The satirical magazine Private Eye has featured Peverel’s name-change today.
Referring to previous reports on Peverel as see “Eyes passim ad nauseam” it treats readers to a resume of Peverel’s recent unfortunate history.
“FirstPort may turn out to be LastResort for the troubled management company,” is the pessimistic conclusion.
Related posts:
Cooee! Peverel becomes FirstPort and heading for ARMA-Q … But will it be welcome?
Peverel / FirstPort paid ‘£40,000′ of residents’ contingency fund money to Mr Tchenguiz ‘by mistake’
Any port in a storm as Peverel desperately rebrands to … FirstPort
Terrys Mews right to manage fails for not knowing Peverel OM is now FirstPort
Peverel / FirstPort pays back £39,377 wrongly taken from Hillside Court, but the pensioners say another £3,498 is missing
Woman has £165,000 flat forfeited over what began as £290 ground rent demand
Does the change to First Port mean that our Lease Agreement with OM is no longer valid? Is our consent required? Do we receive new Lease Agreements with an option to opt out?
No harm asking, but … I assume “OM” is actually named in your lease, but I am sure that there will be a clause there relating to subsequent management companies of the freeholder’s choice. It is unlikely that there would be such obvious wriggle room.
Traute Wilde,
All that changes is the Brand Name, the rest of the **** remains the same they already use Peverel Retirement as a Brand Name for Peverel Management Services Ltd?
It is trite law that mergers or aquisitions of this sort regard the name change as just that, not the appointment of a new company.
that includes setting it up for a sale, allegedly 🙂
Michael,
I wonder if Private Eye reads our comments and would like to place some of what we have said in their Magazine?
As seen on About Peverel your comment regarding Dribbling Geriatrics.
As you have pointed out, the way Peverel treated pensioners, along with Ian Raperley who called us Dribbling Geriatrics.
I was recently informed that the House Managers were not obliged to take out Content Insurance so if an accident, such as a Broken WC and Damaged Carpets occurred, there would not be any Insurance Cover.
This said, why should there be any requirement when the Service Charges can be so readily used.
The House Manager can spend up to £1,000 as Petty Cash? The Area Manager can spend £6,99.99 without any consultation as the S20 Notice snaps in at £250 times the number of resident flats, for example 28 flats times £250 per flat is £7,000.00.
Our House Manager spent £2,491.00 on Plants/Planters and we paid the bill. We did eventually receive a refund but it took over a year and the Regional Manager refused to pay any interest.
The Area Manager also allowed her to make private phone calls, which we paid £1,326.53 Phone Bill. We did receive a refund of £1,126.53 some, £200.00 less than she spent. It took me from 2010/11 until late 2012/13, before the Regional Manager finally agreed but again he refused to pay any interest.
I have since found items in the past Invoice Files that we paid for other Developments?
We keep asking Chris Owens and Janet Entwistle for refunds of:-
Insurance Commissions £11,000
Price Fixed Warden Call System £20,0000
Asbestos Surveys £176.00
Roof Surveys £411.25
2 Tree Surveys £685.00
Life Insurance for House Manager £72.00
Training for House Managers £1,000.00
Lights for a Club, £87.06
Housing Ombudsman Service £160.00
Lockable Notice Board £231.86
For Sale Notice £30.00
Replace WC £375.00
Replaced Carpets £327.37
We have asked for the refunds to be placed into the Contingency Funds but Chris Owens and Janet Entwistle, no longer bother to reply.
It seems that the Area Managers have Unaccountable Power and are in a Privileged Position.
We have recently received our Budget Statement, which shows amounts that we cannot account for.
The Area Manager has decided not to call a meeting, but we can phone to arrange a one to one meeting.
How is that for being Open and Transparent?