Freemont, the property management company set up by the old Peverel Politburo in 2014 after the Cirrus / Office of Fair Trading bid-rigging scandal, has been bought back into the fold by FirstPort (as Peverel is now named). It has bought the company.
So it is Coo-ee! Welcome home! to the likes of Nigel Bannister, former CEO of Peverel, Keith Edgar, former head of Peverel Retirement, Kevin Barr, Phil Cummings and David Edwards.
While Nigel Bannister was in charge of Peverel its Cirrus electronic door entry firm was systematically cheating retirement leaseholders with a bogus bidding scam against stooge companies who always overbid.
At least £1.4 million was involved,
Bannister was quoted in The Times in November 2009:
“People are reading a conspiracy into a problem that isn’t there. We use Cirrus because it is an excellent service.”
Nigel Bannister, The Times November 2009
Peverel cheated pensioners in £1.4 million tenders at 65 sites, says OFT – Better Retirement Housing
now ALL sites should exercise right to manage and be rid of them … ‘the system is rotten’ to have allowed Peverel / Cirrus to get off, says Bottomley UPDATE: Guardian reports OFT / Peverel / Cirrus scandal UPDATE: BBC reports Peverel / Cirrus price-fixing scandal The Peverel / Cirrus price-fixing scandal was finally confirmed by the Office of Fair Trading today, which found that retirement leaseholders had been cheated in tenders worth £1.4 million.
Two weeks later Peverel was fessing up to the Office of Fair Trading with its investigation, which involved the examination of 65 dodgy tenders.
Because the cheating only involved the elderly, and quite a few of them were dead, the OFT investigation was half-hearted, feeble and protracted, it might be alleged.
More specifically, the OFT accepted the fiction that these scams were “first brought to the OFT’s attention in December 2009” by Peverel, both it and Cirrus benefited from “immunity from financial penalties”.
LKP and BetterRetirementHousing.com reported the issue to the OFT and the Serious Fraud Office, and held a meeting in the House of Commons where these scams were discussed.
Sir Ed Davey MP, then the Energy Secretary in the Coalition government, and Sir Peter Bottomley have expressed their disgust that the OFT were suckered into a leniency deal with Peverel.
“This is a complete scandal,” said Sir Peter Bottomley in December 2013, when the OFT finally reported. “Other investigators passed the problem to the OFT and Cirrus knew they were in trouble.
“It is odd that by far the greatest offender gets off. The systems are rotten if they allow this.”
Nigel Howell, chief executive of FirstPort, welcomed the new purchase:
“I am delighted to welcome Freemont’s customers, colleagues and clients to the FirstPort group. We have been impressed by Freemont and their approach to excellent customer service for both retirement communities and resident managed developments.
“As an experienced and trusted residential service provider to over 1,000 resident management companies and more than 1,300 retirement developments, FirstPort shares Freemont’s commitment to keeping customers at the heart of what we do. I am looking forward to working with the Freemont team to share our learnings and continue to build on their great work together.”
FirstPort’s biggest customer remains the Tchenguiz Family Trust – which used to own Peverel until the 2011 when it was pitched into administration by the arrest of owner Vincent Tchenguiz and his brother Robert by the Serious Fraud Office (wrongly, as it happened).
Its freeholds are administered by its Estates and Management company.
When retirement leaseholders get restless with FirstPort as an “experienced and trusted residential service provider”, Estates and Management usually offers up Freemont as one of the substitutes.
Not much point of that now, however.
Related posts:
Ex-Peverel politburo set up Freemont Property Management
Pensioners ‘turn to old Peverel politburo at Freemont Property Managers for right to manage’
Cooee! Peverel becomes FirstPort and heading for ARMA-Q … But will it be welcome?
A gift from Tchenguiz is one to decline
FirstPort Retirement is allowed into ARMA
FoPRA dumps Roger Southam as ‘esteemed honorary consultant’. Calls for chair Bob Smytherman to stand down
How come the papers were aware of Peverel/Firstport cheating early in 2009 and Ken Kilminster sent an email (copy available) on 16/12/2009 to the SFO who kept it in their system until 2010,
Then sent it to the OFT, yet Peverel claimed Whistle-Blowers Status, claiming no one had complained.
Chas you are correct and there was a lot more detail never published at the time
1) The point about self-reporting was very strongly disputed by Ed Davey MP when Sir Peter and I met the OFT with the SFO “observing” after the decision had been reached. That meeting followed a very robust conversation with the OFT in Ed Davey’s office when he was first told about the decision
2) Not only had Ken and the others raised issues with the OFT long before Peverl self-reported so had Ed Davey. The issue had also been covered in the national press.
3) What we were told by the OFT was that Peverel was deemed to have self-reported before the OFT formally started the case so that meant they could claim whistleblower status. i.e they seem to have seen the issue in the national press and got to the OFT. Somehow the case did not formally start until some time after the OFT had looked to see if there might be a case.
4) This self-reporting rule only applies IF if the self reporter is NOT a dominant provider in the market in something called a Chapter I investigation
5) The .MPs asked the OFT how on earth they could claim this rule applied in the Peveral case when they were the dominant provider to their own sites in what should have been a Chapter II case where self-reporting is not allowed. If I remember correctly the OFT argued they had looked at things within the wider door entry market rather than just retirement homes even though this cartel only related to retirement homes owned by the Peverel group of companies.
6) It was not a very happy meeting with both Sir Peter and Ed Davey criticizing the OFT who assured their decision would make it easy for retirement homes to take matters to court. The MPs made clear they felt the leasehold sector was in a mess. A few months later the CMA announced their wider investigation into property management
7) Throughout the investigation nobody, except Peverel, had any idea the OFT were always planning to allow Peverel to claim whistleblower status and therefore avoid any prosecution.
8) The only people threatened with criminal prosecution were the pensioners (or family members) who reported the case to the OFT. They were all warned that if they disclosed details of the case to third parties or the press they could face a criminal prosecution from the OFT
9) Despite trying to help a number of retirement sites as far as I know not one took the matter to court to recover money
10) Eventually FirstPort offered a “goodwill” payment to some of the sites Peverel offered a nonsense story that nobody was overcharged the cartel was just about getting a better market share
11) When asked about the role of senior management in the case we were told the senior staff were no longer working for the group……..
Martin thank you for the comments.
If I am correct, can you please, if you are aware how long did the SFO have the email from Ken before they passed it on?
The date of the email was the 16th of December and if knowledge of these Government QUANGOS is known it would have been laid in trays for periods of time as it was 9 days before Christmas?
I read the OFT report 3 times and believe it was a fabrication of facts as we at ABC were Price Fixed and not included in the numbers of developments Peverel/Firstport mentioned.
Is there more you can say off-site my email is available to you?
We have received many comments on AF and are in touch with Firstport Escapies who are very upset, can we post on this platform and widen the comments?
I know it is too late to now but Peverel lied, and they had to have help from either the SFO or the OFT?
Can we please have access to this platform to express our views regarding Firtsport Retirement along with Leaseholders and Freeholders such as those in North Brent in London who have been systematically cheated over a 21 period?
Chas,
1) See 3 above. Peverel were deemed to have self-reported before the formal investigation started but that was after Ken and others had reported and it was apparently also after Ed Davey had reported the issue..
2) At the time Ed reported the matter he was an MP but he became a Minister as the Department that oversees the OFT in May 2010
3) I remember conversations with the OFT that there were concerns that some sites had been excluded from the investigation
4) As you say it is an issue that happened nearly 10 years ago. We will ask FirsPort to comment. In my view, those who were in charge at the time must either have been incompetent not to be aware of a 4 year-long nationwide cartel being run by their staff or worse. As you know others have suggested senior management were aware.
4) The issue of door entry systems is ongoing. As you know we took our Interphone issue to the Tribunal in 2011 and won. The property manager was unwise enough to admit they did not look for alternative suppliers or review the tender or question the prices.
Martin 3) Above
Ashbrook Court was one of those I believe, not included, (we were Price Fixed) a bolt of lightning took out the so-called Obsolete WCS.
The Area Manager claimed from the Insurance for the Obsolete System and the insurance company paid £20k into our Contingency Fund.
We were without the WCS for 9 months from June 2007 to April 2008 as it was only an Emergency.
Cirrus Communications who won the tender used the another tenderer Jackson to undertake the replacement, pretending to be Cirrus Communications, who provided Tabards with the Cirrus name on the back.
The reason we found this out, was some valuables went missing during the 2 weeks contract, the police contacted Cirrus who explained they did not replace the WCS but has subcontracted the work to Jacksons, this can be confirmed.
Further to Chamberlayne Walk Estate, which is also managed by Firstport Property Service ltd and Seb thought it was of interest LKP.
Chamberlayne Walk Estate in North Brent managed now by Firstport, has 104 flats some 1 bed and some 2 bed, and 98 Freehold Houses. The S20 used to undertake redecorations in 2106 for the flats failed to follow Firstports Tendering Procedures.
The average cost of the redecoration for the 104 flats was c.£1,200.
Six, One Bedroom Flats ( the smaller flats) cost c.£13,000 to re-decorate, £2,165 each, the Property Manager refuses to provide an explanation and has sent documents regarding the Tender Form and emails.
On examining the documents sent (some missing) they are very suspicious as the Tender Form is quite specific in what has to be completed, which only a third of the questions asked were filled in. Other tenders seen for the same contract had been completed in full.
An email from Firstport to the contractor showed a Net Breakdown of Costs which should have been the other way round, sent by the contractor to Firstport?
The contractor has since been liquidated and another contractor with the same Director has been used by Firstport even though 3 other companies had also been liquidated yet are still a preferred contractor.
The contract also allowed for Estate Costs within the tender which included the painting of Car Parking Bays for the 104 flats which were never painted. The Property Manager at the time (third now since 2016) paid all the contract sums without checking the works had been completed.
To date, Firstport has refused to refund money wrongly charged and used another contractor with the same director to repaint the Car Park Parking Spaces.
The Property Manager has also taken £1,200 provided as a Credit Note that was paid to the leaseholders as a Goodwell Gesture from the Contingency Fund, to pay the other contractor with a similar name and common directors to repaint the Parking Bays?
Three Property Managers who have been involved in the contract still since 2016 and still work for Firstport, after 3 years of correspondence, it seems there has been a major cover-up.
Also, Firstport has admitted wrongly charging Management Fees to 98 Freeholders since 2006 and it is believed wrongly charged the 104 Leaseholders as well?
The amount believed overcharged by Firstport since 2000 to both leaseholders and freeholders is considerable and into hundreds of thousands of pounds, for Leaseholders and Freeholders
The Brent North MP, Mr Barry Gardiner has been working tirelessly on behalf of the Chamberlayne Rd residents but is getting very little response from Firstports, CEO.
Firstport has wrongly charged Management Fees before, recently a resident in a nearby development realised that according to the terms allowable within their Lease Management Fee was to be 10% of expenditure?
Firstport had been overcharging since 2004 in clear breach of the lease and after first arguing that the lease did not apply to Management, Fees have now agreed to refund £31,192,59, which is a lot less than Leaseholders Calculated.
The full story is available and each week further investigations are being undertaken now by the leaseholders and freeholders combined.
I have not mentioned the director in question, was trading under several different company names, three companies being liquidated,
Part of the liquidator’s statement makes mention of concerns over the conduct of a single director. The liquidator stated for both companies: “I identified matters that justified further investigation.”.
Two companies are in liquidation and the liquidator has received major claims from HMRC.
Contractor 1 – £1.403,998
Contractor 2 – £635,130.
What is of concern to Leaseholders is how had Firstport undertaken Due Diligence, before making each of the company’s one of their Approved Contractors.
Another company was raised from the ashes, with a similar name, with the same director and has recently undertaken the repainting of the Car Parking Bays at Chamberlayne Walk.
These were the 104 Car Parking Bays that were paid for. as part of the redecoration of Chamberlayne Walk Estate for the Leasehold Flats, and not painted. during the contract, in 2016/17 but the Property Manager paid out all the contract sum without checking they were painted.
Martin, I believe the same thing may be happening to Private Estates such as Chambelayne Walk Estate in North Brent London, built in 2000 and now managed by Firstport Property Services Ltd which were originally OM Property part of the Peverel Group?
Short History of Peverel Retirement
August 29, 2009, Jeremy Charles – The Times Newspaper headlined:
How Leaseholders can fight back regarding (Peverel Retirement)?
November 07, 2009, Jeremy Charles – The Timers Headlined:
Retirement Homes Landlords/Managing Agents accused of profiteering (Peverel Retirement).
Managing agents and landlords are being accused by campaigners for the elderly of ripping off pensioners living in retirement blocks by imposing hefty charges and anti-competitive practices.
Times Money looks at the latest claims by residents campaigning for a fairer deal for older leaseholders and offers advice on how to tackle problems in your block.
Retirement home landlords are accused of profiteering
Pensioners are fighting back and lobbying Parliament with concerns over excessive charges
December 04, 2009, Jeremy Charles – The Times Headlined
Retirement Homes leasehold tenants angry over sneaky charges (Peverel Retirement)
We investigate fresh claims of unfair and exploitative business practices by Peverel.
Elderly leaseholders are squaring up to Peverel, the notorious managing agent of retirement flats, over new accusations that vulnerable residents are being overcharged by the company.
December 16 2009 email to the SFO regarding Price-Fixing from – Ken Kilminster which forced Peverel to own up to Price Fixing.
104 Flats have been plundered by Firstport over the past 20 years, mostly after 2006/07 after being purchased by Tchenguiz?
Martin,
5) MPs asked the OFT how on earth they could claim this rule applied in the Peverel case, they were the dominant provider, and the others Peverel Technology was I believe the Senior Administration Source mentioned in the OFT Report,
PeverelRetirement was the trading name for Peverel Management Services Ltd (PMSL) who was the dominant provider?
Cirrus Communication Service Ltd (CCSL) was a subsidiary of Peverel and the 3 others involved were Sub-Contractors who undertook the contracts.
I believe the Sub-Contractors acted as such and even carried out the contracts and paid 2.5% as a Sub-Contractor to the main contractor, Peverel Management Services Ltd?
Chapter II where self-reporting is not allowed was I believe introduced to allow Peverel to Whistle Blow outsid the scope of intention within the OFT Rules.
Peverel was so large a company the repercussions would be so damaging and was a Political Move, claiming they had looked at things within the wider door entry market rather than just retirement homes.
As you say the Cartel only related to Retirement Homes once owned by McCarthy and Stone, I believe, that is why they later removed Peverel from their developments?
Nigel Howell CEO of Firstport commenting on the Firstport take-over of Freemont said: “I am looking forward to working with the Freemont Team” who had previously worked for Peverel Group (now Firstport Lt) during the Price Fixing.
Nigel didn’t have much time with them as they all decided to jump before being pushed.
Kevin Barr, Philip Cummings, Nigel Bannister, and Keith Edgar have all resigned their directorships of Freemont, again so much for “Nothing will change” said Mr Howell.
The four worked for Peverel Retirement Before they became Firstport Retirement and left after the Price Fixing c.2011/12 and set up Freemont in 2014.
I feel really sorry for the leaseholders who with E&M help moved to RMC or RTM and then end up back with Firstport?
It reported the gang of four initially stayed on with Peverel in the expectation that Peverel could be bought out of administration cheaply in what is known as a pre-pack and be reunited with Vincent Tchenguiz, which failed to happen.
The good news for leaseholders is E&M and Firstport do not have a good relationship and if requested E&M would find another managing agent, though the best course of action is to undertake a Right to Manage.
When Peverel Group now Firstport Ltd and Firstport Property Services Ltd were placed into Administration in 2011 the Landlord Meridian Retirement Housing Housing Ltd was in the same Corporate Group, so VAT was exempt between Meridian and Peverel.
Nigel Howell Firstports CEO was, involved I believe with both companies as CEO until Meridian Housing transferred the property as our Landlord to Flatlaunch Ltd where all rent due was to be paid to Estates & Management who act as Management Agents on behalf of Flatlaunch Limited.
After Peverel Group was placed into Administration in 2011 the Management Fees were no longer VAT Exempt. In 2012 after Keith Edgar wrote to us saying nothing will change regarding Peverel being in Administration.
Then we were informed as Peverel had been sold to Chamonix & Electra they were no longer in the Corporate Group, so VAT @ 20% was now payable on the Management Fees.
So much for Nothing Will Change!
I thought that if push ever came to shove and my neighbours saw the wisdom of Right to Manage then Freemont was waiting in the wings. Wrong! But as my neighbours are now being led down the FirstPort road for a mix of reasons they’re here to stay. And I will pursue matters for good clean management at the development where I have lived for 20 years and remain the youngest leaseholder – occasionally reminded that I’m not an owner. But that’s OK because FirstPort then have the responsibility and need to act accordingly.