Rumour has it, Peverel SOLD!
By admin | January 18th, 2012 | Category: Past Articles | 70 comments
We’ve been able to obtain a little more information on this story and it does sounds like these rumours are true.
More messages have been received from home owners of Peverel Retirement property who have said that today their ‘House Managers’ have been rather joyful…. when compared with others days.
Apparently, when they have been pressed on this joviality – their response has been “Peverel’s been sold and our jobs are secure!”.
There is still the risk that this is another propaganda stunt, but our Peverel / OM ’sources’ have advised that the House Managers are clearly boasting about it to annoy residents.
Allegedly it’s not quite common knowledge throughout Peverel and that only certain departments are aware of this (well they were before TTAS reported it!).
We’re still waiting to hear from other sources for more details and when we have received this info, you’ll be the first to know about it.
Just remember, where you heard that Peverel had been sold first! TTAS, first for breaking Peverel related news.
Powered by Peverel?
Thanks to TTAS contributor ‘Fleeced’ for bringing to our and the communities attention that it doesn’t look like it’ll be long until our developments are Powered by Peverel.
They discovered the following link to Micro Graphix website, whereby they promote the fact that they have recently undertaken brochure design and production for Peverel Group and quote:
Peverel Retirement is the expert in the management of retirement properties across the UK. Peverel Retirement are part of the Peverel Group which deal with property management and letting, building technologies including communication and protection systems, retirement properties and insurance.
MicroGraphix have designed the new brochure for Peverel Energy, which highlights their services and explains the details in a simple and concise format.
We’ve been able to analyse the image that MicroGraphix use on their website and have been able to determine some of the sells pitch that is quoted on page 4 of the brochure that is displayed.
“Residents will be able to benefit from the excellent corporate relationships that Energycentric has with all major UK Suppliers.
This means that through Peverel Energy, you will have direct access to a dedicated service team including a billing manager, procurement manager and contract manager providing rapid response times in respect of any queries.
It appears that Peverel Energy is being promoted by Peverel Retirement, based on MicroGraphix sales pitch and also from the top line of the brochure on Page 5, where the opening sentence says “Peverel Retirement has launched Peverel Energy.”
Click the images above to view the images that we refer too.
A clever move by Peverel and one that we anticipate to hear a lot more about in the future.
We’ve checked Companies House and there is no company registered in the name of ‘Peverel Energy Ltd’ and therefore, it must purely be another alias that will cause confusion or make people think they’re getting a good deal.
We’ll be publishing more sublet stories tomorrow, in addition to other concerns that potential buyers have.
“This is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius…
Aquarius!
Sympathy and trust abound
Harmony and….’………can anyone else carry on the words?
Sympathy to the devil maybe!
Robert,
Indeed! See comment 30 below.
But all Archangels work together as a team to defeat ‘the devil’.
Does this mean we can get Peverel out of our “Hair?”
Chamonix Equity or Equity…. Or perhaps another goat in for some unpleasant surprises. We shall see.
OMHostage,
Is this the Equity Company you refer to?
http://www.competition-commission.org.uk/inquiries/ref2011/kerry_headland/pdf/summary_of_hearing_with_chamonix_private_equity_22_august_2011.pdf
Or are you referring to the Property Management Company called ‘Chamonix’?
Only goats with strong stomachs (and perhaps questionable discrimination) are likely to eat what’s on offer, and yes PE goats only, with horns.ee
I predict indigestion, RBS style.
The constellations indicate we are still in the Star Sign of Capricorn, so that figures.
Archangel
Is this the one you had in mind on accountants/money? Yes, seems fitting
Todays Capricorn Horoscope from Jonathan Cainer
Actually it was the rreference to ‘goats’ and my reference to the Age of Aquarius above, but I’ve checked it out and the ‘prediction’ seems fitting too!
Hi
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
based in Milton Keynes ??
peverIl – just one vowel changed ?
Questionable Days
…now we are getting cryptic?
………..by coincidence I was passing a fence around a commercial facility near my OM ‘mis’managed estate earlier today and caught sight of a new security notice on the fence. I said to myself “that’s mighty odd, I haven’t seen that before. by Jove that company must be growing”
Admin,
Thanks for the update.
I’ve been checking out the EnergyCentric website and have copied this:
“CRC Consultancy
The CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme is a Government based initiative which is mandatory. The aim is to minimize UK carbon emissions whilst ensuring that we have access to clean and affordable energy for years to come.
The scheme will implement this firstly by charging organizations based on the carbon emissions that result from their energy use and secondly by putting the environmental performance of organizations in the public eye by publishing the emissions of those covered by the scheme in a public league table.
How does it work?
The CRC affects every organization which had a settled half hourly electricity meter in 2008. If the consumption is over 6,000 MWh (6,000,000kwh’s) per annum (circa £400k) then the organization needs to participate, if it is under then an information disclosure is needed.
At the start of each year organisations participating are required to purchase allowances to cover the amount of carbon that they expect to emit over the following year.
At the end of each year organisations covered will be placed in the public CRC league table. Carbon allowances will then be refunded based on ranking within the league table.
Organisations with poor environmental performance will be penalised, whilst those with good performance will be rewarded.
Call us today on 0845 057 9901 and speak to our CRC specialists”.
Whenever I read about ‘carbon trading’ in whatever guise I can’t help but connect it to a strong link with this site which those readingit for some time and very carefully will all be familiar.
How about this from the EnergyCentric website?
“At Energycentric we are independent Energy Consultants working with you to secure the best possible price for your electricity. We will tender your requirements to all major energy suppliers, take care of the transfers and monitor your account throughout the entire contract.”
Haven’t we been here before with LVTs to prove that it just increased costs.
This could end up just like the Kingsborough insurance scam.
We were told that all the developments will have ‘smart meters’ for the communal areas that will put an end to estimated bills and the meters read regularly by remote control instead. But that could be very dodgy if Peverel manage the meters and if VT keeps a finger in the Peverel Energy pie?! Peverel has nothing to do with the VT companies we were told..?
So for the many elderly residents who can’t read their own meters and submit the readings on the internet Peverel Energy will sell them ‘smart meters’ and electricity supply to their own flats that would also put an end to meter readers turning up without notice. Sounds another ideal opportunity for ripping off the elderly once again! Even better when new developments are built Peverel Energy meters and electricity supply could already be in the flats? YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!
I’d rather continue using my own electricity supplier and sending the readings on the internet thank you!
This Peverel Energy Ltd, Watt is going on? Will they be supplying my electricity at ohm? Can I use them to power my electric car, which is a Voltswagon? Anyone know the current situation? Will it be run from AMPress House? How long before the plug is pulled?
To the new owners, let this be an example of what you now face. Every single move you make is known, Every single scam you try will be fought. It is very early days yet, but if the new owners have any connection with the old “faeces” we will redouble our efforts.
To those “happy” HM’s, the information I have is that you are a little too “happy” too soon!
You may think Peverel has been saved,by the sale, far from it! You may think you will be on the same pay as you are now, that is not the case, your hours are about to be cut.
Believe me, nobody is going to tolerate a Peverel2.
It will be solar panels on the roofs people, and other “asset management” opportunities.
Hyped up revenue sources to justify rescuing a failed business model.
They say that goats will eat anything, and the subprime crash demonstrated it.
Another Reviewer,
It just goes to show the crap people will buy in the new year sales!
Hi all
i cannot but help state that it was ttas that high lighted the energy scams first, many moons ago ..
http://www.thetruthaboutsolitaire.co.uk/2010/11/19/possible-false-misrepresentation-of-electricity-costs/
all that has happened is that some clever bugger has come up with a way of LEGITIMISING what we all know is a fraud …
Happy Days
PS for got to mention that our estate where they INCREASED the wattage from 36 watts to 58 watts got meters more suitable for over night storage heating- high day time lower night time, and NOW because of high energy bills has moved over to BRIGHT WHITE led racks – ok lower energy – but help me these replacements for a £1.50 fluorescent cost £120 EACH – and the high tariffs for day time haven’t reduced the BILL that much …
Two comments:
Yes, I’ve also heard that a buyer is close to signing the deal, and that it is for the whole group (whatever that means) rather than the individual operating cos. The staff do seem re-assured by all this. We’ll see…
Peverel have used external ‘energy consultants’ before to get a better deal, and after a year on our site it all fell apart. So again…we’ll see.
19 jan 2012. manager very smirky today viz.” peverel sold/job safe…letters to residents in next 2 weeks”
The actual signing for Peverel, will be marked by 3 short blasts on the horn followed by 1 long blast.
Residents should proceed to their nearest RTM station.
Unless senior, Peverel Staff should wait until TTAS’s predictions come true.
We on TTAS have prepared for 4 outcomes. A MBO, a disguised MBO, a non-related buyout, or complete collapse.
As such, we would have been very foolish not to prepare for the outcome we now face.
Therefore, many of the Peverel” problems” which are highly damaging have been held back.
So, before you put pen to paper, you need to be very sure, that there is nothing you are not aware about, you are confident you know of all the skeletons in the Peverel cupboard.
This is not a simple case of a sound company getting into trouble and someone coming in to put this right.
You are flirting with disaster. If you win, you get to run a much smaller less profitable company. Get it wrong, you go down with it. Up to you, your choice!
I predict litigation when the emptor finds he didn’t caveat. The delay suggests due diligence but a very heavy discount will be needed to take proper account of impending and planned RTM claims, LVT cases and high court actions over misappropriated reserves. The government has set itxs face against reform so the investment risk from legislative changes may appear small for now. But this state of affairs cannot last. The London Assembly is conducting an inquiry into service charges that will, I suspect, result in enough publicity about abuses that calls for a public inquiry will not be resistable.
Anyone checked out Companies House website this afternoon?
I have!
@ Archangel
We’ve just checked Credit Safe and notice that OM Property Management were issued with a “Winding Up Order” on the 28 December 2011!
Can’t see any news on Peverel in regards to changes there yet – but interesting development re: OM Property Management.
./O\.
Hi all
Place your bets NOW …
Melissa is giving out odds … see http://carlex.co/carlex-news
May be if VT placed his bet now at 1000:1 – rats .. this is what she is offering:
1/ Foreign buyer who doesn’t read newspapers or the Net: 1/1
2/ Management buyout headed by Lee Middleburgh and Keith Edgar 50/1
Happy Days
So OM eventually filed ‘under threat’ then, but accounts to 31-10-10 not currently available for inspection!
Admin:
Thought you might be interested in the following:
The London Gazette Notice 1503780 published on Wednesday, 28th December 2011 states the following:
“In the matter of OM PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LIMITED (Company Number 02061041) and in the Matter of the Insolvency Act 1986
A Petition to wind up the above-named Company, presented on 16th November 2011 by Kingsway Asset Finance Limited, Barons Court, Manchester Road, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 1BQ, claiming to be a Creditor of the Company, will be heard at Manchester District Registry, 1 Bridge Street West, Manchester M60 9JD, on 23 January 2012, at 10.00 am (or as soon thereafter as the Petition can be heard).”
It is dated 21 December 2011.
I wonder what will happen to all of our funds should the company be wound up on Monday. Given all the information relating to the “super fund” that can be found on your informative website how can we be sure that these funds will not be used to settle this creditor’s claim!
OMhostage,
I wonder if it will be found that service charge trust accounts will be emptor!
With regard to the “Winding Up Order”, it’s nice to know it is not just me that “winds OM up”
OM may have filled, but E&M still have not.
Michael …..10.47pm !!!!!!
please go to bed we need you at your best , your very best in the days to come to continue the fight
(i have a mate of mine who works in an asylum for very disturbed people. I asked if any of the inmates had purchased anything recently…..he is checking, he states that with them anything is possible as they are incapable of making a correct choice unless of cause they are nuts, his words not mine.
Francescc,
Thanks, I will get to bed, but before I do so, I feel sure that you, others IN the TTAS community and the staff at OM, including the gloating House Managers might like to know that at 10am, Monday 23rd January 2012 at the Manchester Disrtict Court an application from Kingsway Asset Finance to order the Winding Up of OM Property Management will be presented.
I feel sure we would want to wish Kingsway well in court.
Peverel are reacting to events, not in control of events.
If we look at E&M, they finally published accounts after Companies House issued them with a “Notice to Strike Off” No such notice appears to have yet been issued to either E&M or OM for their 2010 accounts.
If it had been Companies House that spooked them, why still no accounts from E&M, Kingsborough and the rest? Why only OM?and why in such a rush?
I think you will find the answer lies in Manchester. The Winding Up Petition is set for Monday.
Of course, it remains the case, that OM can defend it. However, they can only do this if they have filed accounts.
Without accounts, how could they begin to argue that they are trading profitably?
So, working late into the night, to try to avoid a Winding Up, they have now been forced to do something they have needed to prevent, that is publishing accounts and leaving themselves open to scrutiny.
For example, suspicions will be raised if the 2010 accounts do not show LVT ordered repayments.
If they do not, the only source repayments could have come from, in my opinion, would be other development trust funds.
To anyone about to sign up to buy this company, at the very least, would it not make sense to await the outcome on Monday? Would it not make sense to note, that it is a Finance Company, not a contractor, not a resident applying for a Winding Up Order?
As I said, without accounts, the Winding Up Order would be certain to be granted.
It maybe, that OM might be granted a stay of execution. However, any buyer should be aware, that dozens of Winding Up Actions against OM are pending.
Accounts for Peverel Management Services Ltd (Peverel Retirement) have been submitted but not Kingsborough Insurance.
I understand the Kingsborough/Peverel 2010 accounts have just been released from Companies House.
So it is very strange that the accounts for the Budget meeting held earlier this week contained a new notice at the foot of the page: “This document and its contents are confidential to Peverel Management Services Limited and the residents of the development to which it relates. It may not be copied, published or otherwise distributed without the written consent of PMSL.” Why not? What does Peverel have to hide?
All ethical companies publish their own accounts online these days. Why doesn’t Peverel do the same?
Our Property Management was called Peveral OM, now OM always the same staff. This Estate in West London is in a discasting state at times. Rubbish on the grass, some of the Bin stores has got big piles of rubbish covering the floors. The Cleaners turn up sign the card and dissapear. They are not cleaning properly and at times not at all. They get away with it because the Estate Manager seems to be very friendly with them. Could they be his friends, relations? They freguently loose the keys the Leeseholders are asked by OM to sent copies of the keys at £15 time on this development and the one near by. After a short period they loose them again and ring the door bells to gain entry to the blocks. The Estate Manager has been to see the mess, he says he is happy with the cleaning. He did not even get the cleaners to clear bin stores and do the cleaning where needed. We have to put up with OM’s “Service” and it seems that there is nothing we can do about it.
The light are on or sometimes weeks, regardless of complains. The parking spaces has not been numbred only once in 26 years, some of the door bells not working for a few years yet we pay for maintenance. The statement of accounts stated a charge for “Fire Equipment …” we do not have any. When enquiring they just changed to a different heading the amount was still the same. One of the Leaseholders actually got a refund for it. The list could go on and on. It is absolute nightmare how this kind of 850 years old rip of discasting, antiqueted Fleesing System can go on in 20012 in a European Country. We the Leaseholders are second class citizens no any kind of rights what so ever. OM is a Law to themself.
OM Accounts to 31-12-10
(Consort and Marlborough and Insero are trading names of OM)
Note 9 to the Accounts
‘Client monies
Residents’ net cash balance held in trust accounts at 31-12-10 was £68,118,198 (2009 £59,268,860). Cash balances in joint accounts at 31-12-10 was £3,363,660 (2009 £2,585,185). These balances are not reflected on the balance sheet.’
Question – how much of this residents’ cash was due to be handed over to estates that had recently gone RTM and how much of it was/is due to be handed over in 2011-12?
But now I’ve picked up this note.
Page 16 – Note 15 Contingent Liabilities
(The standard bit about the outstanding loan by the Holding Company)
A number of bank accounts maintained for developements under management were overdrawn at 31-12-10 amounting to £745,106 (2009 £217,100). The group has given unlimited guarantee on these amounts in the event of default.
Is this massive arrears of service charges on some estates? If so how are these estates being funded?
Further to this, I have now noticed that in the 2009 accounts, this statement is phrased differently:
‘The company has given various unlimited guarantees on the bank overdraft of various UK related parties. At 31 December 2009 the amount outstanding under these guarantees was £217,100 (2008 £273,605)’
But no mention of this being inconnection with ‘developments under management’?
OM Accounts
Yr to 31/12/08 Properties under mgt +9.5%; retention 97.9% ie lost accounts 2.1%
Yr to 31/12/09 Properties under mgt +6.0%; retention 97.9% ie lost accounts 2.1%
Yr to 31/12/10 Properties under mgt +9.3%; retention 92.9% ie lost accounts 7.1% (including me)
So if they lost 7.1% of accounts this means the gross gain before losses was 16.4%.
Conclusion: still a lot of suckers out there.
On the contrary, these gains will likely have come from taking over failing companies and new developments. In neither case did it matter to the vendors how the leaseholder is screwed. More recently the reputational fallout has caused St.George to distance itself from OM. With developers avoiding OM and with growing numbers of RTM claims the losses will continue growing.
It’s just occurred to me that the increase of properties under management could have been caused by the transfer of Solitaire into OM.
Note 11. “A small proportion of developments are either in dispute over service charge debts or else have made claims against the company relating to the management of their development. The provision of £2,091,661 has been made for service charge bad debts or claims against the company.”
Neil,
But I thought that Solitaire had become OM Property Management Company No 2 Ltd, in which case former Solitaire-managed estates would be within that company’s accounts?
Neil,
Put that way, your conclusions look correct, but I wonder how many estates there are out there stuck in the ‘RTM Counter Notice’ queue thanks to E & M?
Well if I am reading this right the £2,091,661 is a provision for future items that may be payable in 2011 or 2012 (St George’s Wharf + Charter Quays?). However as there is an exceptional item of £2,433,934 in the costs this means that £342,273 was paid during 2010.
OM Property Mgt (No 2) formerly Solitaire
Yr to 31/12/08 Properties under mgt +6.0%
Yr to 31/12/09 Properties under mgt +3.0%; retention 96.0% ie lost accounts 4.0%
Yr to 31/12/10 Properties under mgt -8.5%; retention 95.5% ie lost accounts 4.5% (in other words they magiced up 3.5%)
A provision of £3,562,195 has been made for service charge bad debts or claims against the company for future items that may be payable in 2011 or 2012.
Below has been copied from Peverel Action:-
‘ Kingsborough and the £13M
We are still ploughing through 2010 accounts released this morning, but could not wait to reveal that the shareholder(s) of Kingsborough Insurance were paid a dividend of £13M from the proceeds of insurance commissions.
All derived from our service charges.
Posted by Moderator on 21 January 2012 ‘
PeverelAction has raised a really important point.
For the last filed accounts (2009) of the group parent of OM, Peverel Retirement, and Kingsborough there were shareholders funds of £11.9mn. From the filed financial statements this seems likely to have gone up a little in 2010.
During 2010 Kingsborough paid a dividend of £13mn and Peverel Management services (Peverel Retirement) paid a dividend of £10.55mn. So £23.55mn was paid in dividends from the shareholders funds of £12mn+ at a time when the group had insufficient money to even pay interest on its borrowings. As the parent is in Administration and not preparing accounts we cannot know for sure what happened to this £23.55mn but it seems highly likely that it was paid to the British Virgin Islands company Euro Investments and then into another pocket of VT such as Vincos Ltd.
On 12 October the Administrators report stated that it is expected that the secured creditor (Merrill Lynch) will suffer a ‘shortfall’ on its loan and that many unsecured creditors will not get a penny. Remember also that there is a list as long as your arm of leaseholders who have been cheated by OM and are queuing up to take the company to LVTs. Meanwhile £23.55mn has been removed from the company and away from its actual and potential creditors. Surely this is a matter for the Administrators to pursue and retrieve the money and for the Department of Trade to disqualify VT as unfit to hold office as a company director.
Neil,
You can add another £11,000,000 dividend paid to shareholder(s) shown in the ‘Careline’ Accounts to 31-12-10.
‘Careline’ that ‘ invisible’ charge that the non-retirement leaseholders do not even know they are paying as it is invariably hidden away under some ‘General’ budget head on the annual accounts for a development.
My image appears in many pictures and frescoes in churches across Italy….
Any updates?
Jane
(or can I call you ‘Mercury’ – Messenger of the Gods?)
Perhaps Peverel Action Group would be interested to know that there was a dividend of £1,500,00 in Peverel OM’s accounts in 2007. Now was that not the year it was bought from Holiday Retirement?
And for those visitors unfamiliar with this Company
http://www.carelineuk.com/about_carelineuk
Do take a peek at the pdf 2010 Annual Report at 3.5 MB it’s a lot to download, but worth it
Yes all you have to do is to pay and you get any certification you like.
Careline……………….. oh dear what a sham
My first look at OM Property Management accounts ending Dec 31 2010!
Here goes!
OM made an operating profit in 2009 of £1,021,936.
OM made an operating LOSS in2010 of £1,718,117.
Not bad for a company with a “strong trading performance”
Amounts owed by parent and fellow subsidiary companies £1,495,981.
Provision for disputes with Developments £2,091,861
Loan to Aztec Opco Developments 2009, £116,800,000
Loan to AztecOpco Developments 2010, £131,375,729.
Development funds overdrawn 2009 £217,000
Development funds overdrawn 2010 £745,106.
Let us not forget, the accounts we have now seen relate to 2010.
It was in 2011, that the real damage was done. So whatever we see now is a much more healthy position for OM than currently is the case. As far as I can see, the 2010 loss, does not include the provision for development disputes. That money will have to come out of 2011 figures.
It should be noted that those provisions may not include the big estates that have left, or about to leave, nor may it include the developers that have sacked OM.
Whilst, I could understand some residents not paying into development funds, how is it possible for so many estates to be overdrawn? Where has that money gone?
It is to be hoped that Monday’s Winding Up Order, is genuine, and not a sly Peverel trick to clear their debts and move cash to the British Virgin Isles. We shall see.
It really pains me to say this, as the last thing I would ever want to do is inflict more pain on Peverel, especially at such difficult times for them.
It is my understanding that when a Winding Up Petition is received, it has the effect that the company that is subject to the petition must not be sold, nor can that company dispose of any assets.
Normal practice is for bank accounts to be frozen.
The way to avoid a Winding Up Order is either to defend it and win, or pay what is owing.
The only other option is that if a Judge sees fit is to allow the company to go into administration.
For that to happen, the Judge would have to be convinced the company is only in temporary difficulties, and is basically profitable.
In the case of OM, this option would be remote, as it was Zolfo Cooper, who so recently stated that OM was trading strongly. Their assertion would be open to question as within a few months of that statement the company would be applying to the Court to enter administration to avoid being wound up.
A Winding Up Order, if granted is the end of OM. However. there is a sting in the tail, for us and them.
There remains a strong possibility that funds that cannot be readily identified as “Service Charges” may well be lost. To those that have paid, yet have not had their money credited to the trust, you may have to prepare yourself to pay again. The problem is, that your money is for payment to your trust account not to OM.
This is why, for so many years, I have been warning about the safety of your service charge funds.
For OM, when a company is wound up, a formal investigation takes place. If anything is found the Directors are held liable.
Today’s story in Property Week might have some relevance. If the freeholds are sold, management will go into the melting pot. Note the comment about prospects for “asset management” such as “further development t of unused spaces”
Vincent Tchenguiz has put his residential freeholds business up for sale for ￡3.5bn, in what would be the largest property sale in UK history.
The sale of European Investments Overseas, in a process known as Project MacDonald, brings to the market a business that owns the freeholds of 1% of the UK’s housing assets.
Property Week revealed last March that Tchenguiz had appointed Lazard to restructure the business, and late last year a formal sales process began.
Middle Eastern and Far Eastern sovereign wealth funds were approached about the opportunity to buy the business first, and this month UK pension funds and institutional investors were sounded out.
European Investments Overseas is part of Euro Group, which is owned by the Tchenguiz Family Trust. It has built up a portfolio of 250,000 residential ground rents over the past 16 years and owns the freeholds of individual buildings and apartments, which are then held by individuals on long leaseholds. European Investments Overseas receives the payments.
The actual market value of the properties from which European Investments Overseas receives income is £36bn. The average length of the cashflow produced is 60 years and it is this long-dated income that Tchenguiz believes gives the portfolio its high value.
The portfolio produces income of £60m a year, which could rise to £500m a year over the next century.
The sale is hoped to appeal to large institutions such as wealth or pension funds that need to match their future liabilities to long-dated income.
A sale at this price would represent an internal rate of return of 6%-7%.
The value of the business is linked to house price inflation and, as such, could be used by institutions that want to hedge their exposure to inflation.
The portfolio has around £2.2bn of debt and swap liabilities secured against it through a mix of short-, medium- and long-term maturities.
Some of the debt is securitised, and some is provided by senior lenders such as Deutsche Bank, Lloyds Banking Group, Allied Irish Bank and Bayerische Landesbank.
Tchenguiz said there was no time frame put forward for offers because of the individual nature of the sale.
“What you have here is a business with long-term cashflows that are AAA rated and have a huge reversionary potential. This is a liability-driven investment opportunity … it provides a great hedge for a buyer that otherwise might just have cash on deposit and see their money inflated away.
“We have done little asset management on these properties, so there is an opportunity to add value – such as further development of unused spaces, like lofts, and solar and communications installations on roofs.”
” Why sell? It is part of a review of the Trust’s entire investment portfolio. The residential portfolio has been built over the past 15 years and has reached the mass which gives us the opportunity to realise value. For a buyer, in these uncertain times when many traditional investments have lost their appeal and rates of return are low, this provides a solid, secure, predictable opportunity to lock in to ultra-long term, above average, yields secured on property and land.”
“Given the complex income dynamics and longevity of the portfolio, a single year’s figures do not accurately reflect the value of the investment. However, Income is currently in excess of £60 million.”
Dai Smile
Obviously you are not the banker that lent this guy £2bn or thereabouts … otherwise it would be Dai Uphappy !
The stated income is just over 1.7% for a £3.5bn sale – IF and it is a huge big IF he gets £3.5bn. the ft says only £3bn [but that would give a return of 2.0%]. rest of the world are looking for 3% MINIMUM
so the question is how much is he paying for his £2bn ?
or did he get it cheap from fred the shred ? or is it going to be one of the state owned rbs star buy of the year ?
happy days – keep smiling guys … the inevitable inevitably happens . . . . . . .
if ( my) lease(hold) is offered for sale by tchenguiz to investorsor others, should not I, by law, be offered the
option of purchase for the same price, or the priceTchnguiz paid in the first place?
This fight has been something of a learning curve.
I could not have told you the difference between Opco’s, Propco’s, or Tesco’s!
Now let us assume, that a sale does go through, and let us assume the amount is for around £50m.
This would not be for the company that owns the freeholds, it would be for the companies that we have to deal with, presumably OM Property Management, Peverel Retirement, and possibly Kingsborough.
I am not certain it would include E&M, though.
Turning to the freehold owning companies, they are faced with several problems.
The purchase of the freeholds were backed by loans secured not just on the value of properties, but on future incomes that those properties could generate.
It is suspected that the valuations on the properties were grossly inflated. Also, using future income as security, may have been legal, but was might be termed unusual.
It should be noted, that the fact that income could be derived from the properties, does legitimately increase the value to the freeholder.
Though it is thought that Vincent Tchenguiz wants £3b for his freeholds, this is pie in the sky.
Indeed it is not so long ago that the value was put at £2b, which roughly matched debts.
Since then of course, property prices have fallen as has income derived from those properties.
In addition, potential buyers”smell blood” so would not pay market price anyway.
Suppose someone was to take “controlling interest” of the freeholder.
One hurdle to cross would be that creditors would want their money back, or at least a large part.
The next would be that over a certain amount , a “controlling interest” would require to make a full takeover.
Another hurdle, is that without the connection from Freeholder to Managing Agent, the value and income generation to both sides is severely reduced..
Given that it appears that the likes of Kingsborough and E&M seem to exist largely to increase the income of the freeholders, it would seem that it would be essential that the freeholder holds on to those companies.
In a similar vein, without those companies, the income stream to anyone who buys the OM side of things, does not justify £50m. The purchaser is taking a huge gamble that they are not going to be hit by a torrent of LVT’s and RTM’s. They are also taking a huge risk, that after purchase they may discover massive irregularities , which had been kept hidden from them.
Of course, it should also be noted for the benefit of any potential purchaser, that were that purchaser, have any connection with any of the “usual suspects” believe me, you are in for a very rough ride.
Just getting back to the original topic “Peverel SOLD”, anybody heard any more? We heard it was imminent (like two weeks) more than two weeks ago.
I know someone who received assurances from OM staff two weeks ago today that an announcement would be made “in two weeks”.
It’s Tchenquizspeak for “The cheque is in the mail, trust me. Don’t pull the plug!”
Muddy,
The sell off has not been going as well as planned.
Despite the recent announcement from VT that he was selling the freeholds, which he cannot actually do, he can only sell the company that owns the freeholds, in reality, that company has been for sale since the holding companies collapsed into administration.
It is my opinion, that one key reason for delaying the accounts for so long, was that they could report the accounts on an “On going” basis from the date of the accounts. ie, January 31 2012, not September 30 2011.
For the sake of a fine this has bought them an extra few months to try and find a buyer.
The task of selling was made harder, because I understand that one prospective purchaser went to the fun fair!
He noticed someone had taken 5 cups of granulated sugar, 1and 1/3cups of light corn syrup 1 cup and 2 tablespoons of water, and food dye.
He watched whilst these insubstantial ingredients were turned into vast quantities of Candyfloss.
And yet, as soon as touched, these vast quantities turned back into next to nothing.
Suddenly he understood the Peverel business model.
It was candy floss economics. Large volumes but no substance.
As soon as anyone probed into the company, they realized it was all so much candyfloss.
So he walked away.
Another problem for VT is the way the city and property market works. I refer to gossip!
Basically, everyone knows everyone’s business.
I now take you to a wine bar in the city, and a very typical conversation.
” I hear Giles at xxxx bank has been sniffing around Peverel, is your bank interested?”
” I was going to have a look, but you know how things are at the moment, anyway one thing Giles does know about is property and he walked away from the deal”
“Did he? Given the state of the company Giles must have found a few nasties, he doesn’t normally walk away from a deal”
“Giles reckons it’s fine whilst the money is sloshing around from company to company. He reckons that it never stops spinning around long enough for anyone to check if it’s all real.
Once it does, which he says will happen he doesn’t want to be the one stuck with the company”
” He is not wrong, better to let the whole thing go. The banks will have the freeholds, we can sell them at a profit, we can lend the money so people can buy the freeholds, so we can make a profit, we can lend money to managing agents to take on contracts, so we can make a profit, we can offset it against tax, so we can make a profit”
“Oh look, it’s Giles! Giles get some bubbly, looks like you have earned yourself a bonus”
“How come?”
“Word is you bailed out on Tchenguiz”
“Too right, far too much of a mess to get involved in”
Muddy,
As I am sure you are aware, Lazard were appointed by Vincent Tchenguiz to sell the freeholds.
Since then Lazard have turned a profit of £100m into a 4th quarter loss of £4.8m.
Is it just coincidence, but it does seem that all that touch Tchenguiz lose money?
Thanks for the laugh, ME, but this is not how due diligence really works. You’ve been reading too many Alex cartoons.
I wonder what excuses were made for the non-appearance of various 2010 accounts until a few days ago to prospective buyers, and if the accounts they were shown matched those declared. No doubt the Serious Fraud Office was blamed and will be sued as if it alone was responsible for putting OM into administration. But… who would want to dirty their hands with this, even if the portfolio valuation passed muster, which I doubt? It would be like buying the News Of The World. A very strong stomach would be required, and a plan for disposing of the more toxic stuff immediately.
Two weeks? Hah!
I’m sure you’ve missed your true vocation Michael!! Now all you need is to team-up with a cartoonist, get yourself a slot in a daily rag, and you’re off.
Anyway, I was really thinking about the sale of OM. For some reason I thought they and the other OpCos were being disposed of separately to the freeholds business, but I’m not really that well informed about all this. So, basically we shouldn’t hold our collective breaths…
Fairhold Services Ltd is in reality the “real E&M”
Their accounts show that in 2010 they employed an average of 126 employees, with a total wage bill of £4,381,068.
Like E&M they are based at Molteno House. However, it should be noted that E&M accounts show that no directors or staff were paid in 2010.
In a previous post, i have explained how I thought this could prove crucial in any sub-let battle.
I hope the significance is understood.
I now move on to the 2010 accounts of Faihold Services Ltd, who claim in their accounts to have a 100% shareholding in E&M.
The following is from the directors report for the 2010 accounts.
The borrowings of some of the related parties with which the group and company have inter company balances are currently in default, and/or subject to standstill agreements with each of their principal lenders.
In addition, certain of these and other related parties borrowings fall due for repayment within 12 months of the approval of these financial statements.
The standstill agreements expire 31 March 2012, but can be extended for 3 months by agreement.
Thereafter,the directors expect the standstill agreements to be renewed on a rolling monthly extension basis.
The directors consider that the period of the standstill agreements will give sufficient time to put in place replacement facilities in respect of these borrowings.
The financial statements have been prepared on the going concern basis, which assumed that the related parties will be able to put in place replacement financial facilities and that the lenders to these related parties will not call in these facilities prior to them being refinanced as a result of the events of default that have arisen or any further new events of default that may arise during the period in which new facilities are negotiated.
In the current economic climate, the most likely effect of the withdrawal of the related parties borrowing facilities would be to force the effected related parties into some form of insolvency arrangement, with the company facing demands for the immediate repayment of the amounts owed to those companies. In that situation, the company would also be unlikely to be able to raise in full, or part, amounts owed by those related parties.
In the respect of the companies whose loan facilities are in default and/or when loan arrangements are due for renewal within 12 months of the date of approval of these financial statements, the amounts owed to the group by those companies at December 31 2010 amounted to £37,259,629 and the amounts owed by the group to others of these companies at December 31 2010 amounted to £12,062,254.
The next part of my post is attributed to Mr David Worrow, of Baker Tilly
It forms part of his qualifications of audit.
EMPHASIS OF MATTER- GOING CONCERN.
In forming our opinion on the financial statements, which is not modified, we have considered the adequacy of the disclosures made in the accounting policies on page 9 of the financial statements which set out the status of the borrowing facilities of related parties which together with a need to refinance these facilities may have an impact on the company’s ability to continue as a going concern.
these conditions indicate the existence of a MATERIAL UNCERTAINTY which may cast significant doubt about the group’sand company’s ability to continue as a going concern. the financial statements do not include the adjustments that would result if the group or company were unable to continue as a going concern.
Far from speculation or inside information leaked to me, or TTAS, we now have a directors report and an auditors report that give the clearest indication of the dire financial position Peverel related companies are in.
Without a sale or refinancing from the money markets, very soon, Peverel will have to cease trading.
Michael,
Your fame is spreading, you are mentioned in the latest Peverel Action observation.
Have an early night as yesterday you were burning the midnight oil !!