I have dealt with the landlord insurance Company Aviva(Norwich Union) policy when I was on the board to mange a block. It was a huge fight to change. We used Lansdown as a broker, who gave us a cheaper quote from the same Insurance Company, Aviva (Norwich Union) as the landlord because it did not include our commission.

Your advice is good but it remains to be seen that it will work. Management Company will find another way to “milk” us from our money as far as insurance policy is concerned.

On 25th September 2007 Nicky invited me as a witness to a meeting at Millennium Drive, Isle of Dogs together with Environmental Health Officers, the Managing Agent’s estate manager, Nicola Holmes, who brought their surveyor Chris Anom and his plumber to determine the source of water leaks in her flat and lift shaft.

Nicky also requested her independent witness expert, Mr. Cockram , her builder, and myself to come prior to the meeting to make sure her team was on time and prepared. When Mr Cockram did not arrive, Nicky phoned him and learnt he was discussing the case with Peverel without her knowledge or approval. As a result of that she hurried out of the flat to remove him from the Peverel meeting. She was very upset in front of us with him.

In the meeting it became clear that Peverel surveyor and Mr Coakram both had already discussed the case and Mr. Cockram even suggested that it was his job to take the meeting which Nicky declined.

In my opinion, Nicky’s best interest was not taken care of as he refused to represent her case because he no longer wish to support her against unnecessary tests demanded by Peverel in writing.

Looking on the bright side: they’re not delaying your acquisition date until the invoices are sorted. It’s jsut a case of the resrve fund???

As a purely practical observation – there shouldn’t really be many invoices on your reserve fund as the mjority of invoices will relate to day-to-day issues.

I also understand that it’s the County Court that you have to apply to to get access to the funds as opposed to the LVT. They can’t ignore that – if they do you automatically win your claim (if my memory serves me right). But double check in case I’m wrong on that.

All that said… why are you writing legal letters? If you used a solicitor to manage the handover, then ask them to write the letter. I mean, if you’re a rtm co member, or worse still a director then you must have legal bakup? I’m sure your fellow company members won’t mind the extra cost given the large sum outstanding. You’ve gone so far with the process which is great, but don’t jeopardise things by not checkeing your exact legal position.

If your RTM co can afford it (£300/hour plus VAT) go to a direct access barrister at a London chambers specialising in poperty law. He or she will write a properly framed letter, in the RTM co’s name that will spell out the exact position. It’s about half hour to an hour’s work and I tink you’ll find it money well spent.

Obviously it’s expensive if the barriste has to represent you in court or at tribunal but it possibly won’t come to that. By the way, the barrister can’t sign the letter or send it – but you will find their expertise well worth it.

Good luck – I’m really interested ni this as it’s the next hurdle we have to clear and we have reserves of £25k. Also unpaid service charegs cannot be used as an excuse to delay acquisition or transfer fo funds – the debt simply carries forward to the new company.

I’d urge you to seek legal advice

A useful explanation can be found at http://bit.ly/4uia8M

If you click home page and go downwards and you will find another case that is waiting for the money to be refunded by Peverel has done a fair bit of research. I hope he may be in position to help you.
Good luck.

We are an ex Peverel managed development having recently succeeded in gaining the RTM and getting rid of Peverel. However, since we have gained the RTM they have had to provide us with a number of copy invoices, accounts and bank statements which have thrown up a lot of financial queries and issues. We are looking to taking them to a LVT based on these and also the Kingsborough Insurance issue (our costs via Peverel this year being over £13,000 as opposed to a quote for £9,000 obtained for when we get rid of Kingsborough). Peverel have told me that the published case where Kingsborough’s commission charges were ruled to be unfair and had to be refunded was being appealed against. Does anyone have any further information about this please? Is there an ongoing appeal or has a decision already been made? Incidentally Peverel are refusing to hand over the balance of our reserve fund being £19,000 on the basis that they need to keep it towards outstanding invoices (£6,000 of which is to Kingsborough). Any help towards fighting this great big organisation would be really appreciated.

Slowly but certainly the truth behind Andy statement dated 11th Deceber 2009 under the tag “Peverel OM Customer Satisfaction Survey 2009” is being revealed that was,

“The people who work with me in Peverel are loyal, dedicated and immensely respectful of you our customer. The fact that you may be a little older is neither here nor there and the moment anyone in the team starts to think otherwise then we should send them packing.”

I fully agree with the above statement as Peverel staff are fully dedicated, who are prepared to use threats or other means to protect Peverel. As per whistle blower if someone try to do the right thing they get bullied and they leave. How does that help us is our dilemma?

I was also threatened in October 2007 by Peverel director to hand over the keys of my flat for 2 weeks or the leak will never be repaired “till I go blue in the face” and no one will listen to me including environmental health. Stop writing to us telling what to do? Now it is January 2010 and my flat is still inhabitable and damp, therefore, it seems the threat is still active.

John Murphy threatened and harassed me in January 2008 to sign the documents that I am “satisfied” with his work or he will not leave my property even if takes days. When I took my camera out to record his threats I was threatened that he will call the police if I record as I have been warned not to do so.

Are we getting a customer service or some of us are being punished for asking for the service we deserve or standing up to them?

Our cost at Millennium Drive-Isle of dogs can easily be reduced by stoping the miss use as follow:

1.The cheaper insurance policy will reduce the cost.

2.We have about 6/7 electric gates and doors to provide protection which can be reduced very easily to make them more effective and some flats valve may go up too and reduce the cost.

3.We have cameras ( WITHOUT APPROVAL) may be 10 or so erected which appears to monitor some of the blocks residents moments more rather then providing overall protection to all the residents and their cars. The cameras are monitered by the concierge. A few cameras erected at the appropriate location will be far more beneficial and reduce the cost.

4.We have bike stand in the ally way (WITHOUT APPROVAL AND IS A BREACH OF THE LEASE) for 12 or so bikes with 2 high fence gates which blocks exist from my own bedroom in case there is an explosion or dire emergency. In my opinion, it is monitoring my contactors and my moments which is nerve racking. I have clear evidence that my ex – expert witness was intercepted by Nicola Holmes and Chris Anom, Peverel surveyor in September 2007, without my knowledge or approval. My case was discussed when my expert witness had no authority to do so. Peverel did not know he was appointed to act on my behalf or were ever introduced. This is a clear breach of data protection act from both Peverel and my ex – expert witness. Bike stand must be dismantled and camera to be replaced at appropriate location to provide over all protection which will reduce the cost.

We pay 15% of the expenditure to the Management Company, so there is the conflict. Higher the maintenance and refurbishment work, the more money Peverel are ripping off. In my opinion the work created is not to providing the service but just another means to increase the profit at teh residents cost !!!!!

Finally, if someone calls the clients as “dribbling geriatrics” which was changed to “serial complainers” in front of the public and the visitors are threatened then my fear is what is being done to the weak and vulnerable ( any age) behind the doors or away from the public!!!!!.

How many are there with financial resources, skills and above all emotionally strong to stand against Peverel continuous incompetent negligent customer service?