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 It is moderated, which means that your comments will NOT be published until they have been checked by the editorial staff first.
Implications for Firstport of Leasehold Reform.
Posted by The Editor on 05 March 2025
Editor,
The Government should only compensate Freeholders for their initial investment. Future profit claims by Freeholders are irrelevant when determining fair compensation.
Ground rent is paid for nothing and is a feudal relic that should have been abolished long ago.
The Government should only compensate Freeholders for their initial investment. Future profit claims by Freeholders are irrelevant when determining fair compensation.
Ground rent is paid for nothing and is a feudal relic that should have been abolished long ago.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 05 March 2025
Agreed compensation should be based on the level of investment and not on future income streams. This is what happened in Scotland. Most residents paid between £5,000-£10,000 for their freehold. Crucially the freeholders had to offer long term payment plans that were interest free to purchase the freehold.
In some instances leaseholders chose not to purchase the freehold and wished to carry on as leaseholders. Any forthcoming legislation should allow for this as well.
After all, a development with cladding or other safety issues is not worth owning and better left with the current freeholder. There could also be a case for some retirement developments to remain on a leasehold basis on the proviso that that the leaseholders are able to appoint a managing agent of their choice and that the lease is extended putting ground rent at zero.
In some instances leaseholders chose not to purchase the freehold and wished to carry on as leaseholders. Any forthcoming legislation should allow for this as well.
After all, a development with cladding or other safety issues is not worth owning and better left with the current freeholder. There could also be a case for some retirement developments to remain on a leasehold basis on the proviso that that the leaseholders are able to appoint a managing agent of their choice and that the lease is extended putting ground rent at zero.
Posted by The Editor on 06 March 2025
Hi Stephen,
You say GR is a “ feudal relic”…Wrong!
You clearly didn’t get the memo… “ LKP trustee Katie Kendrick ergo LKP are saying leasehold is “ uncivilised “ ergo GR is uncivilised and not ‘ feudal”…
It’s interesting that LKP politicians use the word feudal to describe leasehold but representatives of freeholders whine and say that the word feudal Is “ unhelpful”…. Who’s side is LKP on? It hasn’t even published an article about the banning of leasehold flats on its site. LKP was quick to write a lengthy inaccurate account of the RTM at Chelsea Bridge Wharf whilst praising accredited LKP management agency URANG ( see Trustpilot reviews) for getting the gig.Nowt about the banning of leasehold. Whose side is LKP on?
You say GR is a “ feudal relic”…Wrong!
You clearly didn’t get the memo… “ LKP trustee Katie Kendrick ergo LKP are saying leasehold is “ uncivilised “ ergo GR is uncivilised and not ‘ feudal”…
It’s interesting that LKP politicians use the word feudal to describe leasehold but representatives of freeholders whine and say that the word feudal Is “ unhelpful”…. Who’s side is LKP on? It hasn’t even published an article about the banning of leasehold flats on its site. LKP was quick to write a lengthy inaccurate account of the RTM at Chelsea Bridge Wharf whilst praising accredited LKP management agency URANG ( see Trustpilot reviews) for getting the gig.Nowt about the banning of leasehold. Whose side is LKP on?
Posted by Kim on 06 March 2025
Re my previous comment " uncivilised"v Feudal. I meant "Politicians" and not " LKP politicians". A Freudian slip but kinda the wrong way around....Geddit? If LKP does not write an article on the banning of future leaseholds then leaseholders had better ask themselves who's side LKP is on? The leaseholders or the Freeholders and LKP accredited agents ?
Posted by Kim on 06 March 2025
Hi Kim,
Thank you for your satirical reply; I found it very good. If I'm "wrong", perhaps I should consider being "politically re-educated" to believe that Freehold is beneficial and provides a utopian existence for happy Leaseholders. After brief consideration, I will still refer to ground rent as a medieval feudal relic that should have been abolished long ago.
Thank you for your satirical reply; I found it very good. If I'm "wrong", perhaps I should consider being "politically re-educated" to believe that Freehold is beneficial and provides a utopian existence for happy Leaseholders. After brief consideration, I will still refer to ground rent as a medieval feudal relic that should have been abolished long ago.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 06 March 2025
Somewhere way back in the midst of time in England those that supported William the Conqueror or subsequently any future King would be given land as a reward.
If a "peasant" wished to farm on that land he would have to pay a fee to the landowner for occupying the land he was farming. Paying such a fee also served to acknowledge the ownership of the land.
And is from the original word for a "fee" we get the word "Feudal"
I hope this explanation was civilised enough for NLC to understand!
If a "peasant" wished to farm on that land he would have to pay a fee to the landowner for occupying the land he was farming. Paying such a fee also served to acknowledge the ownership of the land.
And is from the original word for a "fee" we get the word "Feudal"
I hope this explanation was civilised enough for NLC to understand!
Posted by Michael Epstein on 07 March 2025
“ Leaeehold flats to banned in overhaul,of centuries -old system”
Dear Mr Editor,
I am sure your lovely readers heard the news on Monday that Leasehold is to be banned . About time wouldn’t you say?
The dynamic Harry Scoffin was interviewed on Andrew Marr’s LBC programme and was fabulous. He made clear why the leasehold system should rightly be abolished and is a wonderful advocate for leaseholders.
On the hand, LKP,trustee Kate Kendrick was interviewed on the Shelagh Fogarty LBC programme.
Her contribution was to say that leasehold is “ uncivilised “…she didn’t mention the word ‘ FEUDAL” which used to be the buzzword of NLC when it started out..Funny that.
I say this to the LKP trustee Katie Kendrick. “ UNCIVILISED “,is saying serviette instead of napkin. Drinking from a finger bowl. Saying tea instead of supper .That kind of stuff which doesn’t really harm anybody. Leasehold ruins lives and drives people to suicide. The NLC was recently banging on about the correlation between the leasehold system and mental issues. I do not the think the word “ CIVILISED” is an appropriate adjective to describe the a feudal system that makes lives a misery for millions of people and that drives people to suicide. Very poor show by an LKP trustee. Btw, now about the banning of leasehold on the LKP blog…Maybe LKP is disappointed that it will soon be redundant Good Riddance!
I am sure your lovely readers heard the news on Monday that Leasehold is to be banned . About time wouldn’t you say?
The dynamic Harry Scoffin was interviewed on Andrew Marr’s LBC programme and was fabulous. He made clear why the leasehold system should rightly be abolished and is a wonderful advocate for leaseholders.
On the hand, LKP,trustee Kate Kendrick was interviewed on the Shelagh Fogarty LBC programme.
Her contribution was to say that leasehold is “ uncivilised “…she didn’t mention the word ‘ FEUDAL” which used to be the buzzword of NLC when it started out..Funny that.
I say this to the LKP trustee Katie Kendrick. “ UNCIVILISED “,is saying serviette instead of napkin. Drinking from a finger bowl. Saying tea instead of supper .That kind of stuff which doesn’t really harm anybody. Leasehold ruins lives and drives people to suicide. The NLC was recently banging on about the correlation between the leasehold system and mental issues. I do not the think the word “ CIVILISED” is an appropriate adjective to describe the a feudal system that makes lives a misery for millions of people and that drives people to suicide. Very poor show by an LKP trustee. Btw, now about the banning of leasehold on the LKP blog…Maybe LKP is disappointed that it will soon be redundant Good Riddance!
Posted by Kim on 05 March 2025
Compared to Harry Scoffin, Katie Kendrick is completely out of her depth presenting the leaseholder's case.
As well meaning as she may be, she has proved unable to present a credible case for the abolishment of leasehold as it is in my view beyond her abilities so to do.
Anyone that has met her or seen her television appearances knows that when she gets stuck she reverts to the case of her
leasehold home and the cost to enfranchise. Those that know her will know that the articles published in her name cannot possibly have been written by her. But for the issues with her home she would never have got involved with the campaign to end leasehold and rid ourselves of corrupt property managers. Many was the time that those campaigning had to remind NLC that the campaign was not solely about leasehold houses. When this campaign is (won and it will be won) yes NLC and Katie Kendrick will have played their part but other campaigners from the dim and distance past are worthy of praise.
As well meaning as she may be, she has proved unable to present a credible case for the abolishment of leasehold as it is in my view beyond her abilities so to do.
Anyone that has met her or seen her television appearances knows that when she gets stuck she reverts to the case of her
leasehold home and the cost to enfranchise. Those that know her will know that the articles published in her name cannot possibly have been written by her. But for the issues with her home she would never have got involved with the campaign to end leasehold and rid ourselves of corrupt property managers. Many was the time that those campaigning had to remind NLC that the campaign was not solely about leasehold houses. When this campaign is (won and it will be won) yes NLC and Katie Kendrick will have played their part but other campaigners from the dim and distance past are worthy of praise.
Posted by The Editor on 05 March 2025
Dear Mr Editor,
Harry Scoffin is the leaseholders Ferrari across the media. LKP trustee Katie Kendrick is the Ford Cortina with 2 tyres missing in the my view.
Btw, I used to write many of the letters to government ministers on behalf of the NLC so I agree that articles published in her name are not credible….
Harry Scoffin is the leaseholders Ferrari across the media. LKP trustee Katie Kendrick is the Ford Cortina with 2 tyres missing in the my view.
Btw, I used to write many of the letters to government ministers on behalf of the NLC so I agree that articles published in her name are not credible….
Posted by Kim on 05 March 2025
Disagree! Harry Scoffin is more of a Lexus in that he can be relied on to finish leasehold.
Nothing wrong with Cortina, though basic they did the job!
A better analogy might be an Austin Allegro with a spare tyre.
You can be sure any article that is well and professionally written will not be Katie Kendrick's handiwork.
Perhaps a journalist writing on her behalf?
Nothing wrong with Cortina, though basic they did the job!
A better analogy might be an Austin Allegro with a spare tyre.
You can be sure any article that is well and professionally written will not be Katie Kendrick's handiwork.
Perhaps a journalist writing on her behalf?
Posted by The Editor on 05 March 2025
I note the proposed leasehold reforms that will ban new build leaseholds does not as yet merit a mention on the LKP website.
Given LKP is the leaseholders charity one would have thought the news might appear on their site?
Given LKP is the leaseholders charity one would have thought the news might appear on their site?
Posted by Michael Epstein on 05 March 2025
Harry Scoffin is a dedicated and driven leader of the "Free Leaseholders" initiative. Last year, my wife and I had the privilege of spending several hours with him and contributing to one of his online video presentations, which garnered approximately 75,000 + views.
Harry possesses intelligence, charisma, and an exceptional ability to present logical, evidence-based arguments advocating for the abolition of Freehold, in my opinion.
Harry possesses intelligence, charisma, and an exceptional ability to present logical, evidence-based arguments advocating for the abolition of Freehold, in my opinion.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 06 March 2025
Harry Scoffin strikes me as someone who not only has a grasp on the issues that afflict leaseholders but has a unique ability to express those issues in a readily understandable way. When asked a question he can always comprehensively answer it. He is also a man with great integrity. Initially he was a great supporter of LKP/NLC. As some might well remember Kim and I started to question the conduct of LKP/NLC to some great opposition from fellow contributors to the site.
Rather than tamely follow the LKP/NLC line, Harry took his time, did his research and then quit LKP/NLC.
I for one give him my 100% support.
Rather than tamely follow the LKP/NLC line, Harry took his time, did his research and then quit LKP/NLC.
I for one give him my 100% support.
Posted by Michael Epstein on 07 March 2025
Re: Harry Scoffin.
I agree with you the. He’s a little bit terrific that guy!
Re: NLC.
It blocked a Chelsea Bridge Wharf resident when he posted a video of Harry Scoffin .
RE: LKP.
It at first refused to publish the true account account of the undemocratic unelected directors at .CBW written by Mike O’ Driscoll. It then “ allowed” his comment heavily redacted then immediately closed the comment section! Whose side is LKP really on?
RE: URANG.
The CEO of URANG is a director and major shareholder WESTBURY RESIDENTIAL LTD…….
1. Questionable accounts.
2.unlawfully amended leases.
3.Tenant allowed to breach their lease and “ gifted the eaves
4.£800 of interest earned on shareholders service charge pocketed by WR.
URANG are due to takeover management at CBW…
I will be talking WR to Tribunal later this year….
I agree with you the. He’s a little bit terrific that guy!
Re: NLC.
It blocked a Chelsea Bridge Wharf resident when he posted a video of Harry Scoffin .
RE: LKP.
It at first refused to publish the true account account of the undemocratic unelected directors at .CBW written by Mike O’ Driscoll. It then “ allowed” his comment heavily redacted then immediately closed the comment section! Whose side is LKP really on?
RE: URANG.
The CEO of URANG is a director and major shareholder WESTBURY RESIDENTIAL LTD…….
1. Questionable accounts.
2.unlawfully amended leases.
3.Tenant allowed to breach their lease and “ gifted the eaves
4.£800 of interest earned on shareholders service charge pocketed by WR.
URANG are due to takeover management at CBW…
I will be talking WR to Tribunal later this year….
Posted by Kim on 07 March 2025
LKP refer to Harry Scoffin as the "Former Intern!"
Posted by Michael Epstein on 07 March 2025
CHELSEA BRIDGE WHARF / RTM
Dear Mr Editor,
Please allow me to give you and your ardent followers an update on the RTM situation at CBW.
I have been informed that the unelected directors of CBW have now agreed to hold elections.. I hear that LKP “ recommended “ that elections be held ….an interesting choice of word by LKP- “ recommended “…? In the western world democracy and fair elections are human rights.LKP should have said this
“ Listen up you unelected directors of CBW. You will either step down, allow full and fair elections to be held, circulate URANG contract to the leaseholders, otherwise LKP will advise the URANG to withdraw the contract and for it not to manage CBW”…..
The annual service charge at CBW is 6 million quid.Wonder how much URANG management fee would be? 10%? That would be £600,000.
Please allow me to give you and your ardent followers an update on the RTM situation at CBW.
I have been informed that the unelected directors of CBW have now agreed to hold elections.. I hear that LKP “ recommended “ that elections be held ….an interesting choice of word by LKP- “ recommended “…? In the western world democracy and fair elections are human rights.LKP should have said this
“ Listen up you unelected directors of CBW. You will either step down, allow full and fair elections to be held, circulate URANG contract to the leaseholders, otherwise LKP will advise the URANG to withdraw the contract and for it not to manage CBW”…..
The annual service charge at CBW is 6 million quid.Wonder how much URANG management fee would be? 10%? That would be £600,000.
Posted by Kim on 03 March 2025
So effectively the chair of the "Independent" Leasehold Advisory Service is interfering with a managing agent and leaseholders. How can that be right?
Posted by Michael Epstein on 03 March 2025
Michael E,
“ How can that be right” ? It can't be right! Martin Boyd is chair of both LKP and LAS. He is paid by the taxpayer for his chairmanship at LAS. LKP is poking its nose in at CBW and I was informed they “ recommended “ that free and fair elections were carried out.,….. Hmmm. Would Boyd in his position at LAS “ recommend “ that MA/ Freeholders act honestly?
URANG CONTRACT.
I have advised CBW it is imperative the leaseholders receive a copy of the contract. There could be a clause that say# URANG cannot be booted out for 5 years….even if it is rubbish! Read the Trustpilot reviews. Perhaps LKP will recommend to its accredited MA to provide CBW tenants with the contract.
I feel rather uneasy about this and am doing my utmost as an activist to give help and support to CBW!
“ How can that be right” ? It can't be right! Martin Boyd is chair of both LKP and LAS. He is paid by the taxpayer for his chairmanship at LAS. LKP is poking its nose in at CBW and I was informed they “ recommended “ that free and fair elections were carried out.,….. Hmmm. Would Boyd in his position at LAS “ recommend “ that MA/ Freeholders act honestly?
URANG CONTRACT.
I have advised CBW it is imperative the leaseholders receive a copy of the contract. There could be a clause that say# URANG cannot be booted out for 5 years….even if it is rubbish! Read the Trustpilot reviews. Perhaps LKP will recommend to its accredited MA to provide CBW tenants with the contract.
I feel rather uneasy about this and am doing my utmost as an activist to give help and support to CBW!
Posted by Kim on 04 March 2025
Hi Kim,
I agree. The Shareholders have a right to see all Company documents and to scrutinize the details and to request copies in my view.
I agree. The Shareholders have a right to see all Company documents and to scrutinize the details and to request copies in my view.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 04 March 2025
A Disaster Playing Monopoly
I was doing so well. I had plenty of cash, a racing car, won a beauty contest via the community chest and had successfully invested in the utilities and stations.
Then I threw a 5 and 3 and landed on Pentonville Rd with a property on it. No problem me thinks, a little money out of my substantial cash pile?
But then with horror I discovered that the property on Pentonville Rd was managed by Firstport. The cost was so great I went bankrupt!
Then I threw a 5 and 3 and landed on Pentonville Rd with a property on it. No problem me thinks, a little money out of my substantial cash pile?
But then with horror I discovered that the property on Pentonville Rd was managed by Firstport. The cost was so great I went bankrupt!
Posted by Michael Epstein on 02 March 2025
Michael E
Very funny , but good it isn’t true
Very funny , but good it isn’t true
Posted by RUTH on 02 March 2025
Michael,
From your description that property has the stench of shared equity, leasehold and a possible mortgage thrown in for good measure. Am I warm or cold on this wild guess?
It is reported that lenders have become increasingly nervous about advancing mortgage offers with regard to the above? What is your advice and guidance?
From your description that property has the stench of shared equity, leasehold and a possible mortgage thrown in for good measure. Am I warm or cold on this wild guess?
It is reported that lenders have become increasingly nervous about advancing mortgage offers with regard to the above? What is your advice and guidance?
Posted by Stephen Burns on 02 March 2025
Well spotted Ruth, it wasn't true I actually had the top hat not the racing car!
Posted by Michael Epstein on 03 March 2025
Actually Michael, what I meant was that in reality fortunately it didn't happen.I cannot remember when I last played Monopoly , probably 60 years ago
Posted by RUTH on 03 March 2025
The Sellers Pack
Dear Editor,
You will be aware that to sell a leasehold property you first need to obtain a seller's pack, which typically costs around £600.00 plus VAT. Delays in obtaining this pack may result in a lost sale.
A Development Manager recently offered a seller 30% of the asking price for an apartment the moment it was put up for sale in the residential apartment block that they managed. The offer was rejected out of hand.
Subsequently, the seller received a much better offer from a cash buyer who eventually lost patience with delays in the sales process due to the inability of the managing agent to provide the sellers pack in a timely fashion.
Please note, the above-mentioned property is not managed by Firstport.
I will report similar examples in due course, please draw your own conclussions.
You will be aware that to sell a leasehold property you first need to obtain a seller's pack, which typically costs around £600.00 plus VAT. Delays in obtaining this pack may result in a lost sale.
A Development Manager recently offered a seller 30% of the asking price for an apartment the moment it was put up for sale in the residential apartment block that they managed. The offer was rejected out of hand.
Subsequently, the seller received a much better offer from a cash buyer who eventually lost patience with delays in the sales process due to the inability of the managing agent to provide the sellers pack in a timely fashion.
Please note, the above-mentioned property is not managed by Firstport.
I will report similar examples in due course, please draw your own conclussions.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 28 February 2025
Stephen, you are right to raise this issue. Though the case you highlight does not refer to Firstport never-the-less there are a myriad of cases where Firstport is involved. And of course it is not just sellers that are affected, those wishing to obtain a cheaper mortgage have been thwarted a well, some being stuck on the most expensive SVR mortgages due to Firstport failings.
So bad in fact have Firstport been that in one case a solicitor acting on behalf of a seller took to Trustpilot to beg them to return the sellers pack.
Any request for a sellers pack should be marked by "Time is of the essence contract to be fulfilled within 28 days of the request. Failure to do so will be a breach of contract and you will be held liable for all consequential losses"
One highly respected property management company has told me that in case of difficulty over the sellers pack it may take up to 14 days to produce the requested pack, but if there are no issues they aim to despatch the sellers pack within 2-3 hours.
So bad in fact have Firstport been that in one case a solicitor acting on behalf of a seller took to Trustpilot to beg them to return the sellers pack.
Any request for a sellers pack should be marked by "Time is of the essence contract to be fulfilled within 28 days of the request. Failure to do so will be a breach of contract and you will be held liable for all consequential losses"
One highly respected property management company has told me that in case of difficulty over the sellers pack it may take up to 14 days to produce the requested pack, but if there are no issues they aim to despatch the sellers pack within 2-3 hours.
Posted by Michael Epstein on 28 February 2025
Hi Stephen,
Did this happen at your development block? Why did you not mention the name of the MA ? It is very important for leaseholders to realise that the many not the few of MA’s are on the make and in the take. Thanks to the editor of this site all attention is directed at Firstport, however, there are MA’s equally as bad. Due to personal experience and personal accounts from leaseholders on other blocks, I put Westbury Residential Ltd in the same bracket as Firsport.
Did this happen at your development block? Why did you not mention the name of the MA ? It is very important for leaseholders to realise that the many not the few of MA’s are on the make and in the take. Thanks to the editor of this site all attention is directed at Firstport, however, there are MA’s equally as bad. Due to personal experience and personal accounts from leaseholders on other blocks, I put Westbury Residential Ltd in the same bracket as Firsport.
Posted by Kim on 28 February 2025
Hi Kim,
I continue to admire and respect your positive and highly informed postings on this site which I find very informative and helpful.
This did happen at this site and the managing agent are "Home Management Group Limited" whose registered office is 2 The Chase, Rickelton, Washington, Tyne & Wear, etc. The principal director is David Jarvis and his daughter Natalie Frank. The registered office appears to work part time hours but we cannot confirm this.
Many Shareholders complain of repeated emails and phone calls being ignored by that firm to our increasing frustration.
HMG Ltd have exceeded our expectations in defending their self employed "totally incompetent development manager" in recent months including some lapsed "puppet directors" of this established RTM Company.
We were astonished to of received an invite to our own annual general meeting from Home Management Group Limited Ltd on 27.03.25. This will be the first Shareholder meeting that firm have attended in the history of this RTM Company.
As the instrumental founding director of this RTM Company I must state that HMG Ltd actual contribution to this firms success is at best minimal and at worst insignificant.
For the record, I have many friends including property managing agents who are first class and totally honourable, which also includes landlords.
I continue to admire and respect your positive and highly informed postings on this site which I find very informative and helpful.
This did happen at this site and the managing agent are "Home Management Group Limited" whose registered office is 2 The Chase, Rickelton, Washington, Tyne & Wear, etc. The principal director is David Jarvis and his daughter Natalie Frank. The registered office appears to work part time hours but we cannot confirm this.
Many Shareholders complain of repeated emails and phone calls being ignored by that firm to our increasing frustration.
HMG Ltd have exceeded our expectations in defending their self employed "totally incompetent development manager" in recent months including some lapsed "puppet directors" of this established RTM Company.
We were astonished to of received an invite to our own annual general meeting from Home Management Group Limited Ltd on 27.03.25. This will be the first Shareholder meeting that firm have attended in the history of this RTM Company.
As the instrumental founding director of this RTM Company I must state that HMG Ltd actual contribution to this firms success is at best minimal and at worst insignificant.
For the record, I have many friends including property managing agents who are first class and totally honourable, which also includes landlords.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 01 March 2025
Hi Stephen,
Thank you for your kind words.
It sounds like it time to give “ Home Management group Ltd” the boot!
I recall that when your block achieved RTM you sang the praises of the newly appointed MA.It seems that something has clearly gone wrong. Are the directors of the RTM a little to ‘ cosy’ with the MA? Is that why the MA believes they can ignore emails and phone calls?
I maintain that the many and not the few of MA’s dishonest and rubbish! I have yet to hear from any leaseholder praise their MA. I stand resolute in my belief.
Thank you for your kind words.
It sounds like it time to give “ Home Management group Ltd” the boot!
I recall that when your block achieved RTM you sang the praises of the newly appointed MA.It seems that something has clearly gone wrong. Are the directors of the RTM a little to ‘ cosy’ with the MA? Is that why the MA believes they can ignore emails and phone calls?
I maintain that the many and not the few of MA’s dishonest and rubbish! I have yet to hear from any leaseholder praise their MA. I stand resolute in my belief.
Posted by Kim on 02 March 2025
Of course it should be remembered that having gone through the pain of conducting a Right to Manage in order to rid themselves of a corrupt freeholder appointed managing agent it is a simple process to replace any managing agent that residents are not happy with.
Posted by Michael Epstein on 02 March 2025
Michael,
The simple process has begun. We have already shopped around for a professional managing agent and Select Retirement Service came highly recommended by many other RTM Company's.
Kim, the "glory grabbing" directors of this Company simply jumped on the gravy train after all the hard work was done by standing on the shoulders of better men and women.
This is obvious to the majority of shareholders and their fate will be decided by a majority vote at the AGM later this month.
Further reports to follow.
The simple process has begun. We have already shopped around for a professional managing agent and Select Retirement Service came highly recommended by many other RTM Company's.
Kim, the "glory grabbing" directors of this Company simply jumped on the gravy train after all the hard work was done by standing on the shoulders of better men and women.
This is obvious to the majority of shareholders and their fate will be decided by a majority vote at the AGM later this month.
Further reports to follow.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 02 March 2025
Stephen you might be interested to know that About Firstport have received a copy of an email sent to HMG on behalf of a resident living at a Home Management Group managed development.
" My dealings with HMG have been extremely frustrating and I feel your company is either inefficient or totally incompetent.
You were unable or unwilling to provide a sellers pack essential for the sale of a relative's flat causing the loss of a sale.
I was told you had never done a sellers pack before.
You sent my relative an invoice showing he had substantial arrears, confused by this and in poor mental health he immediately paid a cheque to avoid any penalties. This was despite the fact that you must have known my relative had always paid his service charges by Direct Debit.
You still have not refunded the overpayment.
" My dealings with HMG have been extremely frustrating and I feel your company is either inefficient or totally incompetent.
You were unable or unwilling to provide a sellers pack essential for the sale of a relative's flat causing the loss of a sale.
I was told you had never done a sellers pack before.
You sent my relative an invoice showing he had substantial arrears, confused by this and in poor mental health he immediately paid a cheque to avoid any penalties. This was despite the fact that you must have known my relative had always paid his service charges by Direct Debit.
You still have not refunded the overpayment.
Posted by The Editor on 03 March 2025
Dear Editor,
Are property managing agents required to employ the services of a firm of qualified Solicitors to enable them to carry out their business effectively?
I ask this question in respect of the "sellers pack" which are crucial to enable the sale of a Leasehold property.
In the event a firm of Solicitors were to decide to let a client go could this result in the sellers pack not being provided to the seller?
Are you aware of instances where Solicitors have "dumped" a property managing agent?
Are property managing agents required to employ the services of a firm of qualified Solicitors to enable them to carry out their business effectively?
I ask this question in respect of the "sellers pack" which are crucial to enable the sale of a Leasehold property.
In the event a firm of Solicitors were to decide to let a client go could this result in the sellers pack not being provided to the seller?
Are you aware of instances where Solicitors have "dumped" a property managing agent?
Posted by on 03 March 2025
Dear Editor,
I am aware of a property at this Leasehold apartment block that was put up for sale and sold almost immediately subject to contract (STC) last October and yet the sale has still not been completed.
What could possibly have prevented that property sale from being finalised?
Further investigation is required.
"So the fun begins"
I am aware of a property at this Leasehold apartment block that was put up for sale and sold almost immediately subject to contract (STC) last October and yet the sale has still not been completed.
What could possibly have prevented that property sale from being finalised?
Further investigation is required.
"So the fun begins"
Posted by Stephen Burns on 04 March 2025
To understand what may have prevented the property sale from being finalised, leaseholders need to understand that what is being sold is not the property. It is a document/long term rental agreement that is being sold. That is a fundamental difference between leasehold and freehold.
A freehold property is literally that. A property Free of Hold. You buy it, it's yours!
In the case of leasehold as I have aid it is a document/long term rental agreement that s being purchased not the property. That means the lease maybe in breach when purchased. For example money may be owed to the freeholder/managing agents. That money is owed under the terms of the lease and therefore any lease purchased with money owing becomes the responsibility of the leaseholder.
That is essentially why a sellers pack is needed by a solicitor to show that the lease being purchased is not in default.
Without that information the sale cannot safely proceed.
A freehold property is literally that. A property Free of Hold. You buy it, it's yours!
In the case of leasehold as I have aid it is a document/long term rental agreement that s being purchased not the property. That means the lease maybe in breach when purchased. For example money may be owed to the freeholder/managing agents. That money is owed under the terms of the lease and therefore any lease purchased with money owing becomes the responsibility of the leaseholder.
That is essentially why a sellers pack is needed by a solicitor to show that the lease being purchased is not in default.
Without that information the sale cannot safely proceed.
Posted by The Editor on 04 March 2025
Editor,
Thank you for that very clear and precise reply to my enquiry.
Thank you for that very clear and precise reply to my enquiry.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 04 March 2025
There have been some 16458 posts and replies on this page. To view older ones search here.
This only searches posts, not replies.
That said given the reforms that are coming in will be the straw that broke the camel's back. Banning leasehold for new builds but keeping them long term for existing developments is simply not sustainable.
It will change after a compensation package based on the money freeholders invested rather than future profits is worked out. The Scottish system worked very well for leaseholders.
If Commonhold is the new form of tenure, residents will have the automatic right to appoint a managing agent of their choice? That choice is unlikely to be Firstport!
Even were a developer foolish enough to appoint Firstport, it would only be for a very short period of time.
At a time when Firstport are being forced to buy up market share the lack of new development contracts will hit them hard, especially given the number of developments they are already losing.
That right to manage actions are being made cheaper and easier to undertake is causing serious concerns at Firstport Towers.