Sir Peter Bottomley, Father of the House and co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on leasehold and commonhold reform, has waded into the controversies surrounding Richard Davidoff and his property firm ABC Estates.
In an Early Day Motion, he has called “on the Government to listen to the former employees of Mr Davidoff raising whistleblowing details of his business practices”.
Sir Peter has advanced the motion:
“That this House questions whether the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) has effective power to investigate the actions and conduct of the court appointed property manager Richard Davidoff; recognises the need for urgent action to implement statutory regulation of the leasehold property management sector outlined in Regulation of Property Agents: working group report, chaired by Lord Best, published on 18 July 2019; seeks an effective Government response to the recommendations; and calls on the Government to listen to the former employees of Mr Davidoff raising whistleblowing details of his business practices.”
LKP has been informed that two former employees are entangled in alleged defamation issues. Others have also contacted the veteran MP: peter.bottomley.mp@parliament.uk
Earlier this week Siobhan McGrath, the chamber president of the property tribunal, informed LKP that – “as far as I can ascertain from the Tribunal records” – there were two other blocks where Mr Davidoff is appointed as an officer of her court.
Additionally, she told leaseholders who had raised concerns that she could not “comment on Tribunal determinations or the reasoning given for any decision. Nor do I have power to conduct an inquiry into the conduct of Mr Davidoff in respect of any other property where he been appointed as a manager”.
The EDM can be read here: https://edm.parliament.uk/early-day-motion/59161
Sir Peter’s intervention follows two recent property tribunal decisions involving Mr Davidoff, both as a section 24 court-appointed managing agent and a right to manage application against a nominally residents’ management company of which Mr Davidoff was the sole director, and at which his own company ABC Estates was the block manager.
In addition, the Association of Residential Managing Agents expelled Mr Davidoff’s ABC Block Management Limited as a member on 4 November 2021.
Related posts:
Richard Davidoff, of ABC Estates, ‘breached his fiduciary duties’ after disastrous performance as a court-appointed manager, rules property tribunal
Property tribunal chamber president Siobhan McGrath says Richard Davidoff has two other section 24 court appointments – ‘as far as I can ascertain’ – and proposes a new practice code to encourage section 24 appointees to behave
Richard Davidoff fails to block right to manage – from a residents’ management company where he is the only director
Peter Bottomley MP calls for a debate on leasehold reform
Less ‘legal torture’ and more happiness in leasehold, says Sir Peter Bottomley
Property tribunal chamber president Siobhan McGrath says Richard Davidoff has two other section 24 court appointments – ‘as far as I can ascertain’ – and proposes a new practice code to encourage section 24 appointees to behave
“[….] and calls on the Government to listen to the former employees of Mr Davidoff raising whistleblowing details of his business practices”.
This is fantastic news. Let us hope that the Government also listens to the leaseholders that have been impacted by Richard Davidoff and his various companies.
The Association of Residential Managing Agents, the First Tier Tribunal, the Institute of Residential Property Management, the Property Redress Scheme and the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors have various powers to sanction errant managing agents. Some might argue that they issue these sanctions too sparingly.
As things presently stand, none of these entities have the power to stop a managing agent trading.
We therefore have an absurd situation where managing agents such as Richard Davidoff and ABC Block Management Limited can continue trading even if their practices have been deemed by a court to be abusive and unacceptable. If a managing agent’s practices have been deemed by a court to be abusive and unacceptable (as in this case) we need an entity with the power to stop the managing agent trading. This can only be achieved by an independent regulator.
Leaseholders have waited long enough.
This is the tip of the iceberg…….The stories I could tell ( based by credible evidence) of section 24 appointed managing agents. They would make your teeth curl… I just wish someone would give me a platform. Dynamite!!
Kim, I will light your fuse on the About Firstport Website I believe you are aware of. this!
As for The Association of Residential Managing Agents, (ARMA), the First-Tier Tribunal, (FTT), and the Institute of Residential Property Management, (IRPM) the Property Redress Scheme (PRS), and the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and other types of QUANGOS have over the years refused to act as expected as they are deemed Body Guards for these so-called organisations.
When will Regulation be introduced by this government who are well aware of what is going on and have refused to do anything?
Michael Gove has wanted to change things since being demoted to Housing Secretary but recently items have appeared on websites castigating him.
Is this what happens when MPs try to help Leaseholders?
Hats off to you Chas. You are a beacon of truth in this whole nasty mess. You have fought FirstPort relentlessly.
Kim, I urge you to go for it. Speak to Chas. I once spoke to a ‘rogue surveyor’ who told me stories of how property managers of one of the most well-known managing agents were taking inducements from service providers. It led me to forensically look through all our invoices. We got a whole year’s service charge refunded in the end. What people don’t always realise is that these companies are incompetent and arrogant. If you do the research and build a case over time you can defeat them. There will come a time when this whole sordid market collapses, but it needs people like you to keep throwing petrol on the fire. We have to push hard now. Sir Peter Bottomley has been fighting this almost singlehandedly in parliament and as the father of the house, he will want to hang up his boots in the near future and I just don’t see anyone stepping forward to take up his mantle.
I am having problems with another managing agent. I have emailed my local MP about the issues that I am having and have asked my MP to sign EDM 672, tabled on 19-11-2021 by Sir Peter Bottomley.
If other people having problems with managing agents do the same, we could have a real shot at making change happen!
Another year of leasehold injustice is soon to pass, there is legislation coming forward for future leaseholders but that is still to be passed, but here we are again no regulation after all the committees and reports all saying leasehold needs regulating, its all blah blah blah.
Its the same old story…no regulation of Managing Agents, leasholders having to pay for building work that should have had standards enforced, current leaseholders waiting for the reform that never comes just like waiting for the High Speed Train in Leeds.
How has all this injustice come to pass? .. there is one simple answer.. lobbying.. by powerfull companies who can afford to ‘advise’ ministers…companies who can afford to pay the price for their requirements in order that their steady income stream is not disrupted.
Up till recently there has not been a lobbying group for leaseholders so what chance have individuals who have been left to the mercy of the unscrupulous, and I don’t believe that lobbying for the benefit of leaseholders provides the lucrative pay off needed to change things….and that is why they haven’t changed!
Looking at the current ‘Corruption Perceptions Index’ for 2021 it appears that over the last ten years or so the UK has risen in the league, it is unfortunate that this index does not really relate to the last few months, I am sure that in time to come this year will see the UK in the top ten! if not ‘Number One’ !
In my 73 yrs of life I have never seen a Government so embroiled in such a disregard for peoples well being, it has come to the point where ordinary people have come to expect to be treated as if they were criminals when at the same time those who exploit them using unjust laws and lack of regulation are commended and left to carry on as if nothing has happened..!
If I were a young man again I would **** off from this awful country !!
All leaseholders and others that are serious about having an Independent Regulator for the sector should email their local MP to ask them to sign EDM 672.
This is because (if I have understood it correctly) the EDM is not only about Richard Davidoff and ABC Estates but also about “the need for urgent action to implement statutory regulation of the leasehold property management sector outlined in Regulation of Property Agents: working group report, chaired by Lord Best, published on 18 July 2019 [….]”.
You can stick your leasehold legislation up your arse – altogether now, you can stick your leashold legislation up your arse……………………………………………
Dear David…
yes I agree…
Yes that is what tory MP’s would like..they don’t want legislation to disrupt the brown envelopes.
Sir Peter Bottomley is right to call for this motion but sadly, I doubt the government`s willingness to step in – and even if it does, to do what needs to be done.
In the not dissimilar residential retirement Park Homes Market, the 2013 government comitment to rid the sector of serious malpractice has resulted only in its expansion and whilst the First Tier Tribunals need not investigate because the evidence is regularly put before them, this remains in the applicants bundles, the task of exposing them left to fearful victims and willing campaigners who are advised that it`s down to the hapless residents to do their own due diligence, whilst unregistered leases are handed to sham companies, extraordinarily afforded the right to issue and defend legal proceedings. When a child, an early day motion was a routine involving defecation. That suggested by Sir Peter and backed by Lord Best and LKP should not go the same way, ending up flushed down the pan
I personally found the First Tier Tribunal to be another weak government organisation which is not interested in fighting for residents rights I’m sad to say. It’s so easy for them to give you the brush off and say they can’t help you if it looks remotely difficult. We’re having to fund our own fight against a Management Company, but the legal costs are eye watering and this is where the Management Companies win. Residents do not have the will or cannot get together collectively to fight these people. We have achieved some success but were caught in a HomeGround/FirstPort/Countryside sandwich – need I say more.
I did pause before this reply to Andy because I`m soon to again represent a residents group at an FTT and upsetting the panel beforehand might not be the best move – But sadly, I have to agree. On previous occasions the bias in favour of the frequently dubious characters posing as property management companies is plainly obvious, as is the lack of knowledge of the most basic of contract law. Many see FTT`s as justice ( or not ) on the cheap, albeit less so when up against the crooks – and having previously fought similar battles in the County Courts, I know which forum I would prefer.
Chas above could not have put it better.
My own experience with the ‘Association of Residential Home Managers’ (ARHM) trade association, is that they act like a Body Guard in defending complaints against their members such as Millstream Management Services who (falsely) advertise to adhere to, whilst in practice stubbornly refusing leaseholders requests that they comply with the ARHM’s Code of Practice.