Re: Your letter dated 16th of September 2022, received Friday 23rd of September 2022.As requested in your letter, please note that the full amount of the charges levied are disputed.For your immediate information, the brief but not all of the yet to be confirmed grounds of the dispute are:- The extent of the works are exaggerated. Only routine maintenance work is required. The amounts quoted for the work are excessively above normal contracting rates. The roofing contractor to be engaged, has not been notified to us. The sub-contracting of the surveyor at a market excessive rate, was not notified, or opportunity to object or recommend given. The surveyor engaged is an associate or approved PMMS surveyor. No proper account of suggested alternative roofing contractors was considered again, only associate or approved contractors.PMMS have no authority to act, as the appointment of PMMS as managing agents was executed unilaterally by a single, unelected person without notification or negotiation. Service charges paid to PMMS since March 2019 have been collected, outside of Section 20 legislation and should be returned to the flat freeholders.The simple routine maintenance work required, has been offered to be completed free of charge to all residents and freeholders, paid for by myselfThe surveying cost of "drone survey" and the associated surveying recommendation of complete renewal, when no failure (from the subsequent report by Ashley Consultants UK Ltd.) was confirmed (only routine maintenance noted) was unnecessary against the background that two visual inspections (far superior and cost free), had already been made. The total cost of the surveyor and PMMS fee is some £10,000. Please note: It is still yet hoped that PMMS will act correctly, avoiding unnecessary expense, and the delaying of simple routine maintenance work which can be arranged and completed in a few days. Also unnecessary legal action, distress and the legal damage to the status of the 9 properties within the block, by Tribunal registered dispute compromising the values and saleability of those properties. PMMS will know that solicitors acting on sale pre contract enquiries on behalf of any future purchasers of any of the flats that may come up for sale, will not recommend purchasers continue with the purchase of any properties, where there have been maintenance disputes leading to tribunal, with management companies. To that extent, the intransigence in negotiation by PMMS is damaging the entire future of the block. It is further contended, but not confirmed, that PMMS are advising the now in place directors not to communicate with freeholders. If correct, the efficacy of those directors following that instruction, could be in breach of company law. Once again, I appeal to Mr & Mrs Lee to act correctly in this matter. By doing so, the future of Westleigh Court as a residential block will be better secured, and the good business name of PMMS better preserved.Thanking you.Yours Faithfully,Thank you for your reply Derek, some 3 years + on.You did manage the block in 2022, Derek, and we did end up paying over £10,000, just in commission, for the roofing repair, as you know. As I said and offered at the time, I could have done the work for £300, but you stopped me. Preferring instead to have us pay some £120,000 for completely unnecessary work.
Claim your business profile now and gain access to all features and respond to customer reviews.
PMMS is a managing agent specialising in residential block management for London and the surrounding counties.
We look after internal & external communal areas of blocks of flats and estates of houses.
We collect service charge monies, manage and pay contractors, file company accounts and much more.