Peverel / CBG Times Newspaper Coverage 4th December
By admin | December 7th, 2009 | Category: Past Articles | 12 commentsThose of you that are readers of The Times Newspaper, may have read within the ‘Money Section’, yet another report on how Peverel / Consensus Business Group appear to be ripping off their retirement homeowners.
However, as leaseholders of CBG / Peverel properties - we drew many comparisons of the cases highlighted, with our own.
Retirement home tenants angry over ‘sneaky charges’
We investigate fresh claims of unfair and exploitative business practices by PeverelElderly leaseholders are squaring up to Peverel, the notorious managing agent of retirement flats, over new accusations that vulnerable residents are being overcharged by the company.
Times Money looks at the latest claims by residents campaigning for a fairer deal for older leaseholders and offers advice on how to tackle problems in your block.
Warden call and door entry
Residents have accused Peverel, which is owned by the Consensus Business Group, of trying to bamboozle leaseholders into paying for the installation of new equipment that is expensive and unnecessary. In each case, Peverel has proposed that the work is carried out by Cirrus, the technology company that it owns.
Carlex, the Campaign Against Retirement Leasehold Exploitation, has identified a number of developments where vulnerable residents were told of the need to upgrade their warden-call and door-entry systems but were given little choice over what the work would involve or who would do it.
Under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act managing agents must seek quotes from three different companies for significant works that will cost more than £250 per resident.
In Heather Court, in Chichester, Sussex, and Chislet Court, Herne Bay, and Roman Court, Edenbridge, both in Kent, only two companies produced a tender for the work: Cirrus and Glyn Jackson Communications. In the case of Heather Court, a third quote was sought from A1 Security Systems. However, its engineers were not trained to work with the equipment so it was unable to submit a tender.
Peverel did not ask for tenders from Chubb, one of the market leaders of warden-call equipment, or Tunstall, which fitted the existing equipment in many of its blocks.
In each case the Cirrus bid was cheaper than that submitted by Glyn Jackson. Residents would have to pay up to £32,000 for the work.
Residents in Gibson Court, Esher, Surrey, were told that they would have to pay about £39,000 for the new system because the current system did not comply with the new high-technology telephone network being rolled out by BT over the coming years.
Marina Golding, who owns a flat in the development that is used by her mother, was at a meeting in which residents were told of two quotes, one from Glyn Jackson for £41,000 and one from Cirrus for £38,973.
Mrs Golding was shocked at the huge bill quoted by Peverel and contacted another company to get an estimate for the work. Delta Communication Ltd carried out an onsite inspection and quoted her a price of £17,000 to upgrade the system in Gibson Court, more than £20,000 cheaper than the cost quoted by Cirrus.
The quote does not include all the specifications outlined in the Cirrus quote, such as an intercom system so that residents can contact each other, or a video door-entry system. However, Mrs Golding says that these are features that residents do not want, a fact that Peverel has ignored.
Roger Southam, of Chainbow, a property management company, says: “We have seen a number of examples where residents have received expensive quotes or overspecified quotes from Peverel. When challenged, these quotes can drop substantially.”
This year residents at Heather Court were also told that their warden-call system needed updating, but they say that they were not told why the cost needed to be so high.
Sheila Tofield, 78, from Heather Court, who fears the huge bill for upgrading the system, says: “It feels like you are banging your head against a brick wall. They will do what they want and not what is in the interests of residents in the block.”
Likewise, in Chislet Court and Roman Court, residents have been told that the system is out of date and needs replacing. In each case seen by Times Money, the cheapest quote was supplied by Cirrus, while the second-cheapest quote was always from Glyn Jackson Communications.
Times Money tried to contact Glyn Jackson but the mobile phone number listed on the quote given to residents was not answered. The company is not registered with the Telecare Services Association, the trade body.
Peverel refused to explain why Glyn Jackson was asked to quote in every case. But the company did say: “Peverel always follows a strict consultation process. This is regulated by statute including the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act. This allows a two-way consultation with residents to take place, where quotes from contractors can be nominated and subsequent quotes can be reviewed and agreed.
“It is important to note that at Gibson Court the consultation process is not complete. All suitable options, including contractor suggestions from residents, will be reviewed and discussed in line with statute.”
Insurance
Residents of some retirement blocks report receiving expensive insurance quotes inflated by commissions earned by a subsidiary of Peverel, the managing agent.
Peverel is expected to collect insurance premiums on behalf of the landlord of the blocks it manages. It does not organise the insurance for the retirement developments. Instead, Kingsborough Insurance Services, owned by Peverel, is employed to obtain the buildings cover for the blocks. However, Kingsborough is not an insurer itself or a broker. Instead, it is a middleman, working between Peverel and Oval, the broker that obtains the buildings insurance.
In the last financial year, 2008-09, and in 2007-08, Kingsborough Insurance charged some residents a commission of 33 per cent for its services. This is on top of the 3.45 per cent charged by Oval for organising the insurance. This resulted in residents in Royston Court, in Esher, Surrey, paying £6,369.57 for buildings insurance, plus £209 to Oval and £2,004 to Kingsborough.
In the current financial year the commission collected by Kingsborough Insurance has fallen to 5.45 per cent, but residents fear that it could rise again. Peverel is carrying out an investigation into the commission earned by its insurance arm, which will be completed by February next year.
Residents can challenge the commission that is included in their service charge for reasonableness, under the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act, but the process can be costly.
Mr Southam says: “It is a case which is incredibly hard to fight because the market costs of insurance can vary.”
He recommends that residents who are unhappy about hefty commission payments should seek to manage their own block through Right to Manage. For more information on Right to Manage visit www.lease-advice.org.uk or call 020-7374 5380.
Minor alterations
Leaseholders in some Peverel-owned blocks are charged every time that they wish to change the fixtures and fittings in their own homes. Peverel insists that residents seek permission to make alterations, such as changes to lighting or the installation of new kitchen equipment. The cost of each permission request is £35 plus VAT.
However, this is not the only cost incurred by residents, who complain of other charges designed to provide a steady income stream for Peverel.
Mrs Tofield tried to install satellite television recently. She was told by Peverel that she would have to pay a company other than Sky to install the equipment, at a cost of £299, and would also have to pay a yearly maintenance fee of up to £95 in addition to her satellite subscription. Mrs Tofield says: “The charges became so restrictive that I decided not to bother.”
Mr Southam says: “Peverel is the king of sneaky charges. It even charges people to set up standing orders. In the Commonhold and Leasehold legislation there is a requirement for administration charges to be reasonable.”
Peverel says: “It is now common in a lease for residents to promise not to alter landlord’s fixtures and fittings. Residents may need Peverel to seek the landlord’s permission to make alterations. To ensure there are no difficulties when they sell the flat the resident also needs written confirmation that alterations have been agreed by the landlord. This incurs a cost.”
Source: TimesOnline
It’s pleasing to know that The Times newspaper are not letting this story rest and ensuring that CBG are kept in the public eye, whilst also confirming the facts TheTruthAboutSolitaire has previously highlighted, whereby Cirrus and Kingsborough are all CBG / Peverel companies.
No.10 Downing St Petition
We are up to 449 signatures on the No.10 Downing St Petition, calling for government regulation of the property management / service industry and need your help to hit the minimum target of 500, to ensure that the petition is considered by No.10.
Therefore, if you have not already signed the petition, please, please sign it today and let neighbours / friends know about it.
Sign the petition at: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/flatownerhelp/
Solitaire’s / Peverel’s Contributions
Those regular visitors to TheTruthAboutSolitaire, will have noticed that the contribution of ‘Andy’ (Peverel/Solitaire online feedback manager) has been very little of late and it’s not due a lack of visits to TheTruthAboutSolitaire by them!
Our webstats, show that they are frequently monitoring the website and we wonder whether the lack of comment is due to the fact that they realise, we do not believe a word ‘Andy’ has to say and know he is simply playing lip-service to residents?
Everyone is aware that when a problem is highlighted on TheTruthAboutSolitiare, they endeavour to remedy it – however, it should not come to this and should be dealt with immediately!
Therefore, if you are still experiencing problems with Peverel / Solitaire and would like us to highlight your issues, please e-mail us with photo’s and a story of the actions you have undertaken, to no avail.
I find it ‘amazing’ that with the amount of (bad) focus set on CBG (and associated companies) at present that they still continue to carry on regardless with their bad practices. I have just received our Ground Rent demand from E&M (a CBG company!) with another ambiguous amount on it even though they know FULL well that I am disputing part of the charge (that they claim are arrears!) I wonder whether CBG are just trying to get as much revenue in before things change (and we all know any legislative change will take considerable time to come into effect!) We need all the people who have been looking into this: BBC: WatchDog, Rip Off Britain, Working Lunch, Breakfast, BBC News; The Times, The Mail, OFT, RICS, ARMA(! for what it’s worth them being involved – not a lot in most pple’s opinion!) etc. to really push the message though!
If any other company in any other industry operated in the same way that GBG’s business’ run their operations they’d be out of business in a flash! CBG is protected by the arduous route of LVT, RTM and legal jargon in most lease contracts etc. in trying to affect any change in how our HOMES are run! I personally can’t wait for the day they go out of business – particularly after some of the comments (e.g. dribbling geriatrics!) that has come from them! In my opinion showing their complete and utter disrespect for their ‘customers’!
Also seeing as the contributions from ‘Andy’ have all but dried up recently I hope that they are getting the message that ‘lip service’ is not enough and that we demand that they do something proactive about the terrible situation that they have created for all of us!
But it’s the same old story – an article is published in the national press slating CBG, but ultimately who with any power is doing anything about it…??? Answer – nobody.
It’s good to see that the No. 10 petition is getting close to the 500 signature mark, but then what…??? Once more than 500 have signed it, the government will “look into it”. The petition is open until 15th April 2010, so nothing will happen before then, I’m sure. And shortly after that date, we have a General Election to look forward to, and more than likely a change of Government thereafter. So, will the new occupants of No. 10 be interested in this petition…??? They might be duty-bound to look into it with more than 500 signatories, but I suspect they will have more pressing matters to deal with, at least in the short-term. So I doubt anything will come of this petition until late 2010 at the earliest…..
I think all we can hope for at the moment is that the press / media keep publishing articles highlighting the many & varied failings of CBG and their multitude of offspring companies (many of which really should have been put down at birth…..), so that the pressure is kept up, and hopefully the embarrassment factor that must exist now is maintained & increased…..
I’ve noted that “Andy” seems to have gone rather quiet recently. Perhaps he’s so involved with chasing up various issues up & down the land that he hasn’t got time to respond. Perhaps he’s out visiting sites with long-running issues to see for himself what is causing so much grief in Solitaire Towers. Or perhaps he’s doing his Christmas shopping…..
I’ve now received my Ground Rent bill for Jan-June 2010 from E&ML. It’s only for £15, due 1st January (so they won’t be getting it before then…). It will shortly be followed by Solitaire’s bill for Service Charges for the same period, which will probably be somewhere in the region of £400. As I still haven’t paid the last invoice for July-December this year, the imminent invoice will just get added to the bill…..
When I finally see some action on the issues that were supposed to have been sorted out months ago, then I might consider writing a cheque. Until then, I am not paying for services I’m not receiving – fair enough, I think…
[...] more here: Peverel / CBG Times Newspaper Coverage 4th December By admin | category: building, building insurance uk | tags: also-received, are-unhappy, [...]
[...] from: Peverel / CBG Times Newspaper Coverage 4th December By admin | category: buildings insurance | tags: buildings insurance, internet, [...]
I would urge anybody with a problem with this company not to be disheartened. The reason they act as they do is because we have allowed it. Any demand you get challenge it. Insist on seeing the invoice, insist on major amounts on seeing 3 quotes. more important do not pay until they have satisfied you. You will receive threats, but that is all they can do. provided you make clear you will pay if they satisfy your concerns. Even if you were taken to court, which you won’t any judge will see what has been going on and side with you. This mob can only survive with their revenue coming in. I suggest everyone goes around each estate and get as many people as possible involved. Their company is in our hands. If enough withhold payment they are finished as they deserve to be.
Hi Michael
thankyou for your comment
I think that is the only avenue left for others to deal with this scurrilous corrupt company.
The latest “handy andy” response to Mr Gawthorpe is a pathetic attempt to justifiy outrageous extra charges.
How anyone who works for this company of liars and scoundrels is only known to the devil.
Me Again,
Now i know this works time to get serious! Believe it or not, within the Peverel empire there are still staff who act in a proper manner. Generally, they were with the group before they were taken over. I would like to thank Dean Rochester and Collette Keane for acting in a professional manner.
I have enjoyed the TV exposure peverel have had lately. It seems it can only be a matter of time before Ray Mears has a series Surviving Peverel! You never know how about i am Peverel resident get me out of here?
Do not be frightened by anything this company try to do. With all that is going on they are quite powerless. That is why they act as they do in the hope no one will dare challenge them. Should anyone be taken to court, let all of us who are all victims of Peverel pledge that we will be in court as a witness for the defence (no doubt the de fence that they charged double to build!)Imagine 1000 people turning up in court. We can do it! look what we have managed thus far!
Get all the residents to now challenge every bill, insist on every receipt, question every item. Make sure you have properly audited accounts. Either send one letter or email per week asking them to justify their costs. If they do not answer do not be afraid to withold your payments, whilst making it clear you will resume payments when your issues are settled.
We hold the power over Peverel, and should you ever despair of the fight remember the “dribbling Geriatrics” They are our parents, they are the ones who fought for our future in the war they are the ones who we must fightfor now. It is our duty to ensure that their declining years are spent in peace and not be harrassed by money grabbers such as this group of companies!
to those to whom it applies i wish you a very happy christmas. I know know Jesus was born in a stable, after Joseph and Mary found out the inn was managed by Peverel!
Well done Michael, let’s stand up and be counted, we are not dribbling we are foaming
We all get frustrated and disheartened, however, TTAS has given us the opportunity to come together and learn from each other to become formidable force .
I fully agree with Micheal Epstein’s solution to stop Peverel in their track for service charge.
I would like to high light that ground rent must be paid in full at the right time otherwise Peverel will win in the court, however, I think the rent arrear need to be around £250 before they can take court action.
There is no room for any bulling in the society at any level. Why a Management Company, who totally rely on us for their living, is given powers to say what they like and put us in hell because somehow lease give them the right to do so?
My question is how any management Company and insurance Company can sign off a contractor and pay in full without the leaseholder knowledge or approval that work is finished and satisfactory. Who approved that work was carried out to the satisfaction when no inspection has taken place. If the contractor causes further damage, so, why the leaseholder is made to suffer and pay from own pocket?
Michael do you know a very honest solicitor who can take my case as my contractors are being interfered again and again by Peverel and I can prove that. I can prepare the case myself and defend but need professional guidance so there is room for any mistakes and I am pretty sure we will change the law.
No one is going to benefit from my equity loss in the flat as I would rather donate to charity with some cash to use as spring board to collectively take Peverel to court for bulling, breech of lease and non compliance of the common law. I am living in my will that to happen.
I think my days are numbered so the help will be at hand in very near future, however, leave the decision in the All High Mighty and let it happen what is best for the leaseholders.
My true story is only a fraction on the site but is very horrific and ugly, so, Young Vincent what have you to say to that. How ones company can defend ones actions (especially Nigel Banister who was on mailing list knows my case in full) and rest when one cannot back ones own allegations, can one!!!
Act now before it is too late.
Our address is at Coppice Park. There is a feeling here that we should have an action group and call it CRAP Coppice Residents against Peverel.
Michael talks so much sense. Don’t pay unless you are satisfied. If you lived in a freehold house you wouldn’t pay contractors until you were satisfied with their work.
With Regards to Mr Roger Southam’s comment. JOKE!!! how slippery are Chainbow!!!!!
He says above:
Mr Southam says: “Peverel is the king of sneaky charges. It even charges people to set up standing orders. In the Commonhold and Leasehold legislation there is a requirement for administration charges to be reasonable.”
Me:
I was present at a meeting with Chainbow last week. He told us that we had a surplus of £84k, £82k once invoices outstanding were paid.
I asked for this in writing when he sends us the 2010 invoice as the previous company had gone bust leaving us in debt and we wanted this evidenced and also a quick breakdown of which source the income was from (who’d paid debts, leaseholders or commercial)
I explained i wanted: 2007/2008/2009 year end figures & 2009 accruals (amount of invoices unpaid)
then income, where it’s come from – i.e repossessions – debts paid
Commercial debts paid
Working in finance, this would take his company 15mins to prepare & get onto a letter and send to 51 residents (paying him £250 a week for next to nothing!)
He said we can have this but it would cost us!
2 days later, because I’d caused such a “ruckus” at the meeting, highlighting what Chainbow were not doing and the bad state of maintenance the building had fallen in, he complained to other residents about me in a letter. That was funny, big words for a worried man!
What really has stuck with us is that in that letter he claimed we had just £50k in the bank
At our meeting last night, it was mentioned by other residents, how the hell can you loose £34k in 2 days?
How can you be so far out if you had the wrong figures – bad financial management!
Wow, if it’s as bad as the maintenance we pay for, we need them out!
Also, unfortunatly for those residents who can’t download financial information, due to not having internet access, Chainbow have told us they will charge for such items
A resident was told if he wanted a statement of Account of what he’s paid to date off his Service Charges, he’d be charged £57 admin.
Please tell me how long it takes to run a print and post it, 5 minutes and then postage, 50p,…is he having a laugh!
skylineplaza@yahoo.co.uk love to hear from other experiences of chainbow
Try the accounts direct as below.
Main Switchboard
Tel: 01582 393700
Fax: 01582 393701
Web: http://www.peverel.co.uk
Avenue – Peverel OM’s new interactive website for property owners is now available!
For development-specific information and online payment options, visit http://www.peverelom.co.uk
Hope admin allow this to be posted or ask for my e-mail and I will help if I can.
[ADMIN EDIT]
We received the following message from Andy at Peverel in reference to your post JD and subsequently had to remove the accounts representatives details information: