Eddington Court in Weston-super-Mere, is a McCarthy and Stone site that has seen a series of battles with the Tchenguiz freeholder, Fairhold. It gave Peverel its marching orders and is retirement leasehold site with right to manage
Norman Greed
Battle-scared Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation veteran Norman Greed has pulled off another coup for residents at Eddington Court: a £5,000 repayment on insurance commissions from the Tchenguiz Family Trust.
In June Mr Greed, a director of the Eddington Court RTM claimed £10,000 on past insurance commissions to Kingsborough and Oval.
The action, which was supported by the RTM board of directors, was to have taken place at the small claims court, but was mediated to a £5,000 settlement, which goes into the contingency fund.
Mr Greed was disputing commissions between 2004 to 2009, and Fairhold – a Tchenguiz company – argued that it was too long ago.
In the compromise agreement, Fairhold Homes (no. 9) Limited says the payment is “strictly without admission of liability or fault”.
Eddington Court had to agree to the offer with signatures of 80 per cent of the residents agreeing the settlement.
In sending the document to the residents’ managing agent, Steve Cieslik congratulated the activists:
“The terms seem fair. I cannot see you having any further claims for the period to 31st August 2010.
“I did worry that you might forgo your right to challenge the rental on the house manager’s flat (should it ever come to that), but the settlement only prevents you doing so prior to 31 August 2010.
“As we know Norman and other leaseholders had already taken them to a tribunal prior to this date. You would still be able to challenge from 1st September 2010 onwards.
“A better result than I had expected and so well done”
Eddington Court, which featured in the Channel 4 Dispatches programme of September 2012, is an shining example of what can be achieved by right to manage and fighting back against the monetisers in retirement leasehold.
Congratulations to all the residents there, and thanks to Charles Willis for already outlining this case here and on About Peverel.
The agreement can be read here
EddingtonCourtCompromiseAgreement
Related posts:
Knights Court wins RTM after Peverel dropped the action …
Our nine years in a retirement leasehold development
Peverel / FirstPort paid ‘£40,000′ of residents’ contingency fund money to Mr Tchenguiz ‘by mistake’
Exit fees court battle fails … but it cost Fairhold thousands and Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation now has its legal argument why it believes the contract terms are fair
Norman Greed and Charles Willis,
In sending my congratulations i want to put on record how proud i am to be associated with your proud and honourable campaign, and express my gratitude for all you have done to support others. You are the best of the best!
We wholly endorse this sentiment. It is a huge failing of us all, that people like you two are having to fight these battles.
Seconded
congratulations and WELL DONE to both Charles and Norman.
Congratulations to Norman and Chas on their success .
Now, let other retirement blocks follow and make their claims for recovery of insurance commissions to Fairhold Homes No. 9 Ltd and other similar freehold companies in the same group controlled by TFT in BVI .
Thank you Michael, Ollie, Skipper, A Reviewer and Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation Admin for the nice comments.
I have drafted a letter which I recreated from Normans original letter to send to the Managing Agents warning them about pending court action.
I can whilst I have a few spare days recreate a copy that can be used generically, just add in the correct names.
Again this is as a result of the help, support, direction and guidance, provided by Norman Greed and others.
Well done Charles and Norman. You will inspire others to stand up and be counted and hopefully this will take off.
I would like to thank everyone who has supported me since 2004. Some are no longer with us, but are not forgotten. It is my wish that Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation continues to grow and I for one will support them in any way I can. I would ask anyone who is still contemplating RTM to waste no time, and claim back any commission or overpayments they feel they have paid.
Thank you Alex on behalf of Norman and myself.
Following on from the Peverel/Cirrus/Glyn Jackson Fiasco.
—————————————————————————————————————————————-
Peverel’s Statement to Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation
Peverel Retirement uses independent third parties to manage tenders for all major works. Peverel Retirement has instructed these independent third parties not to issue any new work to Peter O’Rourke Electrical Limited, Owens Installations Limited, Glyn Jackson Communications Limited or any new companies that their previous management are now running.
—————————————————————————————————————————————-
Charles Says:
The Independent Third Parties were introduced after Keith Edgar made 250 redundancies in 200/10. They informed us that Peverel Retirement would still be able to manage the works. Peverel Retirement intended bringing in Building Surveying Contractors who would undertake the larger Contracts for a mere 10% of the contact Sums. Peverel Retirement did not reduce any Management Fees, the fees were left as they were, with Peverel Services Ltd saving MILLIONS OF POUNDS ON WAGES FOR THEIR STAFF?
——————————————————————————————————————————————–
Peverel Cont.
At The Adelphi, after the independently-run tender process, residents chose Goldshield to install their new emergency call upgrade system.
——————————————————————————————————————————————-
Charles Says:
Note the second using of the word (Independent) – Run Tender to emphasise that they have changed and are now listening?
——————————————————————————————————————————————–
Peverel Cont.
Unfortunately, we have discovered [On being informed by Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation] that Glyn Jackson was subcontracted by Goldshield to carry out part of the work at The Adelphi without our knowledge. We have raised this with Goldshield and its management team has confirmed it will not subcontract any work to Glyn Jackson or Safeguard at any Peverel Retirement developments in the future.
———————————————————————————————————————————————
Charles Says:
Does this mean that Glyn Jackson can carry on undertaking the works on The Adelphi?
Does this mean that Glyn Jackson can undertake any of the contracts already signed?
How many other contracts have Glyn Jackson or O`Rourke and Owens been allowed to sub-contract?
Remember Friends, when Cirrus /Glyn Jackson won the contracts, Glyn Jackson undertook the work at a discounted price so Peverel were able to name their own price and then sub- contract making more money
than they would have if they had undertaken the works themselves???
—————————————————————————————————————————————-
Peverel Cont.
We are reviewing our internal processes with a view to ensuring that this doesn’t happen again at any Peverel managed site.
—————————————————————————————————————————————-
Charles Says:
Why after 2009/10 are they only now reviewing internal processes to see this doesn’t happen again. How many times has this been said over the past 9 years in the LVT and now the FTT.
The words Peverel Managed Site in the same sentence, leaves me shell shocked.
Comments
Chas, Norman. congratulations on another Victory… we need more individuals like you to stand up and challenge these greedy MA’s & LL’s.
I tooobtained all invoices paid by our ex MA’s and then with a group of co-owners found numerous anomolies to which a challenge was launched and won. It can be done people, all you need to do is ask…..
It’s amasing what you can get back if you threaten legal action.. Go on – give it a try..
On the “No win No fee” basis, perhaps an enterprising firm could set up a “reclaim overpaid service charge fees” service? For 20% of any funds returned it would make life much easier for residents.
Perhaps I could invite an ex Peverel member of staff (and their are quite a few of them) to form such a company?
Michael,
I have this year had a look at all our Expense’s Files dating back from 2006.
There I found invoices for items that were for
1. other developments,
2. bills left by sacked House Manager
3. insurance claims not made and charged to the Service Charge
The following were charged under the items 1,2,3
1. Relief Managers Pay £143.44
2. Phone Bills £1,260 plus £200 (not refunded)
2. Cost of Plants/Pots/Planters £2,500 (refunded)
3. Replacement WC £327.37
3. Replacement Carpets £375
2. Loss of signal for TV £117.60
2. Call out for TV repairs £93.60
2 Loss of TV signal £125.76
3. Fit 6 hanging baskets £79.30
1. Asbestos Survey £125.00
1. Light Bulbs for a club house we do not have £66.00
We also paid for:
Risk Assessment’s for small trees
Roof Surveys from ground level
Fire Risk Assessments
Don’t forget the Commissions paid for Insurance Cover for both Kingsborough and Oval who both receive commission on the Building Premium and then Oval receive commission on the Terrorism Cover???
We understand that as the period, 6 months from April 1st each year i.e. October this is the busy period as our Area manager has up to 33 developments to arrange Budget Meetings and decide how little information they should provide?
A Leaseholder took OM Property Management Ltd. ( A Peverel Group company) to court for “a breach of contract” at a cost of £27K.
Unable to give more details.
Mystified,
Are you saying that the Leaseholder had to pay £27K or they received £27K
Please contact me?
Charles,
The Leaseholder had to pay £27K due to “a very poor representation by the Leaseholders Solicitors”.
It is easy to say to take these companies such as OM/Peverel etc to Court the cost is very expensive and to many out of question. That goes when extending Leases too if and when the Landlord/Freeholder “mess up” some Leaseholders deliberately.