems with Sloitaire. I pay £1,000 pa to have all the hassle of painting, grass cutting and general maintance done for us. What a fool I am to beleive this. In the 2 years I have had to weekly email and phone the so called customer services to get the communal areas hovered. I have had to borrow a lawn mower to cut the grass after 4 months as I am sure I lost my grandson in the grass. We had all but 2 lights out on the stairs which at night is a H&S issues but they just don’t care. Maybe they will be taken to task agian in front of a court for their lack of interest in the duty of care as well as the H&S of their residents.
Paul I’ve got lights out in communal areas too – the council enviro health said nothing they can do because it’s private (ie owned by Solitaire)
anyone know how to force the council enviro health to take action? Who is above them in the council hierarchy?