Some contributors to TTAS have been fortunate to have their chosen property management company appointed without the need of RTM or LVT.

This was possible because residents petitioned Estates & Management (the company who was acting on behalf of the landlord) and was responsible for collecting groundrent from leasehold property owners, whilst also having the power to appoint the management company.

You may or may not know that Estates & Management are owned by The Consensus Business Group – who also owned Peverel Property Management Group.

Below is an example of how one of these developments managed to do this:-

A small number of residents canvassed their neighbours to ascertain whether the feelings that they had towards their property management company, were shared by others.

It soon became apparent that everyone did share this view and they set about contacting a number of local property management companies, to source quotations that they could compare against the charges their property management company (Solitaire Property Management) were charging.

By appointing a local management company, they discovered that their development charges would reduce from over £21,000 to £11,000 – whilst knowing that services would be provided.

The residents then canvassed their neighbours again to explain the cost savings of escaping Solitaire Property Management and asked the question of whether they supported the decision to appoint a new management company.

They then contacted Solitaire Property Management and Estates & Management, to inform them that 31 out of 33 property owners supported the campaign to replace the property management company with their preferred company.

Solitaire Property Management were already aware of the ill-feeling towards them from residents and Managing Director Lee Middleburgh had attempted to arrange a one-on-one meeting, which was rejected by residents because they all wanted to confront him.

After many heated conversations between residents, Solitaire and Estates & Management – it was agreed that Solitiare would be replaced as the managing agent.

However, Estates & Management then attempted to prevent the residents chosen management company from being appointed by informing residents that they would ask two other companies to tender for the contract.

This infuriated residents as their was a risk that yet another Peverel Property Management Group company would secure the contract. They therefore, produced a templated letter that they got each homeowner to sign, that demanded their chosen property management company were appointed.

It also stated that in the event that the chosen property management company were to not be appointed, then they would commence Right To Manage proceedings because they had in excess of 51% of residents in favour of replacing Solitaire.

These letters were then mailed in one package to Estates & Management to warn them against tendering the contract.

Estates & Management tried on a number of occasions to belittle the residents that were the driving force behind this campaign, but these letters demonstrated that it wasn’t just a minority of residents who were pushing for change, but all of them.

Eventually, Estates & Management transferred the property management from Solitaire to the local company – however Estates & Management refused to relinquish the power of who was responsible for arranging the insurance for the development.

Despite the local company being able to source cover for only £1600 – E&M continued to use another of the Peverel Property Management Group companies “Kingsborough”, who inflate the premiums and receive large commissions.

The residents were still able to reduce their charges from over £21,000 down to just over £13,000.

Were There Any Problems?

Apart from the issue of E&M remaining in control of the insurance policy, there was a problem with the information that Solitaire provided the new management company.

They discovered that there was not any money in the ‘reserve funds’ and that a number of residents accounts were showing as debtors, due to the refusal to pay Solitaire.

In addition to this, the new property management company identified from Land Registry records that a number of residents had been incorrectly charged by Solitaire, with some not even having to pay charges.

It took time to rectify these problems, but eventually they were dealt with and the residents are very pleased to have escaped the clutches of Peverel.

How Long Did This Take?

It took just over eight months from the beginning when residents were first canvassed to the day that the local property management company were responsible for the development.

Was This A One Off?

This development was fortunate because they were a mixture of freehold and leasehold properties.

Had residents proceeded with RTM, then the freehold property owners may well have been stuck with having to pay Solitaire for services.

However, the determination of the residents pressured E&M and Solitaire into accepting their demands.

I Want To Try, What Shall I Do?

Below are basic steps for you to follow, but these are just to get you started as your situation as each development may be different:

1. Canvass residents for their views and if they agree with you, see if there are others that would help out.
2. Inform your property management company and landlord that residents are not happy with the service they provide.
3. Obtain competitive quotes from local companies
4. Supply copies of the quotations you have received to the property management company and landlord, informing them of the evidence that residents are being ripped off (if applicable)
5. Choose an alternative property management company and work with them to force change
6. Petition the landlord e.g. E&M and start pressuring them to sack the existing management company