Login
Get your free website from Spanglefish
This is a free Spanglefish 2 website.

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 It is moderated, which means that your comments will NOT be published until they have been checked by the editorial staff first.

Buildings Insurance Brokerage Fee
Chandlers Court (Burwell, Cambridgeshire CB25 0AZ) is a purpose-built block of 24 flats with maintenance services provided by FirstPort Property Services (Marlborough House, Wigmore Lane, Luton, Bedfordshire LU2 9EX) for which leaseholders pay an annual service charge. The Regional Manager is Mr Lee Farley.

Several months ago, I asked for a copy of the current buildings insurance invoice to identify the amount of the brokerage fee skimmed off by FirstPort. Mr Farley would only issue me with a copy of the invoice as provided by the broker which, of course, only gave the total cost of the insurance without any breakdown. To get the information I needed it was necessary to submit a Stage 2 complaint. In response to my Stage 2 complaint Mr James Williams, Head of Operations (East), FirstPort Group Limited, stated that:

‘’We only receive invoices from our broker. There is a willingness to provide the information, but when Lee requested this information from Knight Square (the broker) they replied, ‘’the invoice for this property is part of a portfolio of properties therefore it is not an individual invoice we can provide, it is for far more than this policy’s premium and contains sensitive data for other developments’’. Knight Square insurance confirmed that FirstPort do not earn any commission from the policies Knight Square place. I can confirm that Knight Square insurance received £1,222.51 for the building and terrorism polices placed for Chandlers Court for 2024''.

So, according to Mr Williams, the policy provider does not issue invoices for individual properties but only for a portfolio of properties, which is an untrue statement, made with the intent to deceive, since I have a policy document issued by Knight Square with a breakdown of the premium for Chandlers Court. Also, Mr Williams was keen to point out that FirstPort do not earn any commission from the policies Knight Square place.

However, it should be noted that, in December 2022 FirstPort Insurance Services Limited was rebranded as Knight Square Insurance Brokers Limited, trading as Knight Square Insurance. Knight Square Insurance Brokers Limited, share two directors and an address with FirstPort Property Services and both are part of a wider group who have recently been acquired by the French private equity firm Emeria.

Also, according to Mr Williams, FirstPort do not earn any commission from the policies Knight Square place even though they are essentially one of the same. How stupid do they think leaseholders are?

A policy document, for Chandlers Court, issued by Knight Square states that ‘’After using our judgement and market awareness, we have only obtained terms from a single insurer’’ which is the same insurer from the previous year.

So, Knight Square sent an email to the policy provider asking them to renew the previous years policy and for that effort the leaseholders of Chandlers Court were billed £1222.51 (13.6% of the total premium including IPT).
How do they get away with that? Am I missing something?

Apparently, FirstPort manage 5800 developments which, on average are twice the size of Chandlers Court, so scaling up, Knight Square (aka FirstPort) could be raking in over fourteen million pounds for doing virtually nothing.
Posted by William fox on 28 October 2024
William, you don’t know you are born!

Our ex MA WESTBURY RESIDENTIAL LTD trousered 15% commission and the brokers charged 20 %….that is a whopping 35% paid for nowt! Well done on your investigation and now it’s time to get rid of Firstport and go RTM!
Posted by Kim on 28 October 2024
William
Submit a section 22 LTA 85 request. By law Firstport has to provide access to the documents within 6 months of the end of the FY or within 1 month. They may provide scanned copies of the invoices instead of access.
Also you could ask your freeholder to provide the invoices.
Posted by Chris on 28 October 2024
William,

We have reduced the service charge by £1,000 + per apartment per annum since we went Right to Manage. In March of this year our reserve fund was at its highest level in six years. This apartment block is maintained to a good standard inline with the terms of the Lease.

The cost to go RTM was less than £100 per apartment and was of course a one off cost.

I recommend Select Retirement Service, they are a long established and reputable property managing agent who are completely up front and transparent about their fees.

They answer the phone when called and reply to emails promptly, unlike your typical ten a penny MA.

If you would like more information about that quality firm then please drop me an email.

No doubt you may make your own enquirys and due diligence. It goes without saying that avoiding MA who staff their office part time and are a one horse outfit should be avoided.

I hope the above is of some use.




Posted by Stephen Burns on 28 October 2024
Select have rightly gained an excellent reputation for managing retirement developments. They have gained many management contracts from Firstport and in the main from word and mouth recommendations from residents of other developments that have sacked Firstport and appointed Select. I understand that more ex Firstport managed appointments are in the pipeline.
Not only does it mean better, cheaper and accountable management for residents, but additionally sacking Firstport denies them the revenue they derive not just from ripping residents off, but they lose commissions from Retirement Homesearch as well.
If we go back to the beginnings of Select both the great campaigner the late Chas Willis and I had to fight very hard on behalf of Select who LKP tried to strangle at birth when tendering for their first management contract.
According to LKP Select founder
Sue Earnshaw was a "Peverel turncoat not fitted to be a property manager" LKP "suggested" the appointment of a rival property management company that by sheer coincidence had paid to be accredited to LKP!
More power to Select!
Posted by Michael Epstein on 29 October 2024
Mike Amesbury Disgrace!
MP Mike Amesbury has done much to advance the cause of hard pressed leaseholders, even becoming the new co-chairman of the Leasehold Reform All Party Parliamentary group. Regrettably that group has diminished from 183 members before the election now down to a mere 21.
Unfortunately the cause of leaseholders and the APPG will not have been helped by the recent incident involving Mike Amesbury that may result in criminal charges being brought against him which could lead to his suspension from Parliament.
The cause had already been undermined by Peter Bottomley the former chair of the APPG after he had publicly given his support to a serial sexual abuser and covered up financial irregularities and the racism of certain members of LKP.
If Mr Amesbury is convicted it will be interesting to see if Martin Boyd of LKP and current chair of the Leasehold Advisory Service still gives him his support?
Posted by The Editor on 27 October 2024
Dear Mr Editor,,
Well I do declare! Fisticuffs in the street involving the co -chair of the Leaseholders cuppa tea and Jammy dodger APPG talking shop that achieves diddly squat but makes 2nd rate back benchers feel worthy…..Crikey, I have seen the video and it don’t look good for little Mike Amesbury….. 2.30 am in the morning playing fisticuffs…hmmmmmm….
Posted by Kim on 27 October 2024
UPDATE,Amesbury’ Suspended’ ….
He allegedly said he felt “ threatened “ , even though cctv footage shows he threw the first punch! Hmmm, smacks of MA’s , LKP ACCREDITED accusing perfectly innocent Leaseholders of “ defamation, harassment “… Sweet baby Jesus and the wee donkey, what a bunch of 🤬🤬🤬leaseholders have ‘ rootin for them’ 😂😂😂
Posted by Kim on 27 October 2024
On the other hand the conduct of Mike Amesbury might play well for Martin Boyd current chair of the Leasehold Advisory Service and the Leasehold Knowledge Partnership as he does rather appear to have a penchant for bully boy practices, something he is well versed in!
Posted by Michael Epstein on 27 October 2024
Unfortunately with Mike Amesbury being suspended by the Labour party that is one less member who could explain what a "working person" is!
Posted by Michael Epstein on 27 October 2024
Editor,

I cannot understand why that APPG is not better supported by MP's.

It may come as no surprise to the contributors of this worthy site that I have been a life long Tory, except at the last election.

I lent my vote to Labour in the belief they would honour there manifesto and promises given by our Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer.

We are in the very early days of this Government and they have tough decisions to make, but Fleecehold - Leasehold abolition appears not to be on the agenda and yet it is only 115 days since the general election results!!!
Posted by Stephen on 27 October 2024
Several factors involved here.
The previous APPG which had 183 members were becoming less effective as some were becoming disenchanted with their leadership especially after the Christophe Pincher affair. Some simply could not be bothered anymore as they were set to leave Parliament.
Never in the history of parliamentary elections has there ever been such an influx of new members, who are largely totally inexperienced and whose political opinions have been formed by what they were taught by a philosophy lecturer and not from life experiences.
At the start of any parliament it is akin to a "freshers" week at university. New MP's are touted to join various APPG's of which leasehold reform is but one.
Having the co-chair of the Leasehold APPG being involved in such a violent incident that thus far has seen the whip withdrawn from him and suspension from the Labour party is a serious blow to the future of the APPG.
It now emerges that Mike Amesbury is a personal friend of deputy prime minister and housing minister Angela Raynor as well as having served as her Personal Private Secretary.
Once again leaseholders have been shafted!
Posted by The Editor on 28 October 2024
Hi Stephen

I am 80 , and like you have voted Conservative all my life. However, I like someone else that I know who did the same,, decided to vote Reform. I am hoping now that there will be number of Bi-Elections as Farage has already taken one seat off them. I think he will help Leaseholders.
Posted by RUTH on 28 October 2024
Over the years I have become disenchanted with all the main stream political parties who appear to have been led by focus groups rather than conviction and who promise the world and can't even deliver the Isle of Wight!
The whole country needs reforming!
Posted by Michael Epstein on 28 October 2024
Michael E,

I have an email thread re the racist, misogynistic abuse I received from LKP.
Boyd accused me of “ Harassment “ when I responded to O’Kelly via his email address which contained the vile abuse, Boyd accused me of ‘ Harassment ‘ for contacting O’Kelly via his private email even though SOK sent me the vile abuse from his private email address. I am at a loss as to how LKP has charitable status, and I am certainly at a loss that Boyd still has his little tootsies under desk at LEASE.
Posted by Kim on 28 October 2024
Hi Ruth,

Farage, Starmer, et al ,are not going “ Help Leaseholders “. Only leaseholders can help leaseholders and they can do this by taking to the streets in their millions … Leasehold would be abolished within 48 hrs! Why can’t the English and Welsh be more like the French 🇫🇷 regarding protest.We need a leaseholders revolution without the beheadings!
Posted by Kim on 28 October 2024
Hi Kim
Trouble is so many of us Leaseholders have had our Three Score years and Ten plus more. We don’t have the energy or ability to take to the streets and I am sure that the government is well aware of that. Unfortunately those who you mention are only interested in making money instead of taking to the streets
and they are not a nice bunch from what you tell us about the abusive behaviour they inflicted on you and The Editor of this site Lets hope Harry Scoffin will get things moving.


Posted by RUTH on 28 October 2024
Hi Kim
Since writing last post Harry Scoffin is asking us to write to our Labour MP’sTo complain about their decision to put off action against leasehold for more than 5 years, and to tell them that we need action NOW! They are not honouring their Kings speech commitment to move quickly.
Posted by RUTH on 28 October 2024
Ruth,

If the Government fail to deliver on the abolition of Leasehold - Fleecehold within the first term of this Parliament I will not vote Labour again.

Like you, I will likely vote Reform in future elections in the event Labour fail to deliver on manifesto promises and the Prime Ministers word.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 28 October 2024
Hi Stephen

I read an article just after the last election where Farage did say that he wanted to deal with Leasehold. So there is some hope . It is quite early days yet for him, and i imagine he will, want to get things right before he starts anything.
Posted by RUTH on 29 October 2024
The Trouble With Trowbridge!
Trowbridge is a picturesque Wiltshire town situated on the edge of the Somerset borders. Originally mentioned in the Domesday book and then called Strabury it is believed the name Trowbridge takes its rise from "A tree by a bridge"
In the beginning only 24 families lived there paying a fee of £8 per year for the rights to live and work the local land.
Over the years the town expanded with several new housing developments being built including the Wain Homes Southview Park containing 210 properties.
As is usual as soon as they could Wain Homes immediately began the process of selling off the freehold of the communal areas and appointed Blenheim Estates to manage the communal areas. Though things were not good, compared to other property management companies they were not a disaster, until that fateful day when Blenheim's were bought out by Firstport.
Service deteriorated and maintenance charges escalated. Whereas direct debits were not charged for by Blenheim's of course Firstport added their £24 charges.
Residents are not unnaturally furious and have made their feelings known in no uncertain terms to all who will listen.
One thing is for sure though, all the residents want Firstport gone!
In response Firstport claim they try to "offer value for money"
Posted by The Editor on 25 October 2024
Editor,

I would like Firstport to justify that £24.00 charge simply so there bought asset can pay that largely disputed fee?

Firstport "claim they try to offer value for money" For who, themselves or their captive asset?
Posted by Stephen Burns on 25 October 2024
Firstport will claim the fee is to offset extra administration charges associated with monitoring a direct debit.
Most managing agents are pleased to offer free direct debits as it means that there is likelihood of a leaseholder building up arrears thereby lessening the effort needed to chase arrears.
That said, one question Firstport have refused to answer is if they hold a Direct Debit Originators Licence in their own name or if they collect direct debits through a third party?
Previous Firstport direct debits through a third party were ruled to be unlawful.
Suppose a service charge was £6,000 per year. this was covered by a monthly direct debit of £120. Residents had assumed that the £120 was being paid directly to Firstport. Instead what was really occurring was that the third party were passing £3,000 every six months to Firstport whilst the direct debit was being paid to the third party who treated the direct debit payments for the service charge as a £6,000 loan. If a direct debit payment was missed penalty interest rates were imposed followed by ruthless debt collection methods. That residents had no idea that they had taken out a loan is what was shown to be as unlawful.
Another potential Firstport "sleight of hand" is this:
So we have the £6,000 annual service charge demand which is due to be paid on a 6 monthly basis of £3,000. All pretty standard. A direct debit is set up of £120 per month. Remember these payments are in advance so at the 6 month mark the £3,000 figure has been achieved and can be passed over to the development service charge account in due time.
But to comply with the terms of the lease the £3,000 only has to be paid in every 6 months.
So what happens to the £120 per month previous payments?
Month 1 you pay £120. Month 2 you pay £120. Month 3 you pay £120, Month 4 you pay in £120, Month 5 you pay in £120. Month 6 you pay in £120.
Month 6 Firstport pay £3,000 into the development service charge account as per the terms of the lease.
That means Firstport have access to 5 months interest free funding which would never show up on development accounts.
Never use a direct debit to pay Firstport service charges!
Posted by The Editor on 26 October 2024
I would endorse The Editor's final sentence above that leaseholders should never use a direct debit to pay FP service charges.

Leaseholders in my development who paid service charges by Direct Debit found that FP had removed money from their bank accounts without notification or the account holders' permission. Leaseholders did not even know why the money had been removed as they were up to date with their service charges.

At a meeting with FP's Regional Director in July, he stated that this was due to a technical 'glitch' (without actually explaining what that was, or whether it had been addressed to stop it from happening again). He also confirmed that it was more expensive for leaseholders to pay by Direct Debit, than by other methods, due to the admin charges mentioned above by The Editor that were added to the original costs. At this point most leaseholders started to cancel their direct debits with FP!
Posted by GWJ on 26 October 2024
Dear Mr Editor,

What Firstport does is bad enough , but WESTBURY RESIDENTIAL LTD ( before it was sacked) invoiced me and my fellow shareholders for the interest accrued on our service charge payments. In addition , WESTBURY RESIDENTIAL LTD invoiced £950 for online - bill payments. I could not find this sum as ‘ Expenditure’ in the 2023 accounts…Wots goin on? I have reported this matter to,the RICS ….
Posted by Kim on 26 October 2024
Mr Editor
When we were getting rid of FP for the second time, when Freemont let us down, you warned us about the addition of an admin charge to the service charge which we were not told about by FP As we are a block of 54 flats we would have been paying an extra £5,184.We all cancelled our Direct Debits when the request arrived.
My bank wanted to know what was going on as so many of us had called in? I was told to contact them if there was a problem so they could block things. .Going RTM has changed everything . We are told about every penny that is to be spent before it happens. Why do more blocks not go RTM and reduce FP from having so much work to do, and also make you happy at the same time!!
Posted by RUTH on 26 October 2024
There are a plethora of reasons why some blocks cannot exercise their right to manage, fear of the process being the prime reason.
Of course everyone who can dismiss Firstport should dismiss them. Why should residents who have worked hard all their lives be cheated out of their own money purely to fund a company with a voracious appetite to generate the maximum revenues possible to finance their debts? As the editor of this site it does please me when residents have rid themselves of the scourge of Firstport and find they can spend money on themselves rather than Firstport!
Posted by The Editor on 26 October 2024
Let's Help Bob?
The Bob I refer to is Bob Smytherman the former Mayor of Worthing and currently the Worthing Town Crier. For many years he has been an unsung hero of the fight for justice for hard pressed leaseholders. He is also deeply involved in the excellent Federation of Private Residents Association (FPRA). I also declare an interest in that for many years I have been a close friend of Bob, that friendship being forged out of charity work and only later finding we were united by our campaigning work.
So when Bob asks for help on the Leasehold Advice website , of course I am going to help. Typical of the man Bob is, when he asks for help it is not for himself but on behalf of another.
So the help needed is for a gentleman called Dan. All credit to Dan, whilst at school instead of playing truant or not paying attention in class as is the wont of many a pupil, Dan studied very hard and was very successful. Indeed after leaving school and higher education he achieved the goal he had set for himself when he landed his dream job as a journalist at the BBC.
Now Dan needs help. He wants to make a documentary about the failings of Firstport as managing agents. He wants any stories concerning Firstport to be emailed to him at dan.colbourne@bbc.com
Let's get emailing!
Posted by Michael Epstein on 23 October 2024
Michael E,

If Dan decides to include any of the ex PEVEREL ( Firstport) mob then I’m his gal! It could be be a tale of how all flotsum and jetsam from PEVEREL lead to Firsport and LKP accredited MA’s who shamefully get appointed by Tribunal under S24….

Dan could be the one to expose the incestuous cesspit carousel of Firsport/ PEVEREL . Ex employees.See how I used those C’s. Clever, huh …
Posted by Kim on 23 October 2024
Dear Michael E
Great news from you today,and I am sure there will be a good response. However I want to thank you for the tireless amount of effort you put in yourself to help the residents still under the rule of FP. and Leaseholders You don't get the praise you deserve, and I know you don't look for it, but some comments recently must have been quite hurtful to you.
A VERY BIG THANK YOU for everything you do for us!
Posted by RUTH on 23 October 2024
Done. I think he will receive more than enough material!
Posted by Chris on 23 October 2024
The Development Manager Socialises With A Resident Outside There Working Hours.
Editor,

Our development manager frequently socialises with a resident outside there normal working hours. It is reported that they are dancing partners.

What is the guidance or advice regarding that conduct, I understand that some MA agents would take a dim view of this?
Posted by Posted on 19 October 2024
Hi posted,

Does the ‘ Development manager” have any clout? EG.can he/she do any “ favours” for residents?

Posted by Kim on 20 October 2024
Kim,

I'm not sure how to answer your question, but can confirm that the DM frequently locks the office door when in the company of those of the opposite sex.

Residents have complained that they have knocked on the DM's office door and received no answer, but suspected there were persons in the office.

Posted by Posted on 20 October 2024
To ON, I was told by a resident that something similar was happening at a block on The Isle of Thanet on the Kent coast some time ago I remember it was posted on here at the time by a concerned resident as the resident in question was a vulnerable person, not sure if this is the same?
Posted by trust on 21 October 2024
Posted,
Please respect the privacy of a DM who may wish to do to a member of the opposite sex what their employer has been doing to their residents for many years!
Posted by Michael Epstein on 21 October 2024
Hi Posted,

The DM’s conduct is unacceptable.
Locking his office door in company of females is predatory. Do you evidence of this? Has any tenant approached the DM / females re this matter?
Posted by Kim on 21 October 2024
At the development just round the corner from us the DM married a resident, the resident sold his flat and moved in with the DM. Although retired, the new husband was then employed as the cleaner. FirstPort did nothing.
Posted by Ralf on 21 October 2024
What exactly is the role of a development manager? Is it just for medical emergencies?
Posted by Curious? on 21 October 2024
Hi Kim,

The current DM is Married but not to their dancing partner.

A number of residents have heard the DM's office door lock being turned as they approached it, or heard part conversations between a male and female then a sudden unexplained silence?

Posted by Posted on 21 October 2024
Curious,

Under the provisions of our Lease the DM has no responsibility for the welfare of the residents, including medical emergencys.

The primary role, in a nutshell, is to carry out the instructions of their employer inline with the terms or covenents contained within the lease.

Other contributors will no doubt explain in detail how leaseholders are systematicaally exploited by various tried and tested methods some of which are similar to those used by "child grooming gangs"

I have first hand and documented experiences gained over severall years of MA and there DM's using fear, intimidation, bullying, harassment, manipulation and lying to Leaseholders to achieve their objective, and not doubt many others also do.
Posted by Stephen Burns on 21 October 2024
I am aware of a case that does not involve Firstport for a change where the RMC is in breach of their articles of association regarding the election of directors. The offer to call a meeting to elect directors in order to repair that breach which would have only taken a couple of minutes was declined.
The genesis of the desire to repair the breach were forthcoming decorations. As it transpired residents were asked to find £4,600 within 8 weeks to pay for internal and external decorations and tenders for the decorations that were valid for 30 days had been obtained by the MA 8 months before the section 20 notice was issued. the issue for the tribunal is that a) a service charge demand could not be issued by a company in breach of their articles and b) the section 20 notice is invalid.
Posted by Michael Epstein on 23 October 2024
Michael,

That seems like a "Slam dunk" to me?
Posted by Stephen Burns on 23 October 2024
Usual Poor Service For FP
Posted on 19 October 2024
Defamation Action Collapses!
Posted on 18 October 2024
Development ManagerOffice
Posted on 18 October 2024
Great Groups
Posted on 12 October 2024
Verbal Abuse Of DM
Posted on 11 October 2024
APPG Back, But Not In Full Swing!
Posted on 09 October 2024
Kim Westbury Victory
Posted on 08 October 2024
Westbury, Urang, gone, gone gone!
Posted on 07 October 2024
Crest Fallen Nicholson!
Posted on 06 October 2024
When is an Accrual not an Accrual?
Posted on 05 October 2024
Leasehold Advisory Service
Posted on 03 October 2024
Another Firstport Trick!
Posted on 30 September 2024
Lease ,a Dream or a Prediction?
Posted on 29 September 2024
Auditing of Service Charge Accounts
Posted on 26 September 2024
Firstport Off To A Flyer!
Posted on 23 September 2024
Time to Say Goodbye!
Posted on 22 September 2024
Full time Resident Manager
Posted on 22 September 2024
The Warden/Alarm Call Conundrum!
Posted on 22 September 2024
A Few Days Of Self Maintenance!
Posted on 08 September 2024
The Digital Trap!
Posted on 08 September 2024
Fancy A Job With Firstport?
Posted on 06 September 2024
Unserviced Car Park
Posted on 02 September 2024
There have been some 16143 posts and replies on this page. To view older ones search here.
Written by


Containing


This only searches posts, not replies.

Click for Map
sitemap | cookie policy | privacy policy | accessibility statement