Completed the RTM process to ensure the customers had the legal power to change spending and accounting decisions

Service charge review over all types of expenditure - to find out exactly where money was being badly spent; Arranged new suppliers where we felt was overcharged and stopped spending on areas we thought were unnecessary;

Created a new accounting system, to deliver regular accounts and deliver these directly to the customers - ensuring they understood where the money was being spent

Completed the RTM process to ensure the customers had the legal power to change spending decisions

Comissioned and managed the surveying work to complete the required repairs

Used our inhouse compliance and legal team to understand the exact insurance requirements for short-letting - allowing us to dispense with expensive external legal advice

We handled the transfer of managing agents and improved the management of:
Fire alarm and emergency lighting
A Passenger lift.
Door entry systems
CCTV and Communal Sat.
Air Condition system
The staff and the concierge service

We prepared a budget and had it agreed with the directors of the new Right to Manage company for the block. The budget highlights were as follows:
The service charge estimate for the current year is 28% lower that the previous year.
A contribution of £7,000 will be made into the reserve fund. A well managed block has a suitable reserve fund. We encouraged the leaseholders to agree to build up the reserve fund. It is these small things that make your investment stand out from the others. It is one of the top ten questions asked by flat buyer’s solicitors.
An £700 saving made on the fire alarm maintenance contract
£1300 was saved on buildings insurance.
£1300 savings was made on gardening and cleaning.
If there is money left over towards the end of the year then it will be used to invest in LED bulbs to try to reduce the annual electricity bill of £3600.

Completed the following emergency renovations works after completing a condition report :
Emergency telephones in 6 of the lifts were not working. Three of them were not working because there were no active telephone lines.
Several communal doors needed repairs in order to comply with fire regulations. Doors not closing properly, fire intumescent strips.
Door entry systems were not working. There were at least 20 issues with the door entry systems.
A small leak from one of the apartments into the Under croft car park which existed for over 9 months.
Lots of issues with lights not working or staying on all the time.
Even though we are appointed by the Landlord, we are engaging with the residents to identify their priorities and explain to them what we are doing on the development. The response from the residents has been very positive. We are collaborating to bring the development back up to the standard expected.

Implemented a customised software solution to simplify management structure between the agents and the leaseholders

We are managing the development on behalf of the Landlord and also collect the ground rent.

In the first week of taking over the management, the maintenance contractors attended the site and carried out a deep clean of the communal areas. We carry out block management in Tonbridge for several developments and have a list of approved maintenance contractors who can help. The property manager met with residents on site to further discuss their requirements with regards the property maintenance and management.

-

The leaseholders decided that the most effective way forward was to take control of the management from the Landlord, and change agents. Initially, we met with about 9 flat owners and explained the RTM process and and management services. From a Right to Manage perspective, it was a fairly complex set-up. There are 2 blocks on the development and parts of the freehold development had been sold off to other landlords. There remained a shared access way, gardens and shared car park.

Our Legal & Compliance Director worked as a solicitor specialising in property law for 10 years before joining Pembroke PM. She oversees out all our RTM claims and is an expert in Right to Manage legislation. We knew exactly what the RTM Company was entitled to manage within the development. The RTM Claim Notice was carefully drafted and submitted to the Landlord.

The Landlord’s solicitor responded and requested numerous documents relating to the company and the methods we used for serving the notices on non-members. They carried out a thorough examination of the claim. Once they were satisfied with the validity of the claim they acknowledged that the leaseholders had successfully acquired the Right to Manage.

During the 3 month management handover period we sourced new contractors to carry out the maintenance of the building, grounds and services on site. We prepared a budget for approval by the directors. For the first time, the leaseholders gained an understanding of the service charge costs up front, and they could have their queries answered. In the first year of handover, Pembroke PM saved leaseholders £7000 compared to their service charge payments in the previous year.

We helped the leaseholder canvas other leaseholders for support by providing them with the tangible benefits of carrying out Right to Manage. It made the Leaseholds comfortable with the idea once we highlighted that the Right to Manage process would be carried out by our Legal Services Director. Most leaseholders didn’t know it was possible to carry out the Right to Manage.

The leaseholders were asked to get in touch with their telephone numbers/email addresses so that we could organise a meeting to discuss next steps.

We immediately applied to Companies house to register the company and prepared Notices to Participate to serve on all those leaseholders who did not attend the meeting, inviting them to also become members. We are obliged by law to wait 14 days before the Notice of Claim can be served on the Landlord.

The Notice of Claim was sent to the Landlord and other parties to the lease. The Landlord did make contact with us immediately after receiving the notice. We explained the process to them and highlighted the Landlord Duties with regards the claim.

The Landlord is given a deadline date to respond which is at least one month after the notice is served. We didn’t here anything else from them until the final day they had to respond. If they hadn’t responded then we would have automatically been awarded the Right to Manage. We received a letter from the Landlords Solicitor on the final day saying they didn’t dispute the claim.

Our designated property manager for Carter House attended the open day to support the team and answer any questions from attendees. Having a managing agent in place for the launch demonstrated to potential buyers that the developer has covered all aspects of the build and they have put procedures in place to ensure a smooth handover.

-

-

We worked closely with the developer during the final stages and whilst leaseholders started taking occupation. We liaised with the new leaseholders and residents to answer any queries. It was at this stage that we were looking for Directors for the new Resident Management Company (RMC).

Once all the properties were sold a meeting was held with all the leaseholders. At the meeting the budget was reviewed and an explanation was provided about all about the services in the building and the costs associated with those services. The need for a suitable reserve fund was explained to leaseholders and they agreed an amount that should be allocated to the reserve fund every year

A notice of intention was sent out in line with Section 20 legislation in 2017 with works planned for 2018. Lessees were made aware at an early stage that funds would be required for the project. The surveyors employed to managing the works, Blakeney Leigh, had experience of similar building repairs. They produced a suitable specification for the repairs and invited 3 specialist contractors to tender for the contract. As part of the section 20 process lessees were also invited to nominate any contractors.

As managing agent, Jennings and Barrett was instructed by the Residents Association to manage the work. They quickly got the process underway to inform leaseholders of the proposals, raise funds, and invite tenders for the work. Using their in-house RICS surveyor, John Shine, a specification for the works was soon drawn up.

To minimise disruption to residents and to make funding easier on lessees, one block was completed per year, with a period of six weeks required per block. Within three years, the whole estate had a revamped look and all residents felt the revitalising effects in their day-to-day life

Managed a separate account for services charges and for a reserve fund, which is permitted within the lease. Accounts are balanced using industry specific Qube management software and directors meet monthly to review these. There are currently no service charge arrears exceeding 30 days and the service charge accounts are in credit. All original invoices are made available to directors to view and no additional charges are added to invoices. The service charge budget is currently set at £178,700/year with insurances on top of this.

The Service charge is set in accordance with the lease on an annual basis in discussion with the Directors, based on previous years spending and any planned works.

The Estate has been fully managed by Jennings and Barrett since 2002. The Directors have a range of preferred contractors to carry out planned maintenance and to respond to repairs as required.

Section 20’s works carried out have included a full roof renewal programme completed in 2012, Exterior decorations carried out on a rolling basis of two blocks/year as per the terms of the lease and the installation of entryphone systems across the estate in 2015.

Site visits and meetings with directors are carried held formally every 6 weeks and also on an ad hoc basis as requested or where required.

We manage arrears in a robust manner and as at September 2018 there was just one service charge outstanding. This was being managed through our arrears process and action is taken where service charges are outstanding for more than 30 days.

We arrange buildings insurance for the estate and in order to ensure our RMC directors are protected also arrange the annual directors and officers insurance policy.

A full review of the previous accounts was carried out. Despite there being limited arrears, there was a discrepancy between the funds available and the invoices paid out. A forensic account has been engaged on behalf of the RMC to look into the accounts in greater detail and the outcome of this is awaited.

The major issue of the estate being open and unsecured due to a failure the electric gates was attended to as a matter of urgency. Now the estate is secure and an entry code system is functioning a second phase of works is being carried out to get all residents access fobs working correctly, allowing access to the various blocks as required. Directors are considering options regarding maintenance for the access systems across the development.

All contracts for maintenance across the estate are being reviewed and directors are in day to day contact regarding the management.

In month one Navana Residential made various communication channels available to residents and provided a designated property manager to visit the property on a weekly basis ensuring our approved suppliers were upholding their contractual obligations to keep the building serviced, compliant and safe.

In month three after undergoing the necessary section 20 consultation procedure and after agreement form the residents we began refurbishment of the lobby areas and external facades which had seen neglect for the past seven years by the previous agents. The residents now receive quarterly financial reporting providing full transparent detail on actual expenditure versus budget, reserve fund expenditure, arrears report, health and safety report and any other relevant managerial updates.

Navana Residential has provided a dedicated property manager who attends site on a weekly basis and follows up his inspections with a monthly report to the residents detailing the financial and managerial updates in respect of the property.

The residents association have advised they could not be happier with the transparency and communication levels they are now in receipt of.

A specific defects report was commissioned. The report, whilst listing some of the work needed, also highlighted that due to the complexity of the roof, not all roof slopes or voids could be inspected.

Jennings and Barrett commissioned a drone survey to enable a thorough inspection of the entire roof (no easy task on the compact plot). Specialist RICS surveyors CWA, based in Sidcup, were appointed to produce the specification, manage the works and sign them off upon completion. Three roofing contractors were invited to bid for the roof refurbishment.

Experienced contractors, Capital Roofing Ltd based in Blackheath, were awarded the contract. The work included renewing lead flashings and valley gutters, installing new Velux skylights and re using the existing stained-glass windows in new hardwood frames. There was also some work to chimney stacks carried out.

As managing agents, Red Rock was instructed by the residents Management Company to manage the block and assist with the catalouge of building defects left by the developer.

Initially, the leaseholders felt compelled to remedy the defects via a build warranty insurance claim for each block; but the insurance policy had a £1,250 excess per unit and, with not enough money held in reserve, this needed to be paid by every leaseholder before works could commence.

Working with the resident directors, Red Rock mounted a campaign locally, involving Sir Bob Russell, the Liberal Democrat MP for Colchester. The upshot is that Weston Homes have now listened to their customers and agreed to completely remedy the defects, working closely with Red Rock to ensure that expectations are met.

Leaseholders have been spared a bill for the excess of £187,200.

The communal fire alarm system was found to be non-operational following a routine service visit and the replacement parts were obsolete, only 4 years after installation.

Conversations were held with the installers, manufacturers and the Freeholder of the building, whilst Red Rock applied to the FTT for Dispensation under Section 20ZA of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 with immediate effect.

Communication was sent to all Leaseholders to inform them of the issue. Red Rock updated and worked alongside the resident Directors and Leaseholders to ensure the fire alarm was replaced as quickly as possible to guarantee the safety of residents.

The FTT granted approval within a matter of days whilst the most competitive quotation was sought and instructed.

Red Rock over-saw access arrangements with each of the apartments and garages to ensure that the system could be tested and commissioned speedily. Whilst also making sure the work was carried out quickly, Red Rock ensured that the Management Company was compliant with all legislation and bylaws pertaining to The Landlord & Tenant Act and received many e-mails and calls of gratification for dealing with the issue quickly and efficiently.

As managing agents, Red Rock was instructed by the residents Management Company to manage the block and assist with the catalogue of outstanding issues from the previous agent and the ongoing management of the building.

Red Rock made numerous savings on Service Charges in comparison to the previous agent which allowed further monies to be collected to the Reserve Fund.

Working with the resident directors, Red Rock agreed a specification for the decoration and this was carried out speedily and at an extremely reasonable cost, by liaising with many local contractors in the area that Red Rock had already built a rapport with working at other buildings in the vicinity.

The lighting was also changed to LED for a low cost, making a saving on the electricity consumption for the block year upon year, ultimately making a saving within the annual Service Charges.

Red Rock was instructed by the Residents Management Company to manage and oversee the cyclical external decoration work.

Red Rock administered the Section 20 as part of their management fee (at no extra cost) and secured a contract with a local company, saving around £200,000 in comparison to the most expensive quotation issued in the Statement of Estimates.

Since management, Red Rock had been continuing to build a healthy Reserve Fund which meant that none of the Leaseholders had anything extra to pay for the major work to be carried out.

Review of Finances - The first stage was to review the last set of accounts and the current service charge budget to understand the level of reserve fund and service charge arrangements.
Following discussions with contractors to obtain a budget price for the required works, a new budget was produced incorporating the required funds to undertake the major works.
In addition, we also produced a 10 year forecast to enable us to smooth service charge collection and ensure funding for future works would not be an issue.

Section 20 Consultation - In accordance with Section 20 of the Landlord & Tenant Act 1985 (as amended), consultation notices were issued to all leaseholders.
The first stage notice informs the leaseholders of the intention to carry out works and allows them the opportunity to review the specification and nominate a contractor they believe would be suitable to provide a quotation for the works. Once all tenders were returned, and the 30 day consultation period had expired, a second notice is issued to all leaseholders detailing the estimates received from each contractor and any professional fees for management of the works.
This notice allows 30 days for leaseholders to make any written observations regarding the quotations. Following expiry of the 30 days, as the cheapest contractor was being appointed, an order was placed with the contractor.

Project Management - A specification / scope of works was produced in partnership with Akzo Nobel for issue to contractors to tender.
A 30 day competitive tender process was run and a formal tender report issued to the client with a recommendation of the contractor who should be selected. Before works commenced, risk assessments and method statements provided by the chosen contractor were reviewed along with their insurance and references.
During the works, regular visits were made to site and a final inspection to sign off the works took place before invoices were paid.

Residents Association - Assist leaseholders with formal application to the landlord for recognition of residents association.

Health & Safety Issues - Longstanding issues with a fire curtain that had not been addressed. Sourced contractor able to repair, obtained quotations and appointed to carry out works. Security was also reviewed to ensure unauthorised persons could not gain access to the block.

Financial Review & Planning - Quotations were obtained for various minor and major works around the development. A programme of works was agreed with the association and a forecast produced to ensure funding was in place to meet the costs as they became due.

Plumbing Issues / Escape of Water - Several occurrences of major escape of water from mains cold water system. On review it was found that due to the main riser pipes being fitted with compression fittings, the pressure from the booster pumps kicking in was causing the joints to vibrate and eventually fail.
To remedy this, we arranged for an inverter pump set controller to maintain a constant pressure and replaced all compression fittings on the main risers with soldered fittings to prevent any further issue. Following completion of the works no further occurrences of escape of water.

Security - Due to vandalism, access control systems to the block had been damaged and were not functioning.
A review was undertaken with a specialist access control contractor, repairs were completed, and anti-vandal equipment was fitted to ensure security going forward.

Fire Equipment Repairs - The block was fitted with a sprinkler system for all flats in the top 3 floors of the building which was not operational.
A specialist contractor was appointed to air test the system before refilling. It was found that a section of pipe had been installed externally by the developers that had not been lagged. When the system was originally commissioned the pipes had frozen causing them to split.
Sections of pipe were replaced, correctly lagged and the system was recommissioned.

Regent Property assisted Laurie House with their Right To Manage process to enable them to take control of the building away from the freeholder and return the power to the property owners.

A formal RTM company was created and the residents now control the decisions for their own building.

Regent Property also covered all of the legal costs involved with this process and will be willing to do the same for other clients looking to initiate the RTM process

When taking on any new building, Regent Property conduct a full management audit to ensure that the property is compliant on matters like Fire Risk Assessments, Asbestos surveys, Electrical testing, Maintenance Management etc.

Following a lack of maintenance by the previous agents, Felgate Mews was quickly brought back to a good and safe condition.

Quay Management Services (QMS) led the charge to help residents exercise their Right to Manage so that they could remove FirstPort as the managing agent. QMS were able to build an initial support base of 114 of 118 as members of a Residents Association of which 100/114 said YES to Right to Manage. As a result of the efforts made the residents now have been successful with RTM and can appoint their own managing agent.

To reduce the service charge Quay Management Services first agreed steps forwards with the Leaseholders to take back control and then provided a supplier who would revaluate the building rebuild costs. QMS was able to reduce the insurance costs by 75% to c£500

The first action QMS undertook was to first engage each of the Leaseholders to understand the current financial situations each faced. The importance of this was that for QMS to budget work accordingly we needed to be sure Leaseholders could fundamentally afford it over a period of time. Once ascertaining the costs, we were able to set affordable payment plans to ensure we had the funds available to perform the work when required

To ensure there were funds available for the repair, QMS withheld the invoicing of any of their fees until all health and safety issues including fire risk assessments had been resolved to ensure the building was in a good and safe condition. As a result of the action taken, QMS were able to show their added value as a managing agent and install trust with the leaseholders resulting in the full payment of service charges and ground rent.

Jennings and Barrett from the outset offered the appropriate professional advice and took away the person relationship between the individual owners who refused to contribute as per the covenants of the agreement that they had signed. With one of the residents, this involved talking with their family (compliant with all required permissions and GDPR regulation) in order to come to an appropriate solution where the resident understood their responsibilities in relation to payment of service charges. This took over 18 months but did result in payment of outstanding estate rent charges and an agreement to pay these moving forward.

With the second resident, Jennings and Barrett sought the appropriate legal advice and took the offending owner to court for non-payment of estate rent charges. This took a considerable amount of time, but again resulted in recovering of all estate rent charges and legal fees in relation to the individual concerned.

Instructing Jennings and Barrett meant the Directors did not become embroiled in personal relationships with their fellow owners. This is often one of the most difficult issues that Directors of management companies have to approach and especially where this relates to non-payment of service charges. All of these issues are resolved, and the estate is now operating smoothly.

Jennings and Barrett were able to resolve the multiple long standing issues with the management of this development by working closely with Directors, establishing relationships with the concierge and caretaking staff on site and gaining an understanding over a number of months of the peculiarities of this specific block. Jennings and Barrett include a resolution of ongoing problems within their onboarding process. A key aspect of this is having a single point of contact for the Directors that is an experienced block manager who can gain an understanding of what is required and then ensure that the required actions are carried out in a timely fashion.

Jennings and Barrett separated out these projects beginning in the first instance with replacing the existing time expired water tanks and providing a separate and new water pump supply to the fifth floor. This involved hiring an independent ME engineer (mechanical and electrical engineer) Pi Consult to oversee the project, sending the appropriate notices, and following due process in relation to tendering the project. The water tanks were replaced, newly sited where they could be accessed for routine maintenance. Directors were updated on a regularly on progress which took around 5 months and is now complete.

For the external decoration project, again Jennings and Barrett approached a separate building surveyor competent in dealing with major projects such as this. This project had some its particular difficulties in that liaison was required with The Port of London Authority and with the Local Authority in order to close off roads at some points and to place scaffolding in the river. The Section 20 Consultation ensured that all lessees were invited to put forward names of contractors that they'd like to do the work, and indeed some did so. The work was carried out in three stages covering the three separate sides of the block. This meant that scaffolding was not placed around the whole block for the full period, but rather taken up in phases. Again, Directors were made aware of progress and following the appropriate tender, the total cost for the work including professional fees amounted to £190,000, a very significant amount lower than was first indicated by previous managing agents.

Over the year not only were these works carried out and completed, but also Jennings and Barrett worked with Directors over a long-term maintenance plan so that provision might be made in the future for any large-scale projects. The key element in relation to working with this management company was building a relationship based on trust and visibility. Jennings and Barrett regularly attend the property and take place in Directors meetings held virtually. Initially these meetings were held monthly but now that the major issues are resolved Directors plan to reduce the frequency of their meetings and the work required from them to maintain the standard of their property is reduced accordingly.

Michael Parkes have managed the site since its inception on behalf of the Residents Management Company formed after all sales were completed.

Working effectively with Real Estate company Sundridge Investments who own the Building and manage office spaces directly.

We have taken an active part in drafting leases terms to ensure smooth operation of the site for future owners and arranged all services that will commence with first sales.

We have very high levels of satisfaction amongst our Owners who are used to highest levels of service provision.to ensure smooth operation of the site for future owners and arranged all services that will commence with first sales.

24 hour concierge,On site cleaners,On site handyman,Sauna,Sunbed,Communal garden,Staff kitchen,Communal lounge

Communal garden,Car parking

4 full time staff,Communal heating,Communal garden,Staff kitchen,Lounge,Gym,Pool

Communal garden,Car parking

Communal garden,Car parking

Communal garden,Car parking

Communal garden,Car parking

Communal garden,Car parking

Communal garden,Car parking

Communal garden