Are Peverel A Little Annoyed?
By admin | August 30th, 2010 | Category: Past Articles | 3 commentsOn Friday TTAS saw it’s first response from ‘Andy’ (Peverels Online Feedback Manager) for a couple of weeks.
One of the things that we picked up on, which many visitors to TTAS had also noticed was the tone of the reply.
Not for the first time, Andy used the phrase ‘allegations’ in reference to our post about Amalgamated Lifts securing the lift maintenance contract on 300 Peverel properties in the South East.
We merely referred to a public document, which suggested that PPMG were addressing it’s supply chain. The fact the report mentioned that it would reduce costs for residents, was contradicted by emails TTAS received from residents at developments that Amalgamated now maintained, who reported their service charges had increased, in particular the ‘lift maintenance’ was one of these.
Therefore, how can Peverel so openly try to publicise cost savings for residents, when that apparently doesn’t appear to be the case.
The tone of the response didn’t come over as though it had been thought about, reviewed and appeared to be quite a ‘frustrated’ and ‘annoyed’ reply.
We may be misinterpreting the message, but after last weeks developments, did TTAS actually provoke PPMG to get even more annoyed at us and that was why ‘Andy’ was short and sharp.
Who knows, but we’d like to hear from anyone who has contacted ‘Andy’ direct and had a satisfactory reply / resolution to their problem or are still waiting for assistance from him?
On or around 24th/25th August 2010, notices went up in Peverel managed developments and invoices were issued to managing agents increasing all House Managers’ flat rentals by 4.4%
Peverel are trying to sneak in back door increases in the House Managers’ flat rentals by increasing those rentals by 4.4%. No discussion at budget meetings – just put it in and hope that a notice on the board will be accepted. Well, it wont! In any case, this makes the whole business of budget meetings a mockery and breaches several sections of the ARHM Code of Practice particularly 1.1, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8. Unfortunately, many of the elderly who still have not woken up to the way in which Peverel manipulate figures so as to achieve the maximum profit for their masters, Vincent Tchenguiz’s Consensus Business Group, will not challenge the figure. Even those who challenge it will have to pay for the time being thus increasing Vincent’s cash flow at a time when he is in financial difficulty. Decent managing agents will refuse to pay, which is exactly what Peverel should do. But then what do they care about rulings against them by the ARHM? How much lower can these corrupt persons sink to lay their hands on money from the less well off in society? The degree of their depravity beggars belief.
Leaseholders are strongly advised to check the actual rent increase for their development and put a complaint in writing to Peverel and to the ARHM. It is felt it is sharp practice to present a budget showing a minimal or zero increase in the House Manager’s flat rental, only to announce a substantial increase via the notice board a few weeks later. This goes against the spirit of the ARHM’s Code of Practice.
And when are all HMs’ flat rentals going to be reduced to their reasonable market rentals as promised? And when will Consensus admit that those rentals include a service charge and ground rent element to which they are not entitled by any interpretation or manipulation of the law? And when will the Government take its head out of the sand and realise that strong criminal legislation is required to put a stop to these charlatans’ activities?
I have conversed with Andy a number of times, in those converstions nothing ever got resolved, Andy and FB managed to totally derail a meeting that was set up and bandied around insults towards me and another member of the residents association and then claimed it was a mistake, if this was Andy’s school report, I would be marking him with ‘F – needs to seriously improve and learn to play nicely with others’
Donald,
Good letter, don’t forget the RICS Code of Residential management practice which goes a very long way towards supporting your argument and is also approved by the Secretary of State.
I would love to see copies of both the above referenced documents available for free download. Neither are difficult to read or interpret with great links to relevant statutes and the information contained in both is very powerful to the individual. Any RTM companies / residents associations need copies of both desperately. Shame the Freeholders of this country seem to have mislaid theirs, would have kept them above scrutiny and out of trouble!
Kind regards,
James Butler Esq – Director