FirstPort/Peverel may be VERY seriously harmful to our elderly people.

coachman12

comeandgo said:

Well you are going to say I'm an employee too. We have First Port as maintenance contractors on our housing estate and we run them and have no problems.  
The residents, if not happy, must take the appropriate action to get rid of them, it can be done.
______________________________________________________________
Of course I'm not going to say that about you. Your mail is far too reasonable and succinct.
But, if you read my links and if you google "FirstPort---scandals" or FirstPort --criticisms" etc, and you read the reviews on TrustPilot ( very damning stuff), you would probably admit that you have been very lucky. I'm glad for you. But you may NOT be in an over 65s flats site (as you mention a  "housing estate"); you may have a strong and younger residents' association who are computer literate and confident and are able to TELL FirstPort/Peverel what to do, as they are merely agents to carry out what YOU want. You may not have a useless site manager who lives free on the estate at your expense.You may not have been tricked into having an unnecessary new entry and emergency system (Appello) installed at great expense to you without being told a subsidiary company was being used. You can imagine how a company with FirstPort/Peverel's abysmal reputation treat elderly retired residents who are far more vulnerable. Please spare them a thought when you have read all the info on the internet about a very nasty management company. Thank you for your posting.

coachman12

NeilCr said:

Not bothered about you ranting here. It's just that - as Eddddy says - you'll only have 15 minutes with lease advice so you need to be concise

The residents could try - as I pointed out - complaining to the freeholder. That wouldn't take too much - especially, if they are united 
________________________________________________________
TY Neil. Points understood and appreciated. As you have helpful knowledge, perhaps you can , if you have time, whether you know what powers ARMA has. This Association of Residential Management Agents, which have criticised FirstPort/Peverel in the past ( and kept them from joining ARMA until recently), may have some sort of regulatory role but I cannot find out their terms of reference. Have you any info at all please?
Once again, I take the opportunity to ask all MSE Forum members with any professional knowledge of residential management agents to join this thread which is aimed at helping elderly flat owners who are being exploited.
And does anyone in the business and banking world know anything about the recent loan of £25 million by Banks to FirstPort/Peverel , why they had to apply for such a sum, and how they intend to repay it + interest by 2025 without fleecing residents via even more increases in Service Charges. 

A_Nice_Englishman

My former partner worked as a Scheme Manager in some of these developments.

From memory, they had Residents Committees which negotiated with her and the management companies over the services provided. If there isn't one of these in the development in question establishing one would be a useful step towards self-management. Ideally there will be one or more residents from a management/leadership background who can lead it.

coachman12

A_Nice_Englishman said:

My former partner worked as a Scheme Manager in some of these developments.

From memory, they had Residents Committees which negotiated with her and the management companies over the services provided. If there isn't one of these in the development in question establishing one would be a useful step towards self-management. Ideally there will be one or more residents from a management/leadership background who can lead it
____________________________________________________________
Many thanks . It all helps as I have been asked to help a relative in finding ways to stand up to FirstPort/Peverel. The one I am looking at does not have a Residents Committee because such a move has been met with hostility in the past by the local F/P manager, and it is not difficult to intimidate certain portions of the population. But I think your idea is a good one as a starting point and I will be discussing it with my aunt next time I visit, as she knows most of the residents. And she may know of a natural leader with some relevant background experience who can step forward into the breach ! 

NeilCr

I doubt ARMA would be of much use

You should read this

https://arma.org.uk/leaseholders/complaints-about-a-member

I can tell you that I am in the process of complaining about FirstPort. I have been through their complaints procedure. I got one (standardised) reply and no action. I have also been to the Property Ombudsman. FP did not reply to them. It is a long and tortuous process. We are now going legal. 

I'd try other routes if you can. A Residents Committee is a fair shout as well as other suggestions made on this thread

A_Nice_Englishman

Other things to consider are that residents value having a scheme manager living on site who can respond if they have a fall or other incident more and more as they get older and frailer.  The cost of this will have risen with increases in the minimum wage.

Many will expect a high standard of maintenance and this will cost more for a 40 year old building than a brand new one.

Some will have kept money back from the sale of their previous properties in anticipation of the service charges. Others will have put all the proceeds into the new one or spent the surplus. Some may have inherited large sums.

There may be a wide variation in incomes too, with some on just a state pension and others with substantial private pensions.

All these will make it difficult to reach a consensus between residents whoever manages the development.

Madmel

We had experience of dealing with Peverel with my Mother-in-Law's flat.  Although she lived in it, we owned it.  She was far from the only person in her complex in that situation - around a third of the residents' apartments were owned by family members.  They held management meetings at least annually and we received the accounts in advance for approval.  Yes, the service charges were very high.  However, in our case this covered the services of a live-in warden/housekeeper and also the provision and maintenance of a lift.  The benefit of both is not to be underestimated.  In addition, the laundry rooms contained high-quality appliances and in the 12+ years MiL was there, we were never aware of any issue.  In adverse weather, the warden would arrange for food and medication deliveries or collect prescriptions for residents.  

Peverel's selling arm was a whole different matter, but they just required standing up to.  Once they realised I was no pushover, they backed down and ended up halving their commission on selling the place.  

Your comment about older people not being able to do the research is rather generalising and demeaning.  In our case, after MiL died, we were too young to move in so we sold it.  There was nothing wrong with our research skills, and indeed my own father who is well into his 80s is perfectly capable of using a computer to look things up.  Sometimes people would rather pay a bit more for peace of mind; that was MiL's stance and we supported her in that as it made everyone's lives easier.

coachman12

NeilCr said:

I doubt ARMA would be of much use

You should read this

https://arma.org.uk/leaseholders/complaints-about-a-member

I can tell you that I am in the process of complaining about FirstPort. I have been through their complaints procedure. I got one (standardised) reply and no action. I have also been to the Property Ombudsman. FP did not reply to them. It is a long and tortuous process. We are now going legal. 

I'd try other routes if you can. A Residents Committee is a fair shout as well as other suggestions made on this thread
________________________________________________________________
TY Neil. I am pleased to find someone who has already embarked on a mission I want to try and do for an elderly relative who is fretting at the terrible behaviour and service charges of Peverel/FirstPort. Can you please keep in touch with me over the coming months if you can afford the time-----I will do the same , tho I am not even sure what route to pursue yet ( and getting a simple vote of all residents to kick out FirstPort under the legal "right to manage" may be the way I favour, and then hand over to a reputable management company whose service charge is far less than FirstPort's---------have you seen some of the reviews on TrustPilot about how much residents save in service charges once they have kicked FirstPort/Peverel out ???). I certainly wish you a lot of support. I hate any exploitation of senior citizens, especially by nasty and devious companies like FirstPort/Peverel.
The very best of luck with your admirable campaign , Neil.

coachman12

A_Nice_Englishman said:

Other things to consider are that residents value having a scheme manager living on site who can respond if they have a fall or other incident more and more as they get older and frailer.  The cost of this will have risen with increases in the minimum wage.
_____________________________________________________________
But these site managers are generally poorly educated,  a background in labouring and factory jobs, needing the  free flat that comes with the FirstPort job because they can't afford to buy or rent themselves, no experience of working with the elderly----and couldn't give a damn, even if they had the skills to help the frail and sick ( which they do NOT). 
As to your other points, I accept that there will be a wide range of residents on any site, some who have money set aside and in receipt of occupational pensions; some will have spent all they have just to buy the flat being ruined by FirstPort/Peverel and struggle with FirstPort's higher service charges, just to line that company's own pockets. But even the better-off residents should not be having to pay the high service charges levied by FirstPort.
Have you read some of the comments on TrustPilot where residents have saved a fortune in service charges by kicking out FirstPort/Peverel ?  Reading through the TrustPilot reviews is a real indicator of how awful FirstPort really is. Have you heard the leaked documents from FirstPort HQ that asked all their employees (hundreds of them) to put 5* reviews on TrustPilot------and they are still ranked as the lowest grade with an overall marking of
"poor" !!
The difficulty in residents' consensus that you mention is certainly a factor that a devious and shoddy company use in their own favour, but there are ways around all this.
It is not acceptable that, with a 500% increase in housing values over the past 30 years or so,  many flats "managed" and exploited by FirstPort/Peverel now cost less than they did when first built 30 years ago-----that has to be a huge scandal and tell a story that is hard for anyone to dispute.

A_Nice_Englishman

coachman12 said:

A_Nice_Englishman said:

Other things to consider are that residents value having a scheme manager living on site who can respond if they have a fall or other incident more and more as they get older and frailer.  The cost of this will have risen with increases in the minimum wage.
_____________________________________________________________
But these site managers are generally poorly educated,  a background in labouring and factory jobs, needing the  free flat that comes with the FirstPort job because they can't afford to buy or rent themselves, no experience of working with the elderly----and couldn't give a damn, even if they had the skills to help the frail and sick ( which they do NOT). 
As to your other points, I accept that there will be a wide range of residents on any site, some who have money set aside and in receipt of occupational pensions; some will have spent all they have just to buy the flat being ruined by FirstPort/Peverel and struggle with FirstPort's higher service charges, just to line that company's own pockets. But even the better-off residents should not be having to pay the high service charges levied by FirstPort.
Have you read some of the comments on TrustPilot where residents have saved a fortune in service charges by kicking out FirstPort/Peverel ?  Reading through the TrustPilot reviews is a real indicator of how awful FirstPort really is. Have you heard the leaked documents from FirstPort HQ that asked all their employees (hundreds of them) to put 5* reviews on TrustPilot------and they are still ranked as the lowest grade with an overall marking of
"poor" !!
The difficulty in residents' consensus that you mention is certainly a factor that a devious and shoddy company use in their own favour, but there are ways around all this.
It is not acceptable that, with a 500% increase in housing values over the past 30 years or so,  many flats "managed" and exploited by FirstPort/Peverel now cost less than they did when first built 30 years ago-----that has to be a huge scandal and tell a story that is hard for anyone to dispute.

My ex was certainly not as you describe.

She has a qualification in supported housing and is one of the most caring people I know. As a couple we were quite capable of affording our own home but it was a condition of the job to live in the flat provided.

She got on well with the vast majority of residents but did come across the odd one with a snobbish attitude.

As for the resale value of sheltered properties, they are worth what people will pay for them. They'd probably worth less if poorly maintained.  As someone else pointed out, they should not be bought by people who want to leave them to their families. If they house their occupiers as long as they live or need to move into a residential or nursing home they've done their job.