A long time ago in a far off place in sleepy Shropshire, could be found a development managed by Peverel/Firstport.
They employed a development manager, who must have got very bored with her job as instead of working she started to make hundreds of pounds of personal phone calls (all charged to the residents service charges)
Eventually it was decided that her conduct was too dishonest(even for Peverel/Firstport) so she was required to leave.
In offering a refund mr Owens wrote "We are in full agreement that the previous house manager had not paid in full the costs of her private phone calls.
£637.20 is an entirely fair and appropriate amount for restitution of an indeterminate amount of personal calls made"
Strange how Mr Owens can come to that conclusion if as he writes if the amount is "intederminate"?
Whilst clearly grateful for any refund, that refund was soon eaten up in extra charges imposed on residents.
Because the house manager was removed from post due to dishonesty Peverel/Firstport were forced to employ a relief manager, who had a daily 70 mile return trip to the development, whose travellng costs were paid at a rate of 40 pence a mile. So that "refund" due because of fraud was used up in extra charges in a mere 24 days that the relief manager worked.
How can it be that a member of staff sacked for dishonesty ends up costing residents more money?
An issue was also raised concerning the believed overpayments of insurance commissions amounting to a claimed £11,000.
It had been found and well publicised that Kingsborough (a company connected to Peverel/Firstport) were imposing insurance commissions of up to 40%!
On this matter, Chris Owens writes " It is worth noting that again Peverel does not consider that the commissions paid now or in the past have ever been excessive."
Doubtless it would prove an embarrassement and further undermine Mr Owens's credibilty if it were ever to be put in to the public domain that at the time he wrote this his CEO Janet Entwistle wrote " historically, some insurance commissions have been too high. these were lowered a couple of years ago to a level I am more comfortable with and that tribunals have deemed as reasonable"
Commissions were reduced from 40% down to 14%.
