… Which did not even need to be paid by the living
Pier Management admits issuing £120 sublet demand before reading the lease at Nightingale House, it is claimed
Leasehold reached a new low with Pier Management demanding a subletting fee from a man who is dead.
Nor was a sublet fee payable had Mr A Gaffney, of Dublin, been alive.
Pier Management admitted it had not read the lease before demanding the money, it is claimed – a not infrequent omission in sublet demands.
The leases at Nightingale House, in Stockwell south London, state:
“The sub provisions 4 and 5 of this clause shall not apply to a letting by way of assured shorthold tenancy Company Let or similar form of letting not exceeding 12 months.”
The demand was sent out by Pier Management on March 11, which appeared to be a reminder.
Click to read
£120 was demanded along with the prospect of more to come:
“If we do not hear from you we shall have no option but to assume that the property is being sublet without consent and a breach of covenant fee shall be applied to your account.”
The demand outraged estate and letting agent Richard a Brassard, of Courtneys.
“These are the sort of try-ons you would expect to see from some small-scale slum landlord,” he said. “Instead, this has come from a large management company that is part of the Regis Group plc.”
The group is owned by Peter Edward Gould and Nicholas Charles Gould, two Essex-based brothers, who have built it up over the past 30 years and are reportedly worth £355 million.
Mr Brassard noted following a phone conversation that Pier Management had made its demand before even reading the lease, which he described as “unacceptable and unprofessional”.
He also brought the matter to the attention of his Battersea MP Jane Ellison and Sir Peter Bottomley.
Mr Gaffney died on July 29 2012 and Mr Brassard said that the demand had caused anxiety to his surviving relative,
“… your letter has done nothing, but cause worry to someone who is understandably extremely concerned about your threats”.
Kelly Donaldson, subletting administrator of Pier Management, replied to Mr Brassard:
“I concur, having reviewed this Lease I note that there are no restrictions to prevent you from subletting the property so I apologise for this oversight.
“Our accounts have been noted and the subletting charge removed and I have personally noted on there that Consent is not required.”
Details of the Gould brothers’ directorships can be read here:
http://companycheck.co.uk/director/908315670/MR-NICHOLAS-CHARLES-GOULD
http://companycheck.co.uk/director/908537726/MR-PETER-EDWARD-GOULD
Some other links:
http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/richest-moneybags-Essex-revealed/story-21133347-detail/story.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-20446533
http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/nick-gould/8/9aa/770
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3aa84d12-a9c2-11dc-aa8b-0000779fd2ac.html#axzz3VP4n1zyQ
It does appear that there is often a connection with a demand for sub-let fees and the finances of the company demanding the fees.
I note in this case the demand is sent on behalf of RG Conversions, who currently have a net worth of – £4m and liabilities of £18m.
ME ,
Can you check if Pier Management , itself still has negative net worth ?
I suspected Pier Management kept itself operating by charging its own expenses to the leaseholders who complained of unexplained charges charged on their statements. .
I remember some years ago on another website called “UK leasehold forum”, complaints of leasehold abuse were posted against Southend based, Regis Group companies including Regisport and Pier Management ( which acted as the managing agent for collecting ground rent and overcharged buildings insurance). You may find past LVT cases concerning excessive buildings insurance being charged by PM .
Ollie,
Technically Pier Management has a net worth of – £16,000, so it is not really an issue.
However (and where have you heard the story before?) Pier Management is part of Regis Group Holdings, who have bought up ground rent portfolios with borrowed money secured against the assets.
Of course as is typical in these situations, they effectively appoint themselves as property managers, creating a clear conflict of interest.
Regarding the recent article posting, Pier Management issued an apology to Mr Brassard and the client, who have confirmed that the issue has now been resolved to his and his client’s satisfaction and requires no further input from Pier Management. Pier Management strive on delivering the very best in property management services for Leasehold and Freehold owners throughout the UK. As a result of the incident all staff members have been reminded of the importance of inspecting all aspects of the lease before issuing communications of this nature going forward. Customer service is at the forefront of our business and we will continue to review and improve processes.
It is pleasing to know that some Managing Agents follow the many comments that are placed on Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation and LKP I will also place this apology on About Peverel, so as more of us will be aware that at least this company did wrong and said sorry.
Peverel Retirement also read all the comments, I have been informed, they are sent around the office in paper form, in case they are caught reading the news to each other.
The news that Sir Peter Bottomley standing down is good for him and he will always be regarded as a real champion and will be our loss, thank you Sir Peter if you are ever in Church Stretton you will be made welcome.
Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation replies: Although we are sure Sir Peter Bottomley will appreciate the sentiment expressed and the kind invitation, he is not standing down and is presently campaigning to hold his seat at Worthing West. Indeed, he maintains regular contact with us over leasehold issues and plans – barring an electoral mishap – to host a Westminster meeting on leasehold in July.
On a non political, purely on the man basis, i wish Peter Bottomley well in his quest to be re-elected, as i do Jim Fitzpatrick and Ed Davey in their quest to be re-elected..
Chas, It was kind of you to afford such a warm welcome to Peter Bottomley. You are correct in saying Peverel Retirement staff do read Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation, LKP and About Peverel.
Perhaps you would like to use these sites to extend an invitation to Mr Chris Owens, who could use the visit to refund your development for the price fixing and insurance irregularities that have cost your fellow leaseholders so much?
To Pier Management Rep, so you have issued an apology eh. So that makes everything ok then does it.
The point is it should never have been issued in the first place. All you MAs seem to want to do is grab grab grab money from wherever you can get it.
How about giving the distraught family a decent voucher or a free short hol break as a gesture of goodwill.
Maybe not, you would probably take the money from some sites serv charge account, do another totally unecessary yearly property valuation maybe.
Sorry I am so negative. Wonder who turned me on retirement leasehold! A list of companies longer than both of my arms