MEPM (JR) Ltd - obscure managing agent with poor service

ConcernedResident1

I would've preferred to post this review on Google Reviews, but the company, MEPM (JR) Ltd, doesn't have a Google profile.

I’ve never heard of MEPM (JR) Ltd until my building signed them up. From the start, I found the way this company operated unusual. Their website is extremely vague, with no team profiles, no client testimonials, no case studies. They are not registered on Googe or TrustPilot, and have practically no online presence. Stranger still, Company House says that MEPM (JR) Ltd was dissolved in June 2021, and had been dormant before that. The owner still operates a business, but calls it a different name.

I very rarely post negative reviews, believing that every company deserves a chance. I do not think that MEPM deserves a chance as it seems to struggle with the basics of the job. For example, this company advised our building that fly-tipping was "a perfectly acceptable practice" in the UK. In fact, fly-tipping is a criminal offence. When I criticised MEPM's work, I received an email containing personal insults and a defamatory allegation. I had never been insulted or defamed by a paid contractor before.

Dear Moderators, you have removed two of my previous posts. The first post for containing a recommendation. Fair enough, even though I made it clear that this was *my* recommendation. The second post for mentioning the name of MEPM's owner and sole operator. I was surprised, as this information is public and available through the Company House. Every statement in my current review is based on hard facts, and I hope you find no reason to remove it. I was pointed to your platform as a legitimate forum for sharing honest experiences about the property management industry. Inevitably, such experiences contain opinions -- which, in my case, are well-considered and well-thought-through. I hope this review helps some of the forum members who might care to read it.

RHemmings

I'm not sure why you are talking about the dissolved company when there is a new company which is not dissolved. It has the same director on Companies House. 

If the old company was continuing to trade after being dissolved, then you could complain about that. But, from what I can see, that is not the case here. 

It appears that the new company has a profile on TrustPilot, and there are reviews there. Why don't you complain about the actual company that is currently active. Since the director you have (presumably) had dealings with calls the company that now? 

ConcernedResident1

Thank you for your message and suggestions.

Regrettably, the company that has Google and Trustpilot profiles is called Moreland Estate Management. This is a different company from MEPM JR (Moreland Estate Property Management). MEPM does not have a Google profile, so as much as I would like to leave a review there, I can't. 

I understand that Moreland Estate Management may be a company where the owner-operator of MEPM had worked in the past. I also note that it has 1.1 and 1.8 ratings on Google and TrustPilot respectively.

The active company is still called MEPM (JR), this is the acronym that appears on all letterheads and emails. I mentioned that it was confusing, because the owner had officially dissolved the company bearing this name.

Finally, the scepticism you seem to express about my dealings with MEPM's director can be voiced about every single review, on this platform and elsewhere. I'm sure some of the reviews are made-up. However, most people are too busy to write feedback for a company whose services they haven't experienced. The latter is certainly the case with me.

Again, thank you for engaging.

user1977

ConcernedResident1 said:

The active company is still called MEPM (JR), this is the acronym that appears on all letterheads and emails. I mentioned that it was confusing, because the owner had officially dissolved the company bearing this name.

Yes, but are they actually claiming that their legal name is "MEPM (JR) Ltd"? Or something else?

RHemmings

It sounds to me that you could try reporting the director for the dissolved company continuing to trade. 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reporting-misconduct-by-companies-directors-and-bankrupts-to-the-insolvency-service/reporting-misconduct-by-companies-directors-and-bankrupts-to-the-insolvency-service

I'm not saying what the outcome is likely to be. But, you could try. 

anselld

ConcernedResident1 said:

The active company is still called MEPM (JR), this is the acronym that appears on all letterheads and emails. I mentioned that it was confusing, because the owner had officially dissolved the company bearing this name.

They seem to be two incarnations of the same Company with the same Owner/Director.

They are required to publish their Company Number on their letterheads, surely that will confirm which one you are actually contracted with.

RHemmings

anselld said:

ConcernedResident1 said:

The active company is still called MEPM (JR), this is the acronym that appears on all letterheads and emails. I mentioned that it was confusing, because the owner had officially dissolved the company bearing this name.

They seem to be two incarnations of the same Company with the same Owner/Director.

They are required to publish their Company Number on their letterheads, surely that will confirm which one you are actually contracted with.

The director of the old one is the director of a currently registered company, but not under the name under which they are communicating with the OP. Something doesn't look right to me. 

ConcernedResident1

RHemmings said:

anselld said:

ConcernedResident1 said:

The active company is still called MEPM (JR), this is the acronym that appears on all letterheads and emails. I mentioned that it was confusing, because the owner had officially dissolved the company bearing this name.

They seem to be two incarnations of the same Company with the same Owner/Director.

They are required to publish their Company Number on their letterheads, surely that will confirm which one you are actually contracted with.

The director of the old one is the director of a currently registered company, but not under the name under which they are communicating with the OP. Something doesn't look right to me. 

Thank you for your further insights. This is how the company name appears on all correspondence: MEPM (JR). The phone, email and postal address are public information and are displayed on MEPM's website. I redacted the name of the director for privacy. I'm not necessarily saying that this company is trading unlawfully. Rather, that the overall appalling service and inefficiency are also reflected in the confusing use of the dissolved name. I don't know the full story, of course. Finally, as a new user, the system doesn't allow me to reply to posts, so I have to quote instead.

RHemmings

That looks to be exactly the name and address of the company that was dissolved over four years ago. I believe that it's legal to continue some activities after that to wind up the company, but I don't know if that would cover still carrying on business of this type four years later. So, I don't know if this company is trading unlawfully. But, you can make a complaint and see. If you want. 

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dissolved-company-investigations/dissolved-company-investigations  doesn't really make it clear to me if such a complaint would be likely to make a difference or not. 

ConcernedResident1

user1977 said:

ConcernedResident1 said:

The active company is still called MEPM (JR), this is the acronym that appears on all letterheads and emails. I mentioned that it was confusing, because the owner had officially dissolved the company bearing this name.

Yes, but are they actually claiming that their legal name is "MEPM (JR) Ltd"? Or something else?

I find it interesting how this discussion (which I appreciate) has veered into the discrepancy between MEMP's names - even though this was only one of the points in my original post intended to illustrate the broader message about MEMP's poor service and inefficiency.

Clarity and transparency are essential in a contractor, and, in MEPM's case, both are lacking. For example, when you check your contractor's name on the Company House, you can reasonably expect it to be listed as "active", not "dissolved."

I did not examine the situation at a legal level, and I didn't claim that MEPM was trading unlawfully. I said, however, that their whole data trail is confusing and obscure. In addition to a cryptic website which doesn't list team names, or client testimonials, or case studies, this company doesn't have a Google profile, making it impossible for customers to leave a public review.

I reiterate my previous points about MEPM's lack of basic knowledge pertaining to the business, and about unacceptable way of interacting with the clients.

Thank you for the discussion.

RHemmings

ConcernedResident1 said:

user1977 said:

ConcernedResident1 said:

The active company is still called MEPM (JR), this is the acronym that appears on all letterheads and emails. I mentioned that it was confusing, because the owner had officially dissolved the company bearing this name.

Yes, but are they actually claiming that their legal name is "MEPM (JR) Ltd"? Or something else?

I find it interesting how this discussion (which I appreciate) has veered into the discrepancy between MEMP's names - even though this was only one of the points in my original post intended to illustrate the broader message about MEMP's poor service and inefficiency.

Clarity and transparency are essential in a contractor, and, in MEPM's case, both are lacking. For example, when you check your contractor's name on the Company House, you can reasonably expect it to be listed as "active", not "dissolved."

I did not examine the situation at a legal level, and I didn't claim that MEPM was trading unlawfully. I said, however, that their whole data trail is confusing and obscure. In addition to a cryptic website which doesn't list team names, or client testimonials, or case studies, this company doesn't have a Google profile, making it impossible for customers to leave a public review.

I reiterate my previous points about MEPM's lack of basic knowledge pertaining to the business, and about unacceptable way of interacting with the clients.

Thank you for the discussion.

Did you want to do something about the situation? Or do you just want to vent a bit? Nothing wrong with the latter, if that's the case.