Planning Watch UK » campaign

Problems mount for Peverel and Solitaire

Editor — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 15:13:25 +0000

Peverel property management faces tenant rebellion over service

Excessive fees and poor service are some of the accusations residents level against Peverel. Now they are taking action

The Peverel tenants who are fighting back

Comments (26)

- Patrick Collinson
- The Guardian, Saturday 12 February 2011
- Article history

Tenants Frank Gadd and Bernard Allwork of Church Crookham, Hampshire. Photograph: Graham Turner for the GuardianThree years ago Frank Gadd saw a two-bed maisonette for sale near Fleet in Hampshire that seemed perfect for his retirement. Yes, it was small, but it was affordable and it was relatively new, so maintenance would be minimal.

“When I saw it, I thought what a lovely place to be in,” says Gadd, now 67. “But after just eight or nine months I felt I’d made a mistake. It was grim.”

It wasn’t the property that was a let-down. It was the huge service and maintenance charges Gadd was being forced to pay out of his modest pension. The bill hit £4,400 a year for a run of four maisonettes with no common parts. This year, after taking on the agents, he will pay just £200.

Gadd’s story is one of despair both at the lack of service and excessive costs for things such as buildings insurance. And his tale may not be unfamiliar to leaseholders and flat dwellers around the country.

His managing agent was a firm called Solitaire Property Management, which in 2008 became part of the Peverel group of companies. Peverel is one of Britain’s most controversial property companies. It owns or manages hundreds of thousands of properties across Britain, under brand names such as OM, Consort and Pembertons Property Management. It looks after 65,000 retirement homes, largely at McCarthy & Stone developments. It runs security company Cirrus, which installs CCTV and entry systems for flats, and Kingsborough, which organises buildings insurance.

Behind Peverel and a web of connected companies stands multimillionaire property tycoon Vincent Tchenguiz, whose flamboyant spending – before the credit crunch at least – was legendary.

Aside from the Rolls Royce (at one stage he reputedly owned five), he boasts a £10m-plus luxury yacht, called Veni, Vidi, Vici (I came, I saw, I conquered). His brother Robert also built a huge financial empire, much of it based on loans from Kaupthing Bank in Iceland.

As Iceland’s financial system collapsed in October 2008, many of the loans were called in, wiping out a large swathe of Robert Tchenguiz’s business empire, and also affecting Vincent.

But far from the yachts on the French Riviera, numerous tenants of properties around Britain ultimately controlled by Tchenguiz are furious at the charges they pay, and the service they receive.

One website alone, where tenants share stories about their treatment and what they can do about it, has received nearly 120,000 visitors over the past 16 months. The awkwardly named The Truth About OM Property Management (formerly Solitaire Property Management) & Peverel Group Companies, was set up in 2008 by a disgruntled Solitaire customer

When he spoke to Guardian Money it was on the basis that we only publish his first name: Adam. “I was fed up with being palmed off with various stories, services not being provided yet the fees kept going up. But it soon became apparent it wasn’t just me.”

The site is now peppered with allegations, although they are firmly rejected by Peverel. In a statement, it said: “Solitaire Property Management only became part of the Peverel Group in mid 2008. Given Solitaire’s poor history, immediate changes were made by Peverel to improve the company, including centralising customer service management and closing poorly organised regional offices … Since taking control of Solitaire we have made it our number one priority to make a fresh start with residents who felt they had been let down by Solitaire.”

But some leaseholders continue to press ahead with tribunal claims. In the coming months, a tribunal will hear a £2.6m claim for overcharging alleged by more than 300 leaseholders at the striking St George Wharf development on the river Thames. Residents of five blocks in Nottingham, called City Heights, set off fireworks to celebrate wresting control of their development from Peverel after a long legal battle. Across the city, residents at Weekday Cross have won £730,000 at a tribunal, although Peverel is appealing this.

Every tenant’s story is different, but there are a number of strands that feature regularly among complaints.

Service charges Residents, many of whom are on fixed incomes, talk of rampant charge inflation. In the Weekday Cross development, also in Nottingham, the service charge on a flat went up 75% in just two years.

Service provision Residents say they understand the need to pay service charges, but allege that services are not provided. Often it is the mundane details of daily life. In Gadd’s case, he claims the person supposed to cut the grass didn’t turn up for six months. In other instances it’s about critical repairs and security.

At Weekday Cross, residents allege promises were repeatedly made but not kept, and in August 2009 at a leasehold valuation tribunal, Solitaire/Peverel were ousted as managing agents.

Insurance costs Some residents claim they are overcharged for buildings insurance, which is usually arranged for Peverel by its sister company Kingsborough. Residents say premiums can be as much as double the rate on the open market, driven up by commissions of up to 40% earned by Kingsborough for arranging the policies. Peverel says it regularly tenders risks to the open market and is legally allowed to obtain commissions.

Transfer fees When the owner of a retirement home dies and the property is sold, a seller may be charged 2% of the value of the property. Peverel says the fees are passed on to the landlord, and it does not benefit. But often the landlord is a company called Fairhold, which although not part of the Peverel Group shares a common beneficial owner – the trustees of the Tchenguiz Family Trust.

Late charges Residents allege that accounts may be filed late, and that as a result, they are faced with “balancing” charges, sometimes years after the work has taken place.

Legal representation Individual residents complain that taking on the legal firepower of the Peverel Group is a daunting prospect. One individual says he was faced with nearly 1,000 pages of legal documentation sent just 72 hours before a tribunal, and stood alone against teams of lawyers and barristers acting for Peverel.

Peverel replies

We understand how important a person’s home is to them and for more than 25 years, we have taken great pride in our service to residents. We adhere rigidly to industry best practice, including The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors and The Association of Residential Managing Agents standards. But as a market leader, we often bear the brunt of criticism for things that not only affect the whole property management industry, but are beyond our control.

Service charges are collected from residents so communal areas and grounds can be maintained, buildings insured and utility costs paid. The money residents pay goes into a development specific ‘trust’ account and is spent on their development alone.

Charges are dictated by the lease, a document drawn up by the developer. All charges should be explained by the buyer’s solicitor, but when they are not, the property manager is the resident’s first port of call.

That doesn’t stop us striving for better practice. For years we have lobbied for greater regulation to raise standards across a largely unregulated industry. Any business faces challenges as it grows, and when Solitaire Property Management (SPM) became part of the Peverel Group in mid 2008, it quickly became apparent it had a number of serious operational and customer service issues that would take time to resolve. Peverel took immediate steps. A three-year, £4m improvement plan was set in motion, customer service management was centralised, poorly organised regional offices closed and Solitaire’s entire senior operations team changed. One of the first actions taken by PPM was to introduce a formal customer complaints procedure for Solitaire. Some of these complaints went as far as tribunals. As part of our commitment to correct errors made under a previous management, we have accepted many of the rulings.

Since taking control of Solitaire we have made it our number one priority to make a fresh start with residents who felt they had been let down by Solitaire.

All properties formerly managed by SPM came under the control of our OM Property Management division on 6 January 2011. As we begin the final year of our improvement plan, we are confident former Solitaire customers are now seeing industry-leading standards of customer service, value for money and transparency.

Share and Enjoy:

Campaign Success – Go Ape drops Pollok Park, Glasgow, treetop park plans

Editor — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 11:18:53 +0000

The plans would have seen treetop walkways and zip slides

Campaigners succeed as controversial plans to build a treetop adventure playground in Pollok Park in Glasgow abandoned.

The Go Ape facility was given the go-ahead by dotty Glasgow councillors last year, despite a large campaign against it.

Now the firm behind the adventure course in the park’s north wood, behind the Burrell Collection, is pulling out.

Glasgow City Council has called it a “major disappointment” but the Save Pollok Park group said it was delighted with the move.

The proposed Go Ape adventure play area would have seen platforms and zip slides placed in the trees near the Burrell Collection.

Our main objective was to secure an additional attraction for park users

Robert Booth
Glasgow City Council

In March 2008, members of the planning committee at Glasgow City Council voted in favour of the plan after a special meeting and visit to the site.

Despite a continued campaign from objectors, the Scottish National Party Government decided it would not issue any restriction or call in the plan.

The scheme was referred to Scottish ministers because the council had a financial interest in the scheme.

Go Ape are understood to have now decided the venture would be too expensive to pursue.

Inquiry call

Robert Booth, Glasgow City Council’s executive director of land services, said: “Obviously we regret Go Ape’s decision not to proceed with their facility at Pollok Park.

“Our main objective was to secure an additional attraction for park users at no cost or financial risk to the council.”

Save Pollok Park campaign said it was “delighted” with the decision of Go Ape to abandon its plans.

A spokesman added: “However, the council’s failure to consult and respond to the real legal and operational issues resulted in over two years of unnecessary work and a waste of taxpayers’ money which could have been avoided.”

“We call for a detailed inquiry into the council’s futile posturing and mishandling of the Go Ape affair.”

Campaign Information Background:

We are a group of park users and many others (over 5000 signatures) who are concerned about Glasgow City Council’s proposal to give a 21 years lease covering a large part of the North Wood of Pollok Park to Adventure Forest Ltd to develop a “GO APE ” facility

Go Ape and Glasgow Council are bogged down in a legal mess

It is now established that Pollok Park ( and Knowehead Lodge ) are part of the Common Good and they will haveto go to court to remove them

This will cost either Glasgow Council tax payers or Go Ape tens of thousands of pounds – and legal precedents are such that it is likely they will lose (and the case could take several years)

The NTS has not yet given its required consent for the proposals as they presently stand. The dicussions to use Knowehead Lodge have got nowhere

There is no chance of a lease being signed in time for the Go Ape proposed start date of 2010. If one is signed now it will be subject to a legal challenge

It is clear that Glasgow Councillors (and Go Ape) contiune to be misled by Land Services

We suspect they are all now trying to find a way to wriggle out of this without accepting that they have made a total mess – no doubt they will try to put the blame on the 5000 objetors and those of us who have been telling them since 2007 that they got it wrong in the first place

Oposition to Go Ape’s agressive tactics and flouting of local agreements is growing across UK

Go Ape and Glagow Council thought we would just go away- but we have shown that we undestand the legal status of Pollok Park better than them – and contiuue to win round many politicians at local and national level through our reasoned arguments and independent legal opinions . We are stronger than ever .

The Council , Go Ape and its PR company have produced no counter arguments or evidence to what we have been saying – in fact Go Ape tried to libel us in the press (Oct 2008) - a tactic which back fired as nobody believed them and made Glasgow people even more angry

So watch this space

UNDER PRESURE GLASGOW COUNCIL HAS FINALLY CONCEDED THAT POLLOK PARK BELONGS TO US – IT PART OF THE COMMON GOOD

IT CANNOT BE LEASED WITHOUT A COURT ORDER AND ANY INCOME BELONGS TO THE COMMON GOOD AND NOT COUNCIL SERVICES

WE SAY THAT AS IT WAS A GIFT TO US IN PERPETUITY WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY FOR THE USE OF ANY PART OF IT

It is now officially established that the Park belongs to us – we have a right to use it freely without hindrance or cost as the people of Glasgow have been doing for over half a century - it is inalienable. Depite this the Council and Go Ape are still pursuing the idea of fencing off areas ( for example the land on the right of this photo identified as the Go Ape ” training area” ) and charging us £25 to go into it

I have been using the Pollok Park since I was knee high, and have been out running and walking in the park early morning very frequently over the last few weeks, and have been regularly spotting groups of six to eight deer grazing in the very spot that Go Ape propose to masacre. These deer have probably already been trapped within the park due to motorway and continuing developments around the park, but if Go Ape were to go ahead these deer will have a substantial amount of their habitat taken away. I can’t describe what an amazing site it is to see these deer and it elates me every time to see such beautiful wildlife so close to home. I am very much saddened by the fact that Glasgow Council disregard such an asset to the park and just want to fill their greedy pockets by collaborating with whoever it takes, they seem to have no shame.
I am 32 years young and would like to have enjoyed this park just the way it is, it’s a ‘little piece of peace’ just moments away from the hustle and bustle of the secular world

We exposed Glasgow Council’s flawed public consultation process, their cavalier treatment towards the National Trust for Scotland and that the Council and Go Ape’s statements that they would only come to Pollok Park if the people of Glasgow wanted them as a con

We exposed the the fact that Councillors were misled when they approved the proposal in 2007 – because they were not told of the legal agreement in place which mean that NTS consent is needed to certain developments – nor were they told that Pollok Park is Common Good Land – it cannot be alianated and anyway the projected commercial deal to raise money for Council services is a non-starter

We exposed the “offer ” by Go Ape of 450 free places to Glasgow schoolchildren as a con – head teachers were not asked if they would agree to the health and safety requirements or to virtually shutting schools down to enable enough teachers to accompany the pupils- we did ask and we have not found one school who said they would take up the “offer”

We have exposed the poverty of the planning application- the lack of public toilets, no parking survey was done, no study of the flora to be affected was done, the less than truthful assertion that ” we would have to look up to notice anything at all ” the visual and noise pollution of the fences and zip wires in an area of national landscape importance . Despite this 14 Councillors voted through the application – but now the Council has recognised the flaws and is trying to get round them – see News and Updates

We rallied over 5000 signatures , held public meetings of 700+ and a vigil of 1000 people . We have shown that we are not a small group of “NIMBYs but people from all over Glasgow and beyond who value the gift to the “Nation and the Citizens of Glasgow “ that is Pollok Park and are determined to safeguard it as it was intended even if the Council seems to have abandoned its obligations under the terms of the original gift

We have supported other campaigns in UK fighting GoApe proposals in equally unsuitable sites and exposed that they cannot be trusted – eg they have illegally felled trees in Chorley

Save Pollok Park supporters in Feb 2008 on the occasion of Pollok Park being awarded “European Best Park”

1000 people turned out to a silent vigil – to mark the site of the Go Ape development (we could only mark part of it) - here is the proposed site of a 120 metre mechanical slide across an area created by the Maxwell family in the 18th century, described by Scottish Natural Heritage as of National Landcape importance, home to several roe deer, and gifted to the city ” to be preserved in its orginal state. Go Ape says ” we will have to look up to notice anything at all”

See News and Updates for result of a debate with Glasgow Scouts and young people from Greater Pollok

See News and Updates for news of a campaign similar to SPP in Lancashire

See News and Updates

Find out why this will make the Council’s attempt to use money from Go Ape for Land Services unlawful - and what you can do about it - Go to The Common Good section of this website

Another successful public meeting on 28th October heard expert views affirm that Pollok Park is part of the Common Good of Glasgow and confirm our views on the Legal Agreements – See News and Updates for Details

Almost 300 people attended the meeting on 28th October at Pollokshaws Burgh Hall- they unanimously endorsed 2 new resolutions

A separate meeting was also held on 28th Oct to start the setting up of a Friends of Pollok Park

The National Trust for Scotland has publicly re- affirmed its opposition to the present proposal for the Go Ape development although at persent it remains neutral on possible alternative suitable sites in Pollok Park - Go to news and Updates for Details

An Archaeological dig has just finished on the Go Ape Site – see News and Updates for more details

A lovely view of Pollok illustrating why people feel that we need to conserve it as was intended in the gift to the people of Glasgow – as a country estate – and not an urban theme park - sent in by supporter Christopher S. Walton (thanks)

Cick on this Link to Gerry Fletcher’s website which has additional photos and videos (with sound ) of the Park and of some of Save Pollok Park’s actions to date

http://www.gerflet.co.uk/savepollokpark2008/

A packed meeting of 200 people vowed to continue to challenge the proposal . Representatives of 4 political parties were there- all of whom gave their support – Nicola Surgeon, the constituency MSP spoke as did Jackson Carlow MSP and Patrick Harvie MSP. Others were Robert Brown MSP and Bashir Ahmed MSP. Glasgow Councillors Danny Alderslowe and Paul Colsehill also spoke and Cllrs David Meikle , George Roberts and Margo Clark were there in support of the next stage which is to persuade Scottish Ministers to call in the application and overturn the Glasgow Council planning decision

THE REAL FIGHT TO SAVE OUR PARKS HAS JUST BEGUN – our main strength is in our numbers- already over 5000 petition signatures Can we all be wrong?

To find out more about what is proposed go to The Development
To find why we think it is a bad deal for Glasgow go to The Proposed Lease
To find out about why Pollok is unique go to Historic Pollok
To see photos of Go Ape and of the areas of the Park it will affect go to Photos- Go Ape/Park
News and Updates includes some new and older pieces of news of the campaign

Here is a mock up of a the Zip wire going across the Glade – a Conservation Area and designed landscape of national importance (Historic Scotland)-and yet Go Ape says it will have little impact and ” we will have to look up to notice anything at all” - are these people serious?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aD3FFT-Qt1Q

http://www.vimeo.com/1232652

A soundtracked slide show of the Planning Commmitte’s visit to the Park on 25th March – thanks to Geery Fletcher (and Joan Baez – make sure you turn your speakers on)

http://cid-07bf495138080875.skydrive.live.com/self.aspx/SPP/080414%20Save%20Country%20Park%20%202008%20by%20Gerry%20Fletcher.wmv

They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot
Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you’ve got
Till its gone
They paved paradise
And put up a parking lot

They took all the trees
Put ‘em in a tree museum
And they charged the people
A dollar and a half just to see em
Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you’ve got-till its gone
Joni Mitchell – Big Yellow Taxi- written in 1970 but the message is timeless

Pollok Park was gifted by the Maxwell family in 1969 “for the enjoyment of the citizens of Glasgow” and the “enhancement of the beauty of the neighbourhood” This development will restrict the use and enjoyment of parts of North Wood to ordinary users, walkers etc

It will cost £25 per adult and £20 for a teenager to use – that is not the meaning of the word “Gift”

There are agreements in place form 1939 and 1969 with the Maxwell family and National Trust – they have to be consulted and if they say no – then the Council cannot do this. Representatives of the family and the National Trust have formally objected – so why has the Council told the Company to put in a planning application?

The red lines mark are the activity areas with some fenced off bits adn zip wires – but the planning application area is the whole area within the yellow line – there is no guarantee that these sites may not move over the next 21 years – and we believe there is evidence that the sound of users and zip wires will carry across much of it. The blue dots mark the 2 new buildings – the Burrell Museum is botttom right- this area is 30% of North Wood and 50% of North wood outside the mountain bike track area

Share and Enjoy:

Manchester Congestion Charge – A bittersweet victory for the ‘No’ campaign

Editor — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:45:27 +0000

It was announced yesterday afternoon that the people of Greater Manchester voted in force against the proposed congestion charge, with the 53.2% (1,030,000) turnout voting overwhelmingly against this additional road tax.No less than 79% of those who voted wanted to reject the charge, and no more than 28% voted yes in one any local authority area. This landslide victory marks the death of the Manchester TIF bid and has hopefully discouraged other areas - not least the West Midlands councils - from further pursuing this unpopular scheme.

Yet, though our congratulations go out to the No campaign, it is worth noting that this is a very bittersweet victory with huge amounts already having been spent on a project that was disliked from its inception. Though families in Greater Manchester will no longer have to pay the hefty £1,200 per year that a congestion charge would mean, a startling £34million has already been spent consulting, debating, drawing-up and promoting the TIF bid according to the Drivers Alliance, all funded by ordinary taxpayers. It just makes it worse that the very residents whove paid for this road pricing ambition seem to have been dead against it from the start, and in the end this £34million bought 218,860 yes votes thats £155 each.

This money has been frittered away by those with a blind commitment to the congestion charge, encouraged by those who stood to benefit. Perhaps, at this very moment the proponents of road charging are busy wondering how to bring its spectre back to life with a different guise and new spin and, if they manage a successful resuscitation, lets hope our councils recognise it for what it is and remember this Manchester vote.

Share and Enjoy: