Here is news that will cheer up all leaseholders faced with threatening letters about late ground rent payments or service charges: Estates and Management is facing strike off from Companies House for late accounts.
Estates and Management Ltd (co number: 03244100) is part of the Consensus Business Group and manages the portfolio that still belongs, ultimately, to Vincent Tchenguiz’s Tchenguiz Family Trust in the British Virgin Islands.
It also manages the estate administration – read: revenue streams – for a number of other clients.
So if you pay ground rent, want to sub-let your flat, change your bathroom or keep a cat, the chances are you will be dealing with Estates and Management who will be after a payment.
To be late with accounts is not the most serious offence in the world, but it has a rich irony in a sector that monetises so ruthlessly the late payments of leaseholders.
It is also ironical that this has happened while commercialising freeholders are trying to persuade government of the necessity of professional landlords to leave the leasehold sector unreformed.
One leaseholder has contacted LKP to say that he is withholding his ground rents “until a clear public statement is available as to the financial state of the company no payments whatsoever will be forthcoming from my bank account”.
This is not an advisable course to follow, however, as an expensive letter from JB Leitch or some other debt collector will follow as swiftly as a rain cloud.
This particular leaseholder has form in confrontations with Estates & Management Ltd as he resisted “bully boy tactics from JB Leitch Solicitors on behalf of E&M and they finally caved in and agreed the correct amount due!”
Regarding late accounts, it has to be conceded that although LKP has not been late with accounts to Companies House, it has filed its accounts late to the Charity Commission, as an additional written annual report (2pp in our case) is required.
Related posts:
Blunder forces Pier Management and debt collector JB Leitch to scrap £3,265 late ground rent bill (and forfeiture threat that accompanied it)
CMA forces Countryside Properties plc to strike out doubling ground rents: it was selling them as late as May 2017!
FirstPort jacks up accounting fees at St David’s Square by 80% … and then bodges accounts, leaving leaseholders overcharged by more than £17,500
Imperial Hall beats off £12,366 claim from Sterling Estates Management
Daily Mail reports E&J Estates and wine-growing freeholder James Tuttiett
Dismal picture of leasehold emerges from MPs’ debate. But no government commitment on reforms
Dear Mr O’Kelly,
You could not make it up – the below was published on the “Trustpilot” web platform yesterday, I hope that It may be of some interest to LKP and the contributors to this reputable publication.
“I am about to launch two legal claims against FP. I am a barrister and a television news journalist. One is for negligence. The other is fraud. Please contact me on giles_walker@btinternet.com – if you are suffering serious problems with this scum, I might be able to assist. Because FP are a cancer”
I have briefly had a look at Mr. Walkers online credentials, quite impressive.
I will check it out. Unusual public language for a barrister.
I would caution against thinking that any fraud case is likely to succeed as a criminal action. Over they years we have seen many managing agents, landlords and even some leaseholders do things which the courts should have acted on but sadly it does not happen very often
Even the OFT/CMA prosecution of Peverel/First Port where the evidence was clear the case was watered down (unbeknown to all of us involved on the leaseholders side) to an action based on them deciding not to prosecute anyone other than the small subcontractors. The SFO and NCA and City of London police their record in the leasehold world is dire.
As mentioned Seb will contact Mr Walker to understand what actions he plans to take.
Not only do freeholders impose penalties for late payment of ground rent their insistence on payment by cheque or postal order is a way of making late payment more likely. In this day and age “faster payments” is the norm and acceptable to everyone, but not by my freeholder Shenstone Properties.
Accounts are now filed and include some interesting notes
“The leasehold reforms could potentially lead to a loss of business and adversely affect the company’s ability to recover amounts due from its parent company. However, the financial
consequences of any changes are too uncertain to enable the directors to reasonably estimate the impact of such changes on their forecasts. The accounts have been prepared on the assumption that any legislative changes will not materially reduce the ability of the related parties to repay these balances”
It also argues that leasehold reforms to help consumers will somehow be something that will work against their interests – and those of the ground rent investors
“The directors are of the view that the proposed changes, fi introduced in total, would be very damaging to the residential property market and against the interests of consumers and other property owners. The directors have engaged, and continue to engage, actively in consultations with Government, other stakeholders and interested parties in order to convey the company’s opposition to the current proposals. Public announcements by government and in the Law Commission’s report have recognised that any proposals to make wholesale reforms retrospectively pose real problems with respect to the contravention of human rights legislation.“
The impact of the 2022 legislation is also mentioned
“Parliament has enacted legislation, the Leasehold Reform (Ground Rent) Act 2022, which prevents the inclusion of a ground rent in excess of a peppercorn on new residential long l e a s e s .The Act received Royal Assent after the Balance Sheet date on 8 February 2022. The Act came into force on 30 June 2022 for leases on non-retirement properties and it will come into effect on 1 April 2023 for leases on retirement properties. The legislation does not apply retrospectively although ti does create restrictions on the ability of the group to generate rental income beyond the existing term of current leases as it impairs the ability of the freeholder and leaseholder to agree for the continuation of ground rent in the extension period when extending the lease beyond the current lease term“
It seems that Estates and Management have some integrity, they are not just concerned about themselves and their industry, they are also concerned about the consumer. LKP are always bad mouthing the likes of E & M, I think it appropriate that LKP balance things a little by highlighting this.
Excuse me I have to take my medication.
David as I’m sure you know the day that Estates and Management have an interest in anything beyond their own profit line you may see a blue moon and unicorns.
David,
The Freeholder could not care less about Leaseholder other than we are their primary source of income, “loads of money.” Without the vast income streams they derive from Leaseholders (one way or another) they may well go Bankrupt. Any other notion of this concept is factually incorrect and is proven by all that goes before.
The Freeholders who possibly (big players only) only number a handful are terrified that the “end of the gravy boat coming to an end, and that they may have to move on and get a job and earn their crust like any one else in business” including working in a regulated industry sector where you must abide by the law of the land.
I declare that I am a Director of a successful established RTM Company, David, what is your business relationship with E&M, and did you take your medication on time?
The contravention of human rights will be a fascinating potential Legal argument, In the blue corner Four Million Leaseholders, and in the red corner, a dozen allegedly professional Freeholders, lets await the outcome of another possible frivolous legal challenge.
Stephen,
Yes I took my meds and am feeling a lot better now. Relationship with E & M? I had occasion to communicate with these people regarding purchase of freehold, a freehold which my solicitor assured me had no value – all the value was in the head lease. She anticipated me paying E & M’s expenses (for ownership of freehold) , nothing more. E & M wanted thousands, I can’t recall the exact amount, I ended my attempt to fully own my property – both head lease and freehold.
Human rights? The Law Commission highlighted the human rights of freeholders, I am not aware of them being concerned about the human rights of millions of abused and exploited leaseholders. There lies the problem, the entire system is loaded against leaseholders, the battle to ABOLISH leasehold will continue to be opposed by a vast array of professionals and politicians.
If you want to look at contravention of human rights, look at “unqualified leaseholders “ 😡