Yesterday the Guardian published a devastating report of the Peverel / Cirrus price-fixing scandal.
It poured scorn on Peverel for systematically cheating residents of retirement leasehold, on the Office of Fair Trading for its scandalous feeble report and being suckered into granting Peverel leniency.
It also rightly derided Peverel’s £100,000 offer of a “goodwill gesture” – which should prompt a gesture of an altogether more vulgar variety in reply.
The article was written by Patrick Collinson, the personal finance editor, who has written about Peverel in the past.
Please comment on the article here in order to prompt a follow-up.
It would be useful if the Guardian reports the compensation proposals put forward by Sir Peter Bottomley, which are supported by Jim Fitzpatrick, Labour MP for Limehouse and Poplar, and Ed Davey, the LibDem Energy Secretary and Cabinet minister.
Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation has received a number of other examples where Cirrus has carried out works at sites for disputable amounts of money.
Please keep us informed: if your site has been ripped off and is not on the OFT list, we will look into it.
If Peverel has not reported all the sites where the scams operated, then the OFT’s pathetic leniency deal will not apply.
Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation is also keen to discover what the ARHM has to say about this disgrace. Or the Elderly Accommodation Council, which seems to spend its time doling out awards and linking to a retirement housing estate agency.
The ARHM, funded mainly by Peverel, pontificates about standards, transparency, decency and the rest … now it can comment on an OFT report which, even in its diluted form, is a devastating critique of those managing retirement housing.
It would also be an occasion for Sally (Baroness) Greengross, ARHM president and former head of Age Concern, to address this issue.
She appears to have spent the last 25 years downplaying issues in retirement leasehold and was – according to John McCarthy – the first port of call when McCarthy and Stone disastrously attempted to sue the Daily Telegraph.
She famously said complainers in retirement leasehold were “barrack-room lawyers”, and joked with ARHM members about the indignation caused by the remark.
If nothing else, the OFT report into the corporate plundering of pensioners by Peverel / Cirrus has shown her to be partial and foolish on this subject.
Related posts:
Guardian examines the Peverel / Cirrus price-fixing scandal tomorrow 
Guardian covers more fall out from Peverel’s price-fixing scam with Cirrus Communications 
OFT will report on the Peverel / Cirrus price-fixing scandal on Friday Peverel Cirrus price-fixing stooge says sorry … 
Campaign against Residential Leasehold Exploitation meets lawyers over Peverel price-fixing scandal
I am shocked knowing about Baroness sally Greengross , president and former of age concern appeared to have spent 25 years downplaying retirement housing issues. I have worked voluntarily for age concern ; they are most vulnerable and fragile people. Where these greedy people are taking the world to? They have to be stopped.
Simin,
I have seen her apology and read her comments, she has let down the people she was supposed to represent. Let us name the party she also represents and look for any good she ever carried out.
Check out Campaign against retirement leasehold exploitation and About Peverel as they also are aware of this lady!!!!
It would be far more useful if the OFT admitted that while the goodwill gesture is within their remit, the facts and breadth of overspecification and the collusion are such that they should report the matter to the Police for criminal investigation. Even if they do not, presented with such a future question ” why did you not refer it to the Police” might force them to up the ante on Peveral.
I agree with AM. These matters should be taken seriously. Should be reported to the police. Criminals in this field know the system well, before victim realises the damages, they have made fortunes.
My other concern is why Baroness Sally kept in a position for 25 years. How her position was extended? Was it by voting, feed back of elderly client, or by people above them. Surly she has had support from people around her. The apology is not enough and her apology should not stop further detailed investigation.
I have some sympathy for Baroness Greengross as on many occassions her (third hand) generalisation would be correct. In this case it was woefully wrong.