This the guestbook. You can make your comments here. It is moderated, which means that your comments will NOT be published until they have been checked by the editorial staff first.
Firstport and balconies
We had wooden balconies that rotted and eventually taken down
After much to and froing we managed to save the required amount
We were given photographs to choose design
The finished product bears no resemblence to the picture we voted upon
Now they are too heavy for the walls to bear
The balconies have all been constructed by the fabricator
The surveyor and designer appear difficult to get hold of Surprise Surprise!
After much to and froing we managed to save the required amount
We were given photographs to choose design
The finished product bears no resemblence to the picture we voted upon
Now they are too heavy for the walls to bear
The balconies have all been constructed by the fabricator
The surveyor and designer appear difficult to get hold of Surprise Surprise!
Posted by Jill pack on 02 May 2025
That the balconies are too heavy for the wall to bear is a very serious and urgent possibly life threatening safety issue.
This must be immediately reported to the local authority. Alternatively if you believe their is no immediate danger you can serve a Section 77 Notice on Firstport requiring them to make the structure safe.
This must be immediately reported to the local authority. Alternatively if you believe their is no immediate danger you can serve a Section 77 Notice on Firstport requiring them to make the structure safe.
Posted by The Editor on 02 May 2025
Fortunately the builders who were erecting them brought the matter to the attention of management
So now everything is on hold
We await the solution
So now everything is on hold
We await the solution
Posted by Jill Pack on 02 May 2025
Well done to the builders! When another contractor expressed their concerns about the integrity of fire safety curtains to the attention of Peverel/Firstport at Gibson Court Esher, they were ignored. The result was the death of Irene Cockerton in a fire that spread out of control because of the compromised safety curtains.
Posted by The Editor on 03 May 2025
Firstport CEO
Can you kindly supply me with the Email address of the Firstport CEO Many Thanks
Posted by Peter on 01 May 2025
martin.king@firstport.co.uk
Posted by The Editor on 01 May 2025
RESERVE FUND SQUANDERED
Editor,
We received the service charge budget for the period 01.04.2025 to 31.03.26 recently. The first thing that struck me was that the reserve fund had reduced from £86,882 to £58,794.94 in only one year.
On closer analysis it has become clear to me that this lower figure is over stated.
I spent five minutes and using the back of a fag packet (hypothetical) calculate that this years service charge demand is under estimated to the tune of about £12,954.69 when including past known actual costs.
If my analysis is remotely correct, this will result in one of two things, or both, either a deficit letter being issued to all Leaseholders or a future significant increase in service charge.
More to follow on the issue of "sellers packs" or lack of in a timely manner, or perhaps not at all?
We received the service charge budget for the period 01.04.2025 to 31.03.26 recently. The first thing that struck me was that the reserve fund had reduced from £86,882 to £58,794.94 in only one year.
On closer analysis it has become clear to me that this lower figure is over stated.
I spent five minutes and using the back of a fag packet (hypothetical) calculate that this years service charge demand is under estimated to the tune of about £12,954.69 when including past known actual costs.
If my analysis is remotely correct, this will result in one of two things, or both, either a deficit letter being issued to all Leaseholders or a future significant increase in service charge.
More to follow on the issue of "sellers packs" or lack of in a timely manner, or perhaps not at all?
Posted by Stephen Burns on 30 April 2025
Keep Going!
From the humblest of beginnings a few brave people stood up to Peverel/Firstport the all conquering arrogant company that systemically set out to cheat leaseholders for their own financial gain.
One of the first of the victories against Peverel/Firstport came at Weekday Cross, Nottingham where Firstport were forced to repay several hundred thousand pounds in overcharges.
We owe the forerunners in our campaign so very much. Let us not forget the likes of Ken Kilminster, Chas Willis, Melissa Briggs and the sacrifices they made on behalf of all of us. Remember websites such as The Truth About Solitaire, who were campaigning long before NLC came along.
Now all these years later, we literally have thousands of leaseholders who have risen up against Peverel/Firstport. Finally, MP's from all parties have woken up to the realities of Firstport management is for leaseholders.
There is now an unstoppable movement against Firstport that Firstport may defend against but will ultimately overwhelm them.
Firstport are fire fighting in every part of the UK.
Our campaigning efforts have born fruit as evidenced by the number of developments that have carried out a Right to Manage and sacked Firstport, forcing them to buy up rival managing agents to keep up their market share.
Developers on new build estates are increasingly getting nervous about appointing Firstport as bad publicity engulfs Firstport.
Originally, Peverel/Firstport were purchased by the Tchenguiz Family Trust for £500m. A few years later, having collapsed into administration and after transferring £125m of debt into a related company, Peverel/Firstport were purchased by Electra for £62m. Roll on a few years, and Emeria came along and whilst the exact purchase price has remained confidential, the price is very unlikely to have been over £15-£20m.
Keep going everyone. Now is the time to exert the maximum pressure on Firstport. Firstport must be put out of business. Let us all stick to that task. Give Firstport no quarter and no breathing space.
One of the first of the victories against Peverel/Firstport came at Weekday Cross, Nottingham where Firstport were forced to repay several hundred thousand pounds in overcharges.
We owe the forerunners in our campaign so very much. Let us not forget the likes of Ken Kilminster, Chas Willis, Melissa Briggs and the sacrifices they made on behalf of all of us. Remember websites such as The Truth About Solitaire, who were campaigning long before NLC came along.
Now all these years later, we literally have thousands of leaseholders who have risen up against Peverel/Firstport. Finally, MP's from all parties have woken up to the realities of Firstport management is for leaseholders.
There is now an unstoppable movement against Firstport that Firstport may defend against but will ultimately overwhelm them.
Firstport are fire fighting in every part of the UK.
Our campaigning efforts have born fruit as evidenced by the number of developments that have carried out a Right to Manage and sacked Firstport, forcing them to buy up rival managing agents to keep up their market share.
Developers on new build estates are increasingly getting nervous about appointing Firstport as bad publicity engulfs Firstport.
Originally, Peverel/Firstport were purchased by the Tchenguiz Family Trust for £500m. A few years later, having collapsed into administration and after transferring £125m of debt into a related company, Peverel/Firstport were purchased by Electra for £62m. Roll on a few years, and Emeria came along and whilst the exact purchase price has remained confidential, the price is very unlikely to have been over £15-£20m.
Keep going everyone. Now is the time to exert the maximum pressure on Firstport. Firstport must be put out of business. Let us all stick to that task. Give Firstport no quarter and no breathing space.
Posted by The Editor on 29 April 2025
Emeria Resi owners of Firstport last published accounts show assets (which could have been vastly overstated) as £604 m, liabilities as £580m, leaving a net asset of £24m or a debt ratio of 96%. Since their last published accounts showed an annual loss of £53m. So it isn't going to take much to push them into negative territory?
Posted by The Editor on 29 April 2025
Editor,
Thank you for sharing those quite astonishing facts and figures. If I were an "Emeria Resi" investor, I would be feeling apprehensive!!
Thank you for sharing those quite astonishing facts and figures. If I were an "Emeria Resi" investor, I would be feeling apprehensive!!
Posted by Stephen Burns on 29 April 2025
Dear Mr Editor,,
A good article .Thank you for all your hard work in the campaign to get rid of the Firstport crooks. I know you will keep going and never give up your fight.Well done!
A good article .Thank you for all your hard work in the campaign to get rid of the Firstport crooks. I know you will keep going and never give up your fight.Well done!
Posted by RUTH on 29 April 2025
Here is what I shared with my MP about Emeria RES UK ltd:
Holding Company – Emeria RES UK Ltd which includes Firstport, Innovus and Campions
Accounts for year ending 2023 - Turnover £142m, Loss £53m, Borrowing £422m, Client Monies held £562m
As a leaseholder, I am concerned that we will be expected to fund the interest payments on the borrowing as well as get Emeria back into profit. How is Firstport going to do this in their current situation?
Interestingly I see that Philippe Salle was replaced as the director of Emeria RES UK Ltd by Antonine Alexandre Grenier on 31 Jan 2025.
Holding Company – Emeria RES UK Ltd which includes Firstport, Innovus and Campions
Accounts for year ending 2023 - Turnover £142m, Loss £53m, Borrowing £422m, Client Monies held £562m
As a leaseholder, I am concerned that we will be expected to fund the interest payments on the borrowing as well as get Emeria back into profit. How is Firstport going to do this in their current situation?
Interestingly I see that Philippe Salle was replaced as the director of Emeria RES UK Ltd by Antonine Alexandre Grenier on 31 Jan 2025.
Posted by Chris on 30 April 2025
Dear Mr Editor,
It is down to this site that Firstport is going down the Your and Chas’s indefatigable efforts to highlight the corruption and idiocy of Firstport will see its demise.
Once Firsport falls others like Westbury Residential Ltd and its associated companies will fall. Trebles all round 🥂🥂🥂👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
It is down to this site that Firstport is going down the Your and Chas’s indefatigable efforts to highlight the corruption and idiocy of Firstport will see its demise.
Once Firsport falls others like Westbury Residential Ltd and its associated companies will fall. Trebles all round 🥂🥂🥂👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Posted by Kim on 01 May 2025
Thank you for your very kind comments. Along with the Firstport Residents Action Group (FRAG) we will continue as best as possible with the fight, and we will not be distracted in that fight by succumbing to the temptations of lucrative government appointed jobs in exchange for moderating our campaign.
We leave that to LKP!
We leave that to LKP!
Posted by The Editor on 01 May 2025
LKP is to leaseholders what a bicycle is to an Arbroath Kipper.USELESS!
Btw,I notice an ambulance chasing style of advertising on FB regarding " Insurance Commission no win no fee service....wonder which law firm is offering this service?Where's theres muck theres brass. Leaseholders are the cash cows whose udders keep on giving.
Btw,I notice an ambulance chasing style of advertising on FB regarding " Insurance Commission no win no fee service....wonder which law firm is offering this service?Where's theres muck theres brass. Leaseholders are the cash cows whose udders keep on giving.
Posted by Kim on 01 May 2025
It appears that the law firm offering this service is connected to a trustee of LKP who having trawled the UK to find a company to back the claim were fortunate enough to locate a company situated at the very same address as the law firm!
Since part of their claim is for unfair insurance commissions that can be upward of 40% it appears ironic that their "commissions" are 40%. To put that into some kind of context a No win No fee company representing a client's injury claim is capped at 25%.
When you dive into the details of the claim it also appears to have more holes in it than an Emmental Cheese.
Since part of their claim is for unfair insurance commissions that can be upward of 40% it appears ironic that their "commissions" are 40%. To put that into some kind of context a No win No fee company representing a client's injury claim is capped at 25%.
When you dive into the details of the claim it also appears to have more holes in it than an Emmental Cheese.
Posted by The Editor on 01 May 2025
Dear Mr Editor,
I wonder If the chair of government quango LAS who is also the chair of LKP approves of a company associated with an LKP trustee ambulance chasing on social media… 40% commission? They should be working pro bono not charging leaseholders extortionate “fees , commission “. Oh wait, it’s only leaseholders who
..why not charge 90% commission? It s very very unseemly.
I wonder If the chair of government quango LAS who is also the chair of LKP approves of a company associated with an LKP trustee ambulance chasing on social media… 40% commission? They should be working pro bono not charging leaseholders extortionate “fees , commission “. Oh wait, it’s only leaseholders who
..why not charge 90% commission? It s very very unseemly.
Posted by Kim on 02 May 2025
Pro Bono, Not a chance? The trustee of LKP whose law firm is behind the No Win No fee action was a trustee at the time a scheme was cooked up to "employ" Sebastian O'Kelly until such a time that the £100,000 "donated" to LKP had been paid as "wages" to him.
Posted by Michael Epstein on 02 May 2025
Michael E,
Hey ho! As the great Maya Angelou said, “ When someone shows you who they are , believe them”. LKP & NLC have shown what they are…The law firm associated with LKP,trustee is all over social media like a cheap suit offering it’s “ no up front fees” offer to leaseholders who think they can get a few quid back from the Freeholder/ Insurance's company/ Broker?
It is interesting that the law firm describes leaseholders as “ homeowners “ in its ambulance chasing style advertising. Why is that? A lawyer will know full well that in law, a leaseholder is a long term tenant and does not own the flat. When a law firm shows you that they do not understand the law in terms of leaseholder and owner, believe it!
Hey ho! As the great Maya Angelou said, “ When someone shows you who they are , believe them”. LKP & NLC have shown what they are…The law firm associated with LKP,trustee is all over social media like a cheap suit offering it’s “ no up front fees” offer to leaseholders who think they can get a few quid back from the Freeholder/ Insurance's company/ Broker?
It is interesting that the law firm describes leaseholders as “ homeowners “ in its ambulance chasing style advertising. Why is that? A lawyer will know full well that in law, a leaseholder is a long term tenant and does not own the flat. When a law firm shows you that they do not understand the law in terms of leaseholder and owner, believe it!
Posted by Kim on 03 May 2025
There have been some 16553 posts and replies on this page. To view older ones search here.
This only searches posts, not replies.
They are an agency that collects debts in exchange for a percentage of what they collect. Just because they are "Debt collectors" does not mean they have any extra legal rights even if they try to scare you into believing they have.
They are not to be confused with court appointed debt collectors who do have legal powers.
The basic tactic they will use is to scare you into paying. Watch out for threats of court action or threats to your credit rating. Pay particular attention to the "get out " clause in their letters that use the word "May".
Anything you receive that contains the word "May" means that any letter with the word "May" in it has no legal force.
Indeed if legal action were to be taken against you, it would have to be in the name of Firstport and could not be initiated by Maybeck.
On receiving any communication from Maybeck, simply write "I am in dispute with your client and until such a time that I either acknowledge a debt or the debt is proved you should revert to your client. You are denied permission to contact me other than to confirm receipt of this communication. Failure to comply with this will result in a formal complaint being made to the Credit Services Association"