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 It is moderated, which means that your comments will NOT be published until they have been checked by the editorial staff first.
An Overcharge In Every Port!
Posted by The Editor on 14 April 2024
Reputations are hard won and easily lost even through business association.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 14 April 2024
Absolutely correct. Barratt are also getting increasingly concerned as to the reputational damage being done to them by being associated with Firstport
Posted by Michael Epstein on 15 April 2024
Annual accounts
Our devopment has been told that our annual A/C (WICH are long overdue) will not be available until the new AM. is in Situe. Also. We were told there is a rather large deficit 22/23.wich we will. All. Of course pay. How come FP know there is a deficit if the A/C'S HAVE NOT BEEN PREPARED? Is this a delaying tactic on the part of FP so. That we will. All be charged a late payment fee????
Posted by Puzzled (York) on 11 April 2024
We're also waiting impatiently for the 2022/23 accounts!! They are way overdue, but in our case FP do have the figures for the whole scheme at a gross level, but they've not been split down into the various blocks, etc, or been audited, which of course has to happen before the accounts are finalised. I suspect you've got the same situation.
Posted by RogerJ on 13 April 2024
Virtually every one of the Firstport managed estates are receiving late accounts. Many of those are even having to be issued with Section20b notices to cover the lateness of charging.
This is due to severe cost cutting leading to a shortage of staff in the Firstport accounts department.
It was not so long ago that so far behind in development account preparation was Firstport that they had to outsource the accounts to a company in Malaysia.
This is due to severe cost cutting leading to a shortage of staff in the Firstport accounts department.
It was not so long ago that so far behind in development account preparation was Firstport that they had to outsource the accounts to a company in Malaysia.
Posted by The Editor on 13 April 2024
We are still waiting for the last 3 years worth of accounts going back to 2020/2021. I have involved Homeground but they have not been successful in even obtaining a forecast of when the account will be available. Firstport have stopped engaging with me and are forcing me to go to the FTT to get the answers to issues that are of their making. I have also written to my MP and the CEO of Barratt Homes. I believe that Barratt Homes have also been fobbed off but still awaiting a full response.
Posted by Chris on 13 April 2024
We are still waiting for 2023 accounts arranged under Westbury Residential Ltd whose director was previously regional for PEVEREL later renamed as FIRSTPORT…
Posted by Kim on 13 April 2024
The Monitor Lizard!
Interesting creature the Monitor Lizard.
Somehow(and I do not claim to be an expert on this) the Arabic word "Warni" was translated to the word "Lizard" and the Monitor part came from the Latin " Monere" translated to the word "Monitor"
The Monitor Lizard thus got its name from its ability to stand on their hind legs and observe or "Monitor" their surroundings.
So bringing the subject of Firstport into an article concerning the Monitor Lizard it can be seen that if Firstport or their appointed company are "observing" and thereby able to react to their observations for such matters as an alarm going off at a retirement development they are monitoring. If on the other hand they react to information passed to them by a third party they cannot be monitoring.
Since only retirement developments are fitted with alarm call systems and not general residential developments it follows that general residential developments not only do not have any form of monitoring but they are incapable of being monitored.
Hence all monitoring charges imposed on general development residents by Firstport are BOGUS and should be challenged!
Somehow(and I do not claim to be an expert on this) the Arabic word "Warni" was translated to the word "Lizard" and the Monitor part came from the Latin " Monere" translated to the word "Monitor"
The Monitor Lizard thus got its name from its ability to stand on their hind legs and observe or "Monitor" their surroundings.
So bringing the subject of Firstport into an article concerning the Monitor Lizard it can be seen that if Firstport or their appointed company are "observing" and thereby able to react to their observations for such matters as an alarm going off at a retirement development they are monitoring. If on the other hand they react to information passed to them by a third party they cannot be monitoring.
Since only retirement developments are fitted with alarm call systems and not general residential developments it follows that general residential developments not only do not have any form of monitoring but they are incapable of being monitored.
Hence all monitoring charges imposed on general development residents by Firstport are BOGUS and should be challenged!
Posted by The Editor on 11 April 2024
Firsport Property Services Limited 2022 Accounts
The 2022 accounts provision for liabilities arising on disputes is £79,300.
Given our estates current claim in the FTT is closer to £500k, this appears to be vastly understated. when I was training as an accountant 40 years ago, my old FD taught me that the utilisation in the year could not be more than the provision brought forward in the year, i.e. you could not create a provision in the year and then utilise it in the same year since the provision is for subsequent year (sorry this is for accounting nerds). So I am not impressed with this note. I would also be concerned with what information was evaluated by PriceWaterhouseCoopers, the Group auditors for them to be assured that this provision was adequate.
Given our estates current claim in the FTT is closer to £500k, this appears to be vastly understated. when I was training as an accountant 40 years ago, my old FD taught me that the utilisation in the year could not be more than the provision brought forward in the year, i.e. you could not create a provision in the year and then utilise it in the same year since the provision is for subsequent year (sorry this is for accounting nerds). So I am not impressed with this note. I would also be concerned with what information was evaluated by PriceWaterhouseCoopers, the Group auditors for them to be assured that this provision was adequate.
Posted by Freeholder in NW London on 11 April 2024
So if your development is due for a repayment of £500,000 and the St David's Square development is due for a repayment of £500,000, if my maths is correct that is £1,000,000 for just two of their 1,500 developments.
That sort of puts their provision in better context does it not?
Incidentally given the role of the auditor perhaps residents would like to drop them a line stating that a proportion of Firstport revenues come from false accounting and fraudulent double charging?
That sort of puts their provision in better context does it not?
Incidentally given the role of the auditor perhaps residents would like to drop them a line stating that a proportion of Firstport revenues come from false accounting and fraudulent double charging?
Posted by Michael Epstein on 11 April 2024
Hi Freeholder NW.
As ever, you are on the ball. I must say, the accounts from the shared freehold block in which I have a leasehold flat looks like they’ve gone down the rabbit hole and dropped LSD. Trouble ahead,.. maybe even criminal records. We cannot and must not allow ourselves to be defeated by common trickery and deceit. It took,Mr Bates a quite a while to prove the deceit of the P O
As ever, you are on the ball. I must say, the accounts from the shared freehold block in which I have a leasehold flat looks like they’ve gone down the rabbit hole and dropped LSD. Trouble ahead,.. maybe even criminal records. We cannot and must not allow ourselves to be defeated by common trickery and deceit. It took,Mr Bates a quite a while to prove the deceit of the P O
Posted by Kim on 11 April 2024
Openness & Transparency!
Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse for freeholders of new build houses the latest ploy from developers and their stooge managing agents is simply beyond belief.
Those purchasing a home on a new build development forced to pay a managing agent a service charge for communal areas have been told they must sign a non disclosure agreement before being a copy of their development accounts.
This is outrageous. That means if it is discovered a charge has been imposed for the wrong development (for example a play area that is not part of the development) because of the non disclosure agreement the resident who has found out about it could not lawfully share that information with fellow residents.
Developers and managing agents are punch drunk on their customers funds. It has to stop. Cosying up to Michael Gove in exchange for a bauble or two is not acceptable
Those purchasing a home on a new build development forced to pay a managing agent a service charge for communal areas have been told they must sign a non disclosure agreement before being a copy of their development accounts.
This is outrageous. That means if it is discovered a charge has been imposed for the wrong development (for example a play area that is not part of the development) because of the non disclosure agreement the resident who has found out about it could not lawfully share that information with fellow residents.
Developers and managing agents are punch drunk on their customers funds. It has to stop. Cosying up to Michael Gove in exchange for a bauble or two is not acceptable
Posted by The Editor on 08 April 2024
Dear Mr Editor,
I have been busy kicking bottoms at Westbury Residential Ltd et al, so have been a bit involved with my immediate issues.Blimey, I feel like Mr Bates from the post office. 3 company accounts. 2 Barclays and 1 other… No bank statements detailing transactions. I am onto something and somebody will pay! Won’t be pretty…..
However re your post, i say this.
Firstly, I am not on the least bit surprised at the gagging clauses demanded by Developers and managing agents. I’m just surprised they haven’t threatened prospective buyers with being shot through the head by a hit man for sharing information. Maybe that’s the next step,…….
I have only this to say to prospective buyers of new build rubbish, shoddy homes. If you sign a non disclosure agreement then you should hang your head in shame! DON’T DO IT. Have some self respect.
I have been busy kicking bottoms at Westbury Residential Ltd et al, so have been a bit involved with my immediate issues.Blimey, I feel like Mr Bates from the post office. 3 company accounts. 2 Barclays and 1 other… No bank statements detailing transactions. I am onto something and somebody will pay! Won’t be pretty…..
However re your post, i say this.
Firstly, I am not on the least bit surprised at the gagging clauses demanded by Developers and managing agents. I’m just surprised they haven’t threatened prospective buyers with being shot through the head by a hit man for sharing information. Maybe that’s the next step,…….
I have only this to say to prospective buyers of new build rubbish, shoddy homes. If you sign a non disclosure agreement then you should hang your head in shame! DON’T DO IT. Have some self respect.
Posted by Kim on 08 April 2024
Editor,
Disgraceful. What calibre of builder / managing agent would stoop to the level of requesting a NDA before giving residents access to their own accounts.
This seems to me to be another belt and bracers scheme that protects potential wrongdoers from scrutiny and Justice.
Disgraceful. What calibre of builder / managing agent would stoop to the level of requesting a NDA before giving residents access to their own accounts.
This seems to me to be another belt and bracers scheme that protects potential wrongdoers from scrutiny and Justice.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 08 April 2024
It is not just the developers that make use of non disclosure agreements. Firstport are past masters at the art. Unfortunately many residents worn down by battle with Firstport agree to the NDA just to get the matter solved and money that they had been cheated out of back.
One campaigner who had fought for several years and was on the verge of a substantial win at the FTT was offered settlement before the hearing provided he signed a NDA. He declined the offer and Firstport admitted their liability at the FTT. Subsequent to this another 65 residents at the campaigner's development filed a complaint to the FTT based on the information used by the campaigner. Had he signed the NDA this information could not have been used.
NDA's are basically a damage limitation option for Firstport. Yes they may have to pay out to an individual or sole development, but they sure as hell don't want anyone else to know they have paid out otherwise others will also want a pay-out.
The idea of an NDA has been abused by companies such as Firstport. Originally it was set up to protect children from being identified or to protect a patent. It is not meant to protect company revenues.
One campaigner who had fought for several years and was on the verge of a substantial win at the FTT was offered settlement before the hearing provided he signed a NDA. He declined the offer and Firstport admitted their liability at the FTT. Subsequent to this another 65 residents at the campaigner's development filed a complaint to the FTT based on the information used by the campaigner. Had he signed the NDA this information could not have been used.
NDA's are basically a damage limitation option for Firstport. Yes they may have to pay out to an individual or sole development, but they sure as hell don't want anyone else to know they have paid out otherwise others will also want a pay-out.
The idea of an NDA has been abused by companies such as Firstport. Originally it was set up to protect children from being identified or to protect a patent. It is not meant to protect company revenues.
Posted by The Editor on 09 April 2024
Dear Mr Editor,
NDA’s will not be enforceable if they prevent someone from reporting a crime.
So, if a leaseholder gets their accounts and sees a bit of the old fraud going on, they will be able report it as a crime .
My advice to anyone buying a new build property with a gagging order is this, Do not buy the property and go to the media telling all who will listen that you were asked to sign a gagging clause by , name MA agent and developer.NAME and SHAME.
NDA’s will not be enforceable if they prevent someone from reporting a crime.
So, if a leaseholder gets their accounts and sees a bit of the old fraud going on, they will be able report it as a crime .
My advice to anyone buying a new build property with a gagging order is this, Do not buy the property and go to the media telling all who will listen that you were asked to sign a gagging clause by , name MA agent and developer.NAME and SHAME.
Posted by Kim on 09 April 2024
Kim,
I had no idea. Thanks for that valuable information. I interpret it that " potential crooks and swindlers" cannot hide from the Law?"
Is my interpretation correct Kim?
Again, many thanks for sharing that
I had no idea. Thanks for that valuable information. I interpret it that " potential crooks and swindlers" cannot hide from the Law?"
Is my interpretation correct Kim?
Again, many thanks for sharing that
Posted by Stephen Burns on 10 April 2024
Not strictly true at present, though plans are afoot to change NDA legislation.
Several ladies who wished to give evidence against Sir Philip Green were prevented from doing so because they had signed an NDA.
Several ladies who wished to give evidence against Sir Philip Green were prevented from doing so because they had signed an NDA.
Posted by Michael Epstein on 11 April 2024
Hi Michael, Stephen,
I believe I am correct in stating that NDA’s lose validity if a crime has been committed after the signing of a NDA.
The Phillip Green matter is not comparable as the women signed the NDA’s after the act. If a leaseholder signs an NDA after discovering fraud then that’s another issue.
So Stephen, I believe you are correct in your interpretation.
I believe I am correct in stating that NDA’s lose validity if a crime has been committed after the signing of a NDA.
The Phillip Green matter is not comparable as the women signed the NDA’s after the act. If a leaseholder signs an NDA after discovering fraud then that’s another issue.
So Stephen, I believe you are correct in your interpretation.
Posted by Kim on 13 April 2024
There have been some 15542 posts and replies on this page. To view older ones search here.
This only searches posts, not replies.
It is a high end
luxury development in one of the most expensive areas in Bristol. Unfortunately as is all too common with developers Crest Nicholson sold off the communal areas which resulted in having Firstport imposed on them as managing agent with all the overcharges that Firstport are associated with.
However, to their credit on the transfer back in 2011 Crest Nicholson made an agreement with Firstport that rent charges would be restricted to £1 per year. Of course Firstport charged some residents much more than the £1, which after a battle agreed that this was due to an administrative error and refunded the extra payments.
Roll forward to 2023. After accepting £1 per year rent charge payments from 2011 one of Firstport's eagle eyed legal team noticed that though there had been an agreement for a £1 per year charge, a deed of variation had not been carried out, rendering the agreement invalid.
And of course Firstport being desperate for cash immediately demanded an increase in the rent charge of between £100-£150 per year. Naturally the residents were very angry about this, but nearly as angry as Crest Nicholson were. They have intervened several times on behalf of the residents stating that the £1 rent charge was agreed, that a rent charge is purely to acknowledge a right of ownership and for absolutely no other service. Crest Nicholson have offered to help residents as much as they can. Under pressure from residents, Crest Nicholson and the local MP Dr Liam Fox, Firstport have offered a deed of variation at a cost to each resident of £500 subsequently reduced as a goodwill gesture of £300.
Doubtless Crest Nicholson will look to other companies to manage their new build developments in future.