According to Nigel Bannister, Freemont Property Managers, Right To Manage,which is the only sure way for residents to seize back control of their development is "Best avoided"
His supposed reasoning is that it is simpler for residents to approach their landlord and ask for their managing agent to be replaced.
Of course, he fails to mention that a Right To Manage means that it is the residents that appoint the managing agent and it is the residents that could sack them if unhappy with their service.
Approaching the landlord means that it is the landlord that appoints the managing agent and retains control. The residents may well be consulted, and this consultation may be spun as a residents appointment but it is not!
Any Right To Manage Company would carry ouit due dilligence on any management company they sought to appoint.
Such dilligence would readily show the track record of those currently running Freemont Property Management.
It is all too easy to find out about their dubious record with Peverel/Firstport.
The price fixing, excessive insurance commissions,use of connected contractors for work either poorly done or not even needed, lack of proper accounts, misleading information deliberately given to residents, record refunds of service charge funds being ordered, Keith Edgar being told by the Prime Minister to quit a development and a cabinet minister describing Peverel as a "Monstrous Company"
Peverel/Firstport under the current leadership of those running Freemont Property Management had a very close relationship with the freeholders/landlords. Indeed before entering into administration they were connected companies.
They worked hand in glove to mutually line each others pockets instigating schemes designed to be at the expense of residents.
Following the separation of the managing and freeholding companies the carefully worked out methods no longer worked. The managing agent could no longer pass funds to the freeholder/landlord. This resulted in a drop of income for both parties.
What the freeholder needs is a compliant managing agent?
Enter Freemont Property Managers! Who better then the very people that were instrumental in the wide spread frauds caried out on unsespecting residents?
Since no RTM company in their right mind would ever appoint Freemont Property Managers, how will they get any appointments?
One way is for problems with the current Peverel/Firstport management to be highlighted by a "very concerned for residents" freeholder/landlord.
Then the freeholder/landlord sends a reresentative along(probably Louise Smith) who would "suggest" a change to Freemont Property Managers. Only if residents are up to speed over who Freemont Property Managers reeally are, will the stand by of Rendell & Rittner be suggested. Residents should be aware of an appointment so rushed that the management fees have yet to be decided?
And what to do if residents ask for a different managing agent to be appointed?
Well, Louise Smith even has that covered! Residents will be told the freeholder/landlord has an "approved list"
Remember, without a RTM it is Louise Smith that appoints the managing agent.
It might be of use to ask Louise Smith as to which management companies are on the "approved list" and what each company has to do to get on the "approved list?"
By sheer coincidence Freemont Property Managers have just put a shambolic video extolling their virtues. This highlights the savings in service charges their management has achieved. It does not mention that in the majority of cases, they were the very people that engineered the previous excessive service charge!
They display testimonials from two residents Mrs E and Mrs M.
Note the initials. E and M? Estates & Management, or just a coincidence?
