Leaseholders Saga: Standlake leaseholders versus Lewisham Homes

I am starting this thread in order to share the experience of leaseholders from Standlake Point while dealing with Lewisham Homes who is so called managing agent on behalf of Lewisham Council Housing or ALMO - Arm Length Manging organisation.

The story started in April this year when I visited a local TRA meeting and discovered that I was not alone in seeing poor services, poor managemen and charges for services that were not provided by Lewisham Homes in our block on our Estate.

I would also like this thread to be some source of information for leaseholders, based on real life situations, that can help when dealing with managing agents or give some insight of what is going on behind leaseholders curtains.

I am also calling for all Bampton leaseholders to come forward and get connected and also inviting all leaseholders, who have Lewisham Homes as thier managing agents, to participate actively here.
I have quite a bit of information, communications, etc. that I will be slowly publishing here as and when I have spare time from my work and household duties.

Jumping a little forward, I want to mention that Lewisham Homes are currently facing the risk of the leasehold tribunal from few Standlake leaseholders and LH offered to resolve the issues, with which we are prepared to seek resolution in the tribunal, amicably. We were invited to meet LH to have a talk on 4th December at 13pm in their office. As a part of the pre-tribunal stages we have to attend the meeting in order to comply with ‘requirements’ to do everything we can to resolve issues between each other. If we miss those stages, our case in the tribunal may not be successful.

None of us, the leaseholders, walked this path before, so all what is happing between us and LH in terms of problems and resolutions process is completely new experience to us that may help others like us.

OK, few leaseholders in our block have been questioning Lewisham Homes about their cleaning contract obligation compliance since April this year. That when it was all started.

Lewisham Homes took over from the council to manage our estate about 10 years ago. The service charges doubled from the moment they took over.The previous owner of my flat used to pay 600-700 pounds a year for service charges. After Lewisham Homes took over, it doubled and stayed no less than 1200 per year. And that excluding the majorworks bills.

Now, we never had cleaning problems in our block. Since Lewisham Homes took over, it slowly degraded. The worst years when it hit the rock bottom were years 2015, 2016, 2017. Because it was getting so bad, I requested a breakdown for our service charges 2015-2016. When I received them, Lewisham Homes stated 44 hours cleaning services per block per week (i will publish the documents a bit later) and the total amount caretaking charges were coming to around 17,000 per year per our block. The state of the building was awful and I started taking photos, I have over 500 photos of the evidence of the pigsty we were living (will publish them later as well). looking at the level of the caretaking and the statement of 44 hrs per week cleaning hours raised questions that 44 hrs cleaning per week is a full time caretaker per block which we were not getting, where the caretaking service was missing and why we were charged for something we did not receive.

Then I attended a local TRA meeting in April this year, I discovered that there were the same caretaking problems in other blocks. From that point, I was not prepared to let it go as in previous years and met another leaseholder from our block from whom I learnt that he had offered a twice cheaper option for the replacement of our main door entry system to Lewisham Homes at the time when Lewisham Homes had been planning to the replace it. But Lewisham Homes had ignored his offer which was much better than the one we have now. We, the leasehoders and council funds, ended up paying twice more for the door entry system which has basic functions, faulty from the start, with one year warranty. We were also charged for the repairs of the faulty new door entry system. The poor standards of services provided by Lewisham Homes, being charged by them for services we did not receive and the money waste Lewisham Homes showed triggered an investigation which is still ongoing.The local MP was notified of our troubles as well as councillor Susan Wise. Below is my letter to the Lewisham Homes home ownership department querying the actual service charges for the years 2016-2017.

"Good morning Victoria,

Ref. Service charges breakdown for x, Standlake Point, Se23-2XB.

I and other leaseholders in our block have examined the service charges breakdown provided by yourself and the breakdown raised the following questions which we require a comprehensive answer for please:

1. the breakdown submitted is missing the following sections:
   lifts - what £5223.36 were spent for, please provide jobs details
   entry phones - £772.61, what were spent for, please provide details
   electricity and communal lighting - £2891.20 – please provide details how much electricity was spent and what are the charges per unit
   pest control - £1002.00 – I believe John, another leaseholder from our block, questioned yourself and got a reply that £54 were spent to remove a dead pigeon by the caretaker – we are charged £40.17 per hour caretaking service and charged again £54 for cleaning the dead pigeon by the caretaker? It is a clear charging for the same service twice. The refund of £54 is due to the block leaseholders, please. £950 were spent for the pigeon proofing - can you please provide the details of what job exactly was done, where exactly was done so we can investigate the repair.
   communal window cleaning - £133, please provide jobs details (what windows, how many times, dates)
   bulk household waste removal - £3291.77, please provide details of jobs carried out, schedules, dates,/ days of the week, etc.
   sweeping (external area) - £1417.98 - please provide details what services were provided, what areas, dates, days, etc.
   ground maintenance- £3485.96, please provide details what jobs were carried out, when, etc.

Window repairs: job # 4445412 on 22/06/2016 – erect scaffold and renew window frame to bedroom of flat number 17 and the job # 4508107 on 25/01/2017 – measure up balcony door for renewal flat number 33. On what ground do you charge leaseholders for repairs carried out in other, not belonging to leaseholders flats, please? The lease (the tenth schedule, part one, the service charges, contribution formula, repairs and maintenance section) clearly states that leaseholders contribute to the repairs of their own leasehold properties and common parts only. Windows, as doors, as any other parts of each separate flat are not common parts, they are not shared areas. Refund due to leaseholders for the wrong billing, please.

Caretaking charges: Mr Kanareck confirmed the price Lewisham Homes charge per hour of caretaking - £40.17. Estimated charges for three blocks on our estate for years 2017-2018 are 53,023.86 pounds. You kindly provided the breakdown of the hourly costs of caretaking which are: equipment, supervision, uniforms, telephones, IT, transportation and associated running costs, wages for caretaker, supervisor and manager, cleaning materials, admin support, office accommodation. As you are probably aware, we obtained quotes from commercial cleaning companies for the same amount of services currently provided by Lewisham Homes, with one caretaker cleaning our three blocks only (more weekly hours per block) and providing service 52 weeks a year, not 44 weeks as currently provided by Lewisham Homes. The quotes came as 30 percent cheaper from both commercial companies. It raised further questions as to why Lewisham Homes, a not-for-profit organisation, charges so high prices that affect not only leaseholders, but council funds your company source the money from. Therefore please provide a comprehensive breakdown of how £53,023.86 pounds distributed between equipment, supervision, uniforms, telephones, IT, transportation and associated running costs, wages for caretaker, supervisor and manager, cleaning materials, admin support, office accommodation. Once the breakdown is provided by yourself, I will be requesting to see every single invoice, receipt, etc. that supports the breakdown of £53,023.86 for further assessments.

Kitchen sinks blockages:
job #4433137 on 06/05/2016 – jetters to clear blocked stack affecting kitchen flat 23
job # 4485545 on 4/11/2016 – clear stack affecting utilities to flat 35 causing blockages
job # 4485545 on 4/11/2016 – clear blocked stack affecting flat 35 sink
Can you provide details of where exactly all three blockages were, please?

This is not a comprehensive list of my enquiries/complaints. Further enquiries in respect to the service charges breakdown may follow.

I trust you will treat my enquiries seriously as they are a part of the investigation that has been carried out since April this year by leaseholders/residents due to the multiple Lewisham Homes failures in various areas of their contracted obligations.

I trust 30 days will be sufficient to prepare a comprehensive reply.

Yours sincerely,
Kat
Standlake Point"

Kat - I would hate to get on the wrong side of you!

This is amazing work that you’re doing on behalf of your neighbours and I hope they appreciate it.

I’m sure there must be one or two people in Lewisham Homes who must be crapping themselves right now; and rightly so because, on the face of your representations, they appear to have mismanaged the maintenance work and budget big time.

Anyway, here’s a little heads-up if you’re not already aware of it, which is the Lease Advisory Service https://www.lease-advice.org/ and these people are so, so helpful.

Good luck with it all you crazy (in a good way) person!

Hi John, thank you for your warm support All this work and challenges would not be possible without one man, the leaseholder as me from our block, who is very humble but very smart and experienced in dealing with all this council/ managing organisation battles. He is on this forum but very quiet and polite (different from me who is blunt and loud expressing thoughts without any diplomatic considerations). Both of us make all these challenges possible. I would never have dared to challenge Lewisham Homes on my own. So he is the unsung hero in a way.

Thank you for the link, I have very recently registered myself with them when enquiring about my lease extension.

Yes, there are. We came today from the meeting with one of Lewisham Homes operation managers and area manager for caretaking. The guy was so nervous that his body language was giving him out. However, those people are well trained and have a bunch of lawyers behind them. Us against them a is an unequal battle. As much I feel bad making people uncomfortable and scared (I know how it is like), this is the only way to find the truth and resolution. Unfortunately, being nice and trusting to what they say is a road that gives no chance to find a fair resolution as the most of the times sadly they treat you as if you are stupid.

I am hoping that this thread gives some insight and also the courage to leaseholders, some of them are new and inexperienced, to ask their managing agents questions, challenge them if they are unhappy. Some people buy a leasehold house, flat without proper realising what it is and how to deal with it because the price is attractive. Publishing the info here means the issues will not go unnoticed and if we have to use extreme measures, like press, we can refer to this site for the most of the info.

Reply to my request:

Dear xxxx,

Thank you for your email.

I duly note all the content of your email and I will be responding to all the issues raised as requested within the time scale you have provided.

Kindest regards

Victoria Akiwowo
Leasehold Services Officer

Ok, where the 53 thousands pounds for one catetaker cleaning the three estate blocks with avarage 10 hrs of cleaning per block to spend came from?

"Bampton Residents c/o Block Representative Standlake Point Windrush Lane SE23 2XB

Old Town Hall Catford Road SE6 4RU
0800 028 2 028 jon.kanareck@lewishamhomes.org.uk
23 June 2017

Dear Bampton Residents, General Enquiry – Charges for caretaking services on the Bampton Estate

Thank you for your letter, which I received on Friday 9 June. I’m grateful you’ve taken the time to tell me about your concerns. I understand them to be:

The calculation of the caretaking service charge for the three Bampton Estate high rise blocks – Radcot, Standlake and Newbridge Points

The standard of the caretaking service (internal cleaning) in these blocks

How we calculate the caretaking service charge
The cost of the caretaking service includes the caretaker’s salary, but we also factor in other costs, such as employments costs, the equipment and materials required to deliver the service, management and supervisory costs, and general administrative and support costs. These are all part of the overall cost of providing a caretaking service. Among these other costs are: Employer National Insurance and pension contributions, Agency and temporary staff we employ to reduce disruption when a staff member is absent, Equipment & chemicals – such as brooms, buckets, mops, and vehicles, Management and administrative overheads – for example the cost of managing the caretaking services and support costs such as Human Resources, Finance and other Corporate services. We identify the full cost of the service for each block and then apportion them according to the number of residents. So, on Bampton Estate, we provide an average of 10 hours per week caretaking for each of the blocks over the course of the year. As you rightly point out, the estimate for 2017/18 is £53,023.86 for all three blocks – or £17,674.62 for each block. We based the estimate on the audited actual service charges for 2015/2016. We then divided this by the number of units in the blocks to arrive at an estimated caretaking service charge of £441.87 for each leaseholder. The hourly rate is £40.17 – taking into account all the costs associated with providing the service. We only charge residents for 44 weeks out of the 52 weeks per year. This is to take account of staff absences during the year. I hope I’ve been able to clarify leaseholders’ contributions to the full cost of providing a caretaking service to the block and why it’s more than the cost of the caretaker’s time alone. I’m sorry if we haven’t made this as clear as we could have in the past.

Caretaking standards
We try to ensure good caretaking standards, but we aim for excellence. We do this by ensuring by managing our caretakers’ performance, listening to customers, and responding to their feedback. Supervisors inspect the quality of internal cleaning regularly so we can identify problems, put them right, and try to stop them recurring. The patch supervisor, Andrea Scott, last inspected the Bampton blocks in April and May 2017. On both occasions she found the cleaning to be good – but not excellent. We know management inspections are just snapshots, so we also rely on residents’ feedback to make a visible improvement in quality. For example, you and other residents pointed out some issues on 16 June. Andrea met you on site on 20 June for an estate walkabout. I understand you agreed that the service had recently improved. We’ve had similarly positive feedback from another residents. However, Andrea will monitor the area closely to ensure we build on the improvements we’ve made with your help and generally take care of the area. I understand she also picked up a number of communal repairs which she has reported. The team will continue to work with you to work towards an excellent estate environment, and we look forward to further feedback. The best way to share your views with the team is to email them at environmentalservices@lewishamhomes.org.uk or to phone on 0800 028 2 028. I hope I’ve addressed you concerns. I understand our Area Manager, Chidi Onyema, will be attending your TRA meeting on 29 June, and he’ll be grateful for another opportunity to discuss residents’ ideas and feedback.

Yours sincerely
Jon Kanareck Director of Operations"

20170623 Bampton Residents - Charges for caretaking services on the Bampton Estate (1).pdf (286.9 KB)

Their ACTUAL breakdown of the £40.17 per hour charge would be interesting.

That’s great! Thank you! I will write privately to the email. We would love to get connected with other leaseholders who have Lewisham Homes as their managing agent. From what I have seen so far, there are lots of questions about what they do and how they do it. More information we have, more chances that we can straighten things up.

More interesting is that Lewisham Homes appear to be offering money to residents of adjacent properties to the proposed development site?
There is no planning application, no consultation to tske place until the14th to see what residents think.

Is this a fore gone conclusion with a smokescreen to pacify residents when decisions have already been made?

More info to follow and perhaps any councillors would be interested to comment?

Lewisham Homes just hit Bampton leaseholders with £25,000 per leaseholder estimated bill for the major works coming. The amount is shocking but what more shocking is their prices… Sent right before Christmas, recieved today. Those people in Lewisham Homea have no heart, no consideration, nothing. People are getting ready for festive period, anticipate good time and holidays… I have no words, no respect for those Lewisham Homes workers.

Almost 1 million pounds per block for windows, roof, tiles and painting.

image13024×4032 3.02 MB

image23024×4032 3.12 MB

The estimated cost of work is £622k but they have added in a contingency of £280k or 45% of the estimate. And then added another 10% on top of the total for ‘management fees’. These extras make up 60% of the cost to leaseholders. Doesn’t really seem fair.

At the moment leaseholders are trying to get our heads around to understand or comprehend that… Only roofung costs are £98,000, the roof size is about 25x25 sq.m. ( about just over 75x75 sq. feet or so (corrected 23.12.2017))

This is absolutely disgusting -maybe you should request all of the quotes they obtained for each of these items to put pressure on them to justify that they made an effort to find the best value estimates possible? I highly doubt it though given its not their money they are spending, and they are in fact incentivised to obtain the highest estimates possible in order to up their management fee.

I can’t see why their management fee relates to the size of the quote - surely the cost of the works is irrelevant and it should be a fixed amount? As I am sure you have already have, carefully check your contract to see what it says about management fees for supervising construction works. If it says nothing, then surely you would have good grounds to dispute its size?

Thank you so much for the good point! I will certainly do that. We have managed to obtain the breakdown of the estimate from LH and also contacted 3 commercial companies for alternative quotes to establish what realistic figures are.

£98,000 for 75x75 feet roof is too much even for a lay person like me.

I will keep this thread regularly updated.

Without prejudice,

Dear Lianne, please accept this email as my comment response to the Section 20: Notice of Estimate, Major Works, Standlake Point, Bampton Estate, SE23-2XB, Phase S8-3S.

Firstly I would like to state that the amount of estimated costs for the major works is not acceptable and the estimated costs are unreasonable.

Taking into consideration the feedback of 5 leaseholders in our block that I am aware of, I, therefore, request that the notice consultation period is extended until the end of April 2018 (and longer if required) in order for the block leaseholders to be properly consulted with.

No works or decisions should be started or made until there is a satisfactory agreement with leaseholders reached in terms of the list of works, costs, period of payment and any other issues or concerns that leaseholders may have.

£902113.13 is an extortionate amount of money and therefore I am initiating the investigation into the proposed estimated spendings for the proposed major works.

As the initial part of this investigation, I would like Lewisham Homes to provide evidence for the following:

… The copy of the independent survey report on the list of works that may possibly be required in Standlake block during the planned major works that has been carried out before obtaining price estimates and costs.
… Evidence of the initial research for cost effective and value for money quotes from various suppliers/contractors in order to secure the best value for money contract.
… A list of dates (months and years) when the last repairs/works done in following areas:
asbestos survey and asbestos works
balconies
cladding
internal decorations
external decorations
internal doors works
external doors works
drainage
internal electrical works
external electrical works
internal flooring
integrated reception system
lightning conductors
masonry and render repairs
paving works
rainwater system
block roof
signage
windows

The Standlake Point leaseholders will be requiring a meeting with Lewisham Homes major works and home ownership representatives in due course in order to discuss all issues, concerns, problems and their resolutions once we complete the investigations of the proposed list of major works and their estimated costs.

I would also like to mention that I have no problem and I am prepared to seek legal help and fair decisions in tribunal should they be required if a mutual agreement between us, the leaseholders, and Lewisham Homes in respect to the proposed major works and their costs cannot be reached.

Please confirm the receipt of this electronic comment response to Section 20 Notice.

Kind regards,
Kat

It should also be considered that this figure of £900k+ applies to one block of three, so the major works are approaching £3M!

Given that nearly 45% is for management and contingency one has to question the capability of Lewisham Homes as a housing provider to manage this programme. Investigation of each line item is essential to reveal the extent of the miscalculationsl.

Got the breakdown of works

Decent Homes - S8-3S - Detailed Costs Breakdown.pdf (61.1 KB)

Two items in The Grauniad.

Whilst not identical circumstances to those involved here, the principle of persistent non-accountability dominates.

The reference to Scottish problems echo issues from the past when so-called “factors” operated there in almost identical ways and acted without accountability.

However it is my recall that legislation was introduced in Scotland to curtail their un-regulated behaviour.

It is inexplicable that the issues arise once more but lessons should be learned - with sufficient pressure governments can be forced to take action…

My comment response to the Section 20: Notice of Estimate, Major Works, Standlake Point, Bampton Estate, SE23-2XB, Phase S8-3S.
Part 2

From: Kat xxx Standlake Point, Windrush Lane, Forest Hill, SE23-2XB.

Dear Lianne,

Thank you for the breakdown in a better format. I did examine the works breakdown.

I have information that your department is planning a meeting with leaseholders on 24/01/2018. I appreciate that. I have the following requests as part of the consultation process with leaseholders:

1. After examination of the works breakdown, I believe the estimate received from you is not correct. There are works that I, as a leaseholder, should not be paying for. There are works that are not necessary to be carried out. There are quantities of materials and works that overestimated or do not belong to our block. Please see the end of this email**. Please provide answers to all my comments on that list**.

My request is please provide the correct and accurate major works estimate for the works that are actually, realistically needed and specific and correct to my flat and to me as a leaseholder.

2. Taking into consideration that the Council left the block unrepaired and not properly maintained for years, the block was built in 1964-65 - at least 30-40 years unrepair (despite the obligation to maintain in good and substantial repair and conditions - the ninth schedule referred to in Clause 6 of the lease), it would be fair for a long-term interest free payment plan, at least 25-30 years, to be offered to leaseholders and myself as being one of them. I bought the flat in xxx and have already been charged around £15000 that I am still trying to pay off and another huge amount on the top of that to come. Not only I have no money to cover such huge bill, I am also bearing the whole burden of the council’s failure to invest in building repairs for at least 30-40 years.

Consequently, I am asking for a long-term (25-30 years) interest-free payment plan.

3. XXX, leaseholder of flat X in our block will not be able to attend the meeting on 24th of January and requesting a separate meeting at a later date so he can present his consultation response and discuss his issues and concerns in respect to the proposed works and estimated bill.

As the meeting between leaseholders and Lewisham Homes regarding the major works and estimated costs has been arranged for 24th of January, I would like to have responses from yourself to both my emails - the first one and this one by the end on 20th January 2018 for me to be able to examine and prepare for the meeting on 24th.

21 working days given for the response to my first email is no longer acceptable due to the meeting arrangements being out of my control.

Please confirm the receipt of my electronic response to Section 20: Notice of Estimate, part 2

Kind regards,
Kat

**After examining the works breakdown costs, I have the following questions - please respond to every one of them:

1. report says: Spot 258, spot 969 – asbestos survey, total: £411.83
   my comment: there was asbestos survey carried out already on 12/06/2015, job #4341242 – why repeating the survey again and making leaseholders to pay twice ? Or no survey took place on 12/06/2015 but leaseholders were charged for??

2. report says: Spot 1036 - specialist subcontractors used to carrying out repairs to existing asphalt paving prior to Procol application, quantity: 55 items, £15,743.45
   my comment: we have 40 balconies in our block, where quantity 55 came from?

3. report says: spot 827 – building notice fees, quantity: 409,5 (unit price £1), total £409,50
   my comment: block has 40 flats, where 409,9 number came from??

4. report says: #307703 – cladding: remove existing and renew with cellular cored PVC shiplap boarding, quantity 9,9sm
   my comment: the block does not have cladding, it has external brickwork. Where is this 9,9sm cladding??

5. report says: spot 234,232, 233 – contingencies, total: 17, ranged from £500 per unit to £10,000 per unit; total: 33,45 units = £280,000
   my question: what are those 33,45 units that cost £280,000???

6. report says: #436203 – door frame: rub down, prepare, apply coat of primer, one undercoat, two coats of gloss paint on external surface of metal frames; total quantity: 63.6 lm
   my question: where are the metal door frames in quantity 63,6 lm?? All communal doors are wooden.

7. report says: 17.7.5 – floor covering: renew any size or type of noising to steps, quantity 110 nr, £1953.60
   my question: where exactly 110nr are?

8. report says: spot 348 – painting to masonry, quantity 1012 lm, £4,614.72
   my comment: is it external or internal, how did you come to this amount?

9. report says: #9.9.1 – prep&redec to external walls, flats: painting to masonry, total: 563sqm, £3124.65
   my question: the outside walls of the block are made of bricks, which is around 95% of the external walls, where 563sqm came from??

10. report says: #9.9.3 – prep&redec to external walls, flats: painting to timber surface, total: 114sqm, £1277.21
    my question: there is no timbers on external walls, where are the timber surface on the external walls in our block exactly??

11. report says: #9.9.5 – prep&redec to external walls, flats: wash down with detergent, total: 551,93 sqm, £1225,28
    my comment: why external surface needs to be washed with detergent??

12. report says: # 9.12.8 – prep&redec to fences and railings: open type:painting to metal fences 1-1.5m high, total: 1491m, £39720.24
    my question: we dont have 1491m of fence around our block, where this figure came from??

13. report says: #17.5.8, #17.5.2 – specialist treatment – apply anti-graffiti paint, total 1203.1 sqm, £16025.17
    my qestion: we dont have problem with graffiti in our block, never was an issue, no need for anti-grffiti paint, why on the list of works???

14. report says: #43551 – surfaces: apply anti-graffiti paint to vulnerable external surface of brickwork, concrete, timber, total: 1070sm, £9616.09
    my question: there is no problem with graffiti on external parts of the block, why on the list of works???

15. report says: #435501 – clean existing graffiti covered surface, apply high pressure hot water to remove all traces of remover, paint, debris, total: 1070sm, £12380.97
    my qestion: there is no graffity covered surface, where exactly 1070sm are covered with graffiti that you are prepared to spend £12380.97 for???

16. report says: #436205 – door: rub down, prepare for and apply one coat of primer, one undercoat and two coats of gloss pain on any size single metal door, quantity: 40.58 IT, cost: £2416.38
    my comment: we dont have metal doors exept the main entry door and caretaker door which are in good order, where 40.58 It came from??

17. report says: #135001 – meter cupboard: renew orfix new approved meter cupboard…complete with locking device…quantity: 4, cost: £261.30
    my comment: I have no problem with my meter cupboard, why am I charged for smbd’d cupboards?? Also, one of this 4 cupboards have different price from another 3. Why?

18. reports says: #070115 – shed door: renew any type of hasp, staple…or other equal and approved padlock to shed or bin doo, supply two keys…quantity:20, cost:£467.97
    my question: sheds are not in use, I dont use any shed why am I charged for the lock??

19. report says:# 070107 - shed door: renew shed or bin store door with any size softwood framed, ledged, braced door, quantity: 20, cost £3769.79
    my comment: sheds are not in use, I dont use any shed, why am I charged for it?

20. you report says: #324125 – door: overhaul external door and frame and fanlight complete, remove all ironmongery, piece out, make good, resecure beads, architraves, rehang door, ease, adjust, reglaze fanligh, quanity 1, cost £106.23
    my comment: it is recently changed door, nothing wrong with it, why you charged massive amount to replace the door and now you repairing it?

21. report says: 11.35.0 – repair of PVCu windows/doors: doors: ease, adjust, lubricate hinges, fittings, quantity; 25, cost: £555
    my comment: we dont have communal PVC doors, if they are doors to flats, why am I charged for somebody’s else door?? My door is wooden.

22. report says: 17.10.4 – replace door to caretaker store, quantaty: 1, cost £205.35
    my comment: the caretaker’s door is fairly new, it is in good order, why replacing it??

23. report says: #16.21.5 – renew door and frame with PVC door and frame, quantity: 75, cost: £ 26556.74
    my comment: what doors are they? If flat doors to balconies, there are 40 of them, all communal doors are wooden and there are about 20 of them (10 to stairs, 5 on south and north sides each), why do they need replacement?? Where quantity 75 came from??

24. report says: spot 1041 – standard upgrade of integrated reception system, quantity: 40, cost £5063.20
    my comment: IRS has been renewed during the last major works, it was charged lots of moneys for basic fanctions, why we are charged again for the upgrade when the good IRS should have been installed in the first place??

25. report says: 14.1.0 – CCTV survey of drain runs, quantity 16, cost: £1332
    my comment: CCTV survey of drains were done on 9/06/2015, job # 4340705 – wasn’t it good enough or was it done at all? Why to do it again?

26. report says: spot 420 – lightning conductor works at 1st tower block at Woodvale, quantity: 1, cost: £1713.97
    my comment: why are we charged for works in the block at Woodvale?? We are Bampton Estate!

27. report says: 8.19.0 – re-pointing in masonry: existing brickwork: repointing areas exceeding 3.0sqm, quantity: 23sqm, cost: £714.84
    my comment: where are these 23sqm? Where is the problem with the brickwork?

28. report says: 101907 – wall: cut out bricks from face of the wall, clean and clear away, lay up to 15No new facing bricks in cement lime mortar, bond, bed, point to match existing, quantity: 75it, cost: £2106.15
    my comment: where are the bricks that need replacemen? 2106.15 pounds to replace 75 bricks???

29. report says: 6.12.51 – general repairs: former hopper and chute, quantity:10, cost £512.79
    my comment: waste chutes were already renewed during last major works, why do it again??

30. report says: 6.12.34 – take down satellite dish and re-fix it, quantity: 58, cost £8,369.40
    my comment: I dont have any satellite dish, why am I charged for it??

31. report says: 029305 – supply standard NO BALL GAMES sign, screw to timber, quantity: 55, cost £3260.77
    my comment: the building has 4 external walls!!! Where 55 signs came from???

32. Replacing flat windows
    My comment: my flat has 1 balcony window, 1 kitchen window and 1 bathroom window, why I am I charged the same price as those who have 1 and 2 bedroom flats with more windows??

33. Management charge: £2292.50 per leaseholder, (10%) , total: £275099.40 for three blocks.
    Can you please explain what £275099.40 consist of? Are you saying that the cost of your department is that much? Also, I looked in my lease and could not find 10% management fee, will you please clarify what clause of my lease requires me to pay 10% for the management.

(applause)
Loving your work, Kat!

Hi Kat… do I not recall that leaseholders have the option to put forward their own contractor from which to gain a quote? That might be an option for you to pursue as well.

Got response to my first email:

Dear Kat

Thank you for your comments and observations for the Notice of Estimate (S8-3S) sent on 18 December 2017.

Our Major Works Team have now responded back with the following responses written in light blue below.

‘Taking into consideration the feedback of 5 leaseholders in our block that I am aware of, I, therefore, request that the notice consultation period is extended until the end of April 2018 (and longer if required) in order for the block leaseholders to be properly consulted with.’

The attached FAQ information sheet confirms that Lewisham Homes consulted with Leaseholders as required by statute about major works that will cost the leaseholder more than £250. The works at your building are being carried out under our Major

Works programme that delivers the ‘decent homes work’. The contracts to carry out the works were let under EU Procurement Regulations. Leaseholders were consulted as required by the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act (CLRA) 2002 amendments to the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 section 20.

Each Section 20 Notice contains information about what we plan to do and gives you the opportunity to take part in the consultation. You have the right to send us your comments about the works we intend to carry out. You can do this by post or email. We carefully consider any observations we receive in writing during the consultation period. The end date for the consultation period is given in the Notice. The period is at least 30 days from the date the Notice is given. The consultation period will therefore not be extended however our major works team have confirmed in their below response that works will not start until all comments and observations have been responded to.

‘No works or decisions should be started or made until there is a satisfactory agreement with leaseholders reached in terms of the list of works, costs, period of payment and any other issues or concerns that leaseholders may have.’

Work will not start until the consultation with residents has ended and all comments and observations have been responded to.

'£902113.13 is an extortionate amount of money and therefore I am initiating the investigation into the proposed estimated spendings for the proposed major works.

As the initial part of this investigation, I would like Lewisham Homes to provide evidence for the following:

1. The copy of the independent survey report on the list of works that may possibly be required in Standlake block during the planned major works that has been carried out before obtaining price estimates and costs.
   A copy of the task order was provided by email on 3 January 2018. This is a list of works that are needed to the block

2. Evidence of the initial research for cost effective and value for money quotes from various suppliers/contractors in order to secure the best value for money contract.
   Please see attached document. It explains the tendering process for the contract and how it was awarded. This document also explains how the works are costed.

3. A list of dates (months and years) when the last repairs/works done in following areas:

asbestos survey and asbestos works
balconies
cladding
internal decorations
external decorations
internal doors works
external doors works
drainage
internal electrical works
external electrical works
internal flooring
integrated reception system
lightning conductors
masonry and render repairs
paving works
rainwater system
block roof
signage
windows’

From time to time it will be necessary for Lewisham Homes to undertake items of Major Works to improve or repair the communal and structural parts of the building. These will usually be one-off works.

Our work includes:

· Fitting fire safety doors - if required

· Renewing windows

· Renewing roofs

· Doing structural work

· Redecorating shared areas such as hallways and on the outside of your building

· Upgrading IRS system if there is one present

· Drainage works

Our records show that in 2013 Lewisham homes repairs carried out checks to door closers and communal doors to each landing to see if they needed overhauling as they are fire doors.

I can send you a copy of the repairs history of the block. Would that be helpful?

‘The Standlake Point leaseholders will be requiring a meeting with Lewisham Homes major works and home ownership representatives in due course in order to discuss all issues, concerns, problems and their resolutions once we complete the investigations of the proposed list of major works and their estimated costs.’

A meeting is being arranged for leaseholders to meet with us on Wednesday 24 January 2018 from 6pm to 8pm. Letters were sent confirming this on 11 January 2018.

Kind regards

Lianne Holland

Thank you )) But it feels that we are knocking on the glass wall. I am sorry that we may have to postpone our meeting as I am currently trying to deal with this ridiculous Major Works notice.

yes, thank you. I am currently trying to obtain the alternative quotes from commercial independent contractors…I must admit they are not really keen to reply, I got one response out of 4 and still waiting.

Have you considered doing an FOI (Freedom Of Information) subject access? This is a good website as it’s all done public https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/ They have to reveal all the information they hold on a subect. You have to push them as I have caught them out several times on information they have over looked.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Lewisham Home slap a CPO on the leaseholders of Standlake. Deduct the 25k off the offer price and go ahead with their plans for building on the grounds now with less objections from leaseholders from the estate. I don’t trust Lewisham Homes from previous experiences.

Good luck

There is information from other councils that they may offer to buy back properties subject to large major works bills. Not found anything on CPO though.
Would be difficult to justify as the flats are not being demolished so making an offer you could not refuse may be an option for them.

Morning, thank you for your post. I did use the site to obtain information from LH about the building plans on the ball court and majority of information was refused for disclosure ‘because it is not in public interest’. However it took them 2 month to reply, so basically what they did (and it is not the first time happened) - the gave timeframe to reply, they waited to the end, then they extended again, waited until the last day only to say that the most info cannot be disclosed. They were obviousely buying time by wasting my time, making me wait. Very sneaky.

The consultation is in progress, we are asking questions. It ends on 20th of Jan. They have to provide answers. They said, ‘Work will not start until the consultation with residents has ended and all comments and observations have been responded to’.

I dont think they will offer to take £25,000 off leaseholders in exchange for the building plans. Those people have the army of solicitors, I guess, and will screw the situation to the extent that they will manage to build the larks and rip leaseholders off. We are just lay people against those who are professionally trained with endless funds. We are so uneven in the battles.

Stumbled across this. I’ve only scanned the article but thought it might be useful. Check out the bit on Florrie’s Law.

Thank you very much Starman. One of the leaseholders already checked the Florrie’s law and checked that LH had not applied for partial central government subsidies. So it will not work in our situation. However the part that leasseholders are not obliged to pay for regeneration, but for maintenance and repairs is smth i will look into my lease. I paid for the lifts - 8,000 to replace them, water tank, internal electrics, internal reception system,main door entry system, etc - another 6-7,000. They billed me for the replacements, and repairs and maintenance as well on the top of that as part of the service charges. Thank you Starman! This is a valid point to research. I will definitely look into it.

Just one other thought.

In my last property I was a leaseholder in a Victorian Terrace where the lessor insured it with a number of other terraces on the block. At one point he increased the insurance charges significantly passing the costs of course to the lessees on an equal (per unit) basis. As the block included 1, 2 and 3 bedroom flats in the terraces I felt that somewhat unfair. He agreed eventually to apply the charge based on square footage rather then by unit. So if you had a larger place you paid a higher percentage.

This might work for you… but it won’t endear you to others in the building with bigger flats.

Thank you, i will look into my lease but i think the formula is cost / 40 flats. However I did enquire that with my windows. Waiting for their reply.

Would you happen to know what legislation " allows freeholders to recover the cost of repairs and maintenance from leaseholders, not improvements" at all ?

Hi Kat. I’m just not informed enough on this issue to give you good advice. For this you should try the Leaseholders Advisory Service which I think has been mentioned before. I have found their online guides helpful in the past and used their free advice over the phone.

My understanding is that the freeholder has responsibility for the upkeep of the building itself including routine repairs and maintenance to the building and common areas. Those costs are then borne by the leaseholders like yourself. The repair or maintenance job does not have to directly impact on your flat. For instance, you are still liable for roof repairs even if your flat is on the ground floor.

Just a couple of other thoughts.

When I was a leaseholder, disagreements which could not be settled through normal channels could be referred to the Leaseholders Valuation Tribunal for a third party binding decision. I think the LVT has been changed to the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) so you may want to check into how they can help. As before the Leasehold Advisory Service (LAS) may be your best adviser in these matters.

I notice there is a huge part of the bill for windows. Normally windows not in common areas (like in your flat) are the responsibility of leaseholders… not the freeholders. Your lease probably directs you to keep them in good shape, but if they are you should probably not be paying for these. There is a piece in the LAS about this here.

Thank you Starman. The problem with leasehold advisory is they take time to respond. You cannot phone them directly and ask, you need to make an appointment for them to call, it is not straight away. It used to be, you can call and they will answer. I will use them if I have to go to tribunal (which we are seriously considering) if the matter is not resolved amicably.

In respect to the windows, they have to be all changed, they are about 50 years old, single glazed and everything is rotten and cold. I live on the top floor and don’t have problem with water leaks but the neighbours downstairs and almost every flat suffer from leaking windows because the seal has gone, wood rooten due to high condensation. If my windows are not changed, i may be liable for the damage caused by my old windows to the neighbours’ flat below me.

That what I am dwelling on - repairs and maintenance, but not replacement and regeneration. In the past and currently we are charged for everything like if we are freeholders.

Looked in my lease:
Improvements contributions according to section 187 Housing Act 1985, which states:

improvement means [F1, in relation to a dwelling house,] any alteration in, or addition to, [F2the dwelling-house] and includes—
(a)

any addition to, or alteration in, landlord’s fixtures and fittings and any addition or alteration connected with the provision of services to [F2the dwelling-house],
(b)

the erection of a wireless or television aerial, and
©

the carrying out of external decoration;

[F3and shall be similarly construed in relation to any other building or land;]

[F4 “ improvement contribution ” means an amount payable by a tenant of a flat in respect of improvements to the flat, the building in which it is situated or any other building or land, other than works carried out in discharge of any such obligations as are referred to in paragraph 16A(1) of Schedule 6 (obligations to repair, reinstate, etc. ); ]

“long tenancy” means—
(a)

a long tenancy within the meaning of part IV,
(b)

[F5 a tenancy falling within paragraph 1 of Schedule 1 to the M1 Tenants’ Rights, Etc. (Scotland) Act 1980, or ]
©

a tenancy falling within paragraph 1 of Schedule 2 to the M2Housing (Northern Ireland) Order 1983;

and “long lease” shall be construed accordingly;

And nothing about REPLACEMENT!

Amazing work . I’m not a leaseholder in the Estate but have experienced exactley the same rip off and lack of transparency with another provider that starts with the initial L .
Good luck

Thank you )), we are trying to figure out what is actually going on.

Response from Lewisham Homes to my points (sorry a bit messy, dont have time to make it visually pleasant, LH replies are under my comments to each point)):

Please note that you have only received and estimated bill. Any works that are not required will be removed from the final account, you only pay for works that have taken place on the building. Please also note your lease requires you to pay a share of the cost of any structural, external or works to shared areas that benefit your block or estate
Please see the response in blue to your queries

My comment response to the Section 20: Notice of Estimate, Major Works, Standlake Point, Bampton Estate, SE23-2XB, Phase S8-3S.
Part 2
**After examining the works breakdown costs, I have the following questions - please respond to every one of them:

1. report says: Spot 258, spot 969 – asbestos survey, total: £411.83
   my comment: there was asbestos survey carried out already on 12/06/2015, job #4341242 – why repeating the survey again and making leaseholders to pay twice ? Or no survey took place on 12/06/2015 but leaseholders were charged for??
   The Asbestos survey carried out by Breyer Group is to check areas where the contract will carry out works for example checking the putty around the windows as in old windows .we have found that sometimes they contain asbestos. This is to make sure that the contractors are who are working on the building are not putting themselves at risk.

report says: Spot 1036 - specialist subcontractors used to carrying out repairs to existing asphalt paving prior to Procol application, quantity: 55 items, £15,743.45my comment: we have 40 balconies in our block, where quantity 55 came from?
This is a provisional allowance for repairs to prior prokol coating to balconies and exterior communal areas. The extra 15 is for the communal areas.

2. report says: spot 827 – building notice fees, quantity: 409,5 (unit price £1), total £409,50my comment: block has 40 flats, where 409,9 number came from??
   This is the cost for submitting building notices to Lewisham council building and planning department.

3. report says: #307703 – cladding: remove existing and renew with cellular cored PVC shiplap boarding, quantity 9,9smmy comment: the block does not have cladding, it has external brickwork. Where is this 9,9sm cladding??
   This is internal and for the 10 floor in the communal area.

report says: spot 234,232, 233 – contingencies, total: 17, ranged from £500 per unit to £10,000 per unit; total: 33,45 units = £280,000my question: what are those 33,45 units that cost £280,000???
Spot items 232 codes are contingency sums
These contingency are for:
Provisional allowance for repair / replacement of 1st floor security mesh
roof renewal
**removal of old water tanks **
repair/replace aluminium smoke vents all floors

6. report says: #436203 – door frame: rub down, prepare, apply coat of primer, one undercoat, two coats of gloss paint on external surface of metal frames; total quantity: 63.6 lm my question: where are the metal door frames in quantity 63,6 lm?? All communal doors are wooden.
   Decs to timber store frame – right hand side of bin area. This is a code for painting frames.

report says: 17.7.5 – floor covering: renew any size or type of noising to steps, quantity 110 nr, £1953.60 my question: where exactly 110nr are?
This is for the communal stairs

8. report says: spot 348 – painting to masonry, quantity 1012 lm, £4,614.72 my comment: is it external or internal, how did you come to this amount?
   This is for decs to concrete ring beam 280mm - front , side and rear elevation external this is an estimate cost.

9. report says: #9.9.1 – prep&redec to external walls, flats: painting to masonry, total: 563sqm, £3124.65 my question: the outside walls of the block are made of bricks, which is around 95% of the external walls, where 563sqm came from??
   This is for decorations for balconies for all elevations and communal balconies. Render panels to communal balconies and pain balconies soffits.

10. report says: #9.9.3 – prep&redec to external walls, flats: painting to timber surface, total: 114sqm, £1277.21my question: there is no timbers on external walls, where are the timber surface on the external walls in our block exactly??
    This is for paint the ducting which is boxed in communal lobby’s and ground floor store. Timber panel in communal stairwell (internal)

11. report says: #9.9.5 – prep&redec to external walls, flats: wash down with detergent, total: 551,93 sqm, £1225,28 my comment: why external surface needs to be washed with detergent??
    This is to wash down glass to balustrade after painting

12. report says: # 9.12.8 – prep&redec to fences and railings: open type:painting to metal fences 1-1.5m high, total: 1491m, £39720.24my question: we dont have 1491m of fence around our block, where this figure came from??
    This is for painting the communal balustrade both sides of elevation D

13. report says: #17.5.8, #17.5.2 – specialist treatment – apply anti-graffiti paint, total 1203.1 sqm, £16025.17my qestion: we dont have problem with graffiti in our block, never was an issue, no need for anti-grffiti paint, why on the list of works???
    All communal areas are painted with anti-graffiti paint. This cost is for decorating walls and ceilings with anti-graffiti paint

14. report says: #43551 – surfaces: apply anti-graffiti paint to vulnerable external surface of brickwork, concrete, timber, total: 1070sm, £9616.09 my question: there is no problem with graffiti on external parts of the block, why on the list of works???
    This is for the communal area

15. report says: #435501 – clean existing graffiti covered surface, apply high pressure hot water to remove all traces of remover, paint, debris, total: 1070sm, £12380.97my qestion: there is no graffity covered surface, where exactly 1070sm are covered with graffiti that you are prepared to spend £12380.97 for???
    This is for the communal area

16. report says: #436205 – door: rub down, prepare for and apply one coat of primer, one undercoat and two coats of gloss pain on any size single metal door, quantity: 40.58 IT, cost: £2416.38 my comment: we dont have metal doors exept the main entry door and caretaker door which are in good order, where 40.58 It came from??
    This is decorations for metal door right hand side of bin area and metal door front elevation.

17. report says: #135001 – meter cupboard: renew or fix new approved meter cupboard…complete with locking device…quantity: 4, cost: £261.30 my comment: I have no problem with my meter cupboard, why am I charged for smbd’d cupboards?? Also, one of this 4 cupboards have different price from another 3. Why?

This is for the ground floor lift lobby area cupboard for gas meter.

18. reports says: #070115 – shed door: renew any type of hasp, staple…or other equal and approved padlock to shed or bin doo, supply two keys…quantity:20, cost:£467.97my question: sheds are not in use, I dont use any shed why am I charged for the lock??
    This is for the ground floor store doors. We carry out works to the foot print of the building.

19. report says:# 070107 - shed door: renew shed or bin store door with any size softwood framed, ledged, braced door, quantity: 20, cost £3769.79my comment: sheds are not in use, I dont use any shed, why am I charged for it?
    As above

20. you report says: #324125 – door: overhaul external door and frame and fanlight complete, remove all ironmongery, piece out, make good, resecure beads, architraves, rehang door, ease, adjust, reglaze fanligh, quanity 1, cost £106.23
    my comment: it is recently changed door, nothing wrong with it, why you charged massive amount to replace the door and now you repairing it?
    This is for overhauling communal front door.

21. report says: 11.35.0 – repair of PVCu windows/doors: doors: ease, adjust, lubricate hinges, fittings, quantity; 25, cost: £555my comment: we dont have communal PVC doors, if they are doors to flats, why am I charged for somebody’s else door?? My door is wooden.
    This code used is for overhauling communal stairwell doors.

22. report says: 17.10.4 – replace door to caretaker store, quantaty: 1, cost £205.35my comment: the caretaker’s door is fairly new, it is in good order, why replacing it??
    This code is for new doors to staircase leading to lift lobby.

23. report says: #16.21.5 – renew door and frame with PVC door and frame, quantity: 75, cost: £ 26556.74my comment: what doors are they? If flat doors to balconies, there are 40 of them, all communal doors are wooden and there are about 20 of them (10 to stairs, 5 on south and north sides each), why do they need replacement?? Where quantity 75 came from??
    This code if for balconies door west elevation

24. report says: spot 1041 – standard upgrade of integrated reception system, quantity: 40, cost £5063.20 my comment: IRS has been renewed during the last major works, it was charged lots of moneys for basic fanctions, why we are charged again for the upgrade when the good IRS should have been installed in the first place??
    This is the first time that Major works are carrying out works to the estate. Some works may have taken place on s different scheme. The IRS will be upgraded so it will have sky+

25. report says: 14.1.0 – CCTV survey of drain runs, quantity 16, cost: £1332my comment: CCTV survey of drains were done on 9/06/2015, job # 4340705 – wasn’t it good enough or was it done at all? Why to do it again?
    This is for drains for the whole block which will be surveyed to make sure they are in good condition or if any works are needed.

26. report says: spot 420 – lightning conductor works at 1st tower block at Woodvale, quantity: 1, cost: £1713.97 my comment: why are we charged for works in the block at Woodvale?? We are Bampton Estate!
    This code is for a lightening conductor. Woodvale is a miss print but is the same code that is used for this works

27. report says: 8.19.0 – re-pointing in masonry: existing brickwork: repointing areas exceeding 3.0sqm, quantity: 23sqm, cost: £714.84 my comment: where are these 23sqm? Where is the problem with the brickwork?
    Repointing to front and rear elevation

28. report says: 101907 – wall: cut out bricks from face of the wall, clean and clear away, lay up to 15No new facing bricks in cement lime mortar, bond, bed, point to match existing, quantity: 75it, cost: £2106.15 my comment: where are the bricks that need replacemen? 2106.15 pounds to replace 75 bricks???
    This is for the front elevation of the building

29. report says: 6.12.51 – general repairs: former hopper and chute, quantity:10, cost £512.79my comment: waste chutes were already renewed during last major works, why do it again??
    This is for Lift Lobby - 1st-9th - ease and adjust chute doors

30. report says: 6.12.34 – take down satellite dish and re-fix it, quantity: 58, cost £8,369.40 my comment: I dont have any satellite dish, why am I charged for it??
    This is cost I will be looking into. There is an IRS system which uses a dish on the building. It is possible its for moving the IRS system whilst the roof is renewed

31. report says: 029305 – supply standard NO BALL GAMES sign, screw to timber, quantity: 55, cost £3260.77my comment: the building has 4 external walls!!! Where 55 signs came from???
    This is for signage for the whole block not just no ball signs

32. Replacing flat windows My comment: my flat has 1 balcony window, 1 kitchen window and 1 bathroom window, why I am I charged the same price as those who have 1 and 2 bedroom flats with more windows??
    Our major works programme benefits all residents. Our promise to leaseholders is:
    You are not paying for tenanted homes windows within the block. You are paying towards windows to your property and towards the communal windows to the block.

33. Management charge: £2292.50 per leaseholder, (10%) , total: £275099.40 for three blocks. Can you please explain what £275099.40 consist of? Are you saying that the cost of your department is that much? Also, I looked in my lease and could not find 10% management fee, will you please clarify what clause of my lease requires me to pay 10% for the management.

Lewisham Homes charge leaseholders their share of these and other costs when major works is carried out in a building or block containing leasehold properties. It is currently 10% of the major works bill. The 10% charge includes everything listed for the cost of the service charge each year plus: issuing all consultation notices needed by law when major works is proposed, responding to leaseholders’ questions, advising leaseholders on payment options, paying salaries and overheads of the staff and to manage the projects, tendering the major works scheme, going to consultation meetings on major works, working out the estimated and actual major works service charges, keeping information on the service charge IT system, contributing to developing the service charge module, recovering service charges, which have not been paid on time, going to meetings with residents about major works to tackle leaseholders’ concerns, keeping up-to-date with changes in leasehold laws and amending procedures when needed.

As well as the management charge, there are also professional fees that cover the costs of outside consultants such as surveyors, architects and engineers, these costs are shown separately on your service charge bill. We are not a profit-making organisation. Our charges are based on recovering the money we spend in supplying services to leaseholders.

My email to them today:

My comment response to the Section 20: Notice of Estimate, Major Works, Standlake Point, Bampton Estate, SE23-2XB, Phase S8-3S.
Part 3

Dear Lianne,

Thank you for the reply to both of my emails. I am currently examining the replies and respond or inquire further as I have not received some of the information I needed.

1. Looking through the reply from Kiley Marr to my 32 points, I am even more puzzled now than I was before, therefore I would like to have a meeting with one of your team who knows the works and site very well so we can go through the points and jobs on the list. I would like your team/person/representative to meet me on site, in Standlake Point, to show me what and where the jobs on the list are. I would like this meeting to take place after the one on 24th, which I will also be attending, at the convenient for both of us time, please.

2. I would like to put my name on the list of those who will be attending to inspect works after their completion.

3. I can see that there will be a person appointed from the contractor, a liaison officer, that we can address our concerns or issues to, but I don’t see who is a liaison officer and supervisor from Lewisham Homes to overlook the works. Who is from your team be supervising the site and works please? Can you provide name and contact details? As an example, some of the dec.works are planned to have one coat of primer, one under coat and two coats gloss, I would like an appointed supervisor from Lewisham Home on site at all times who will ensure that 4 coats are applied (as an example) and all works completed as stated/listed/obligated by the contractor.

4. Has any of your team come to the site to check the list of works that your independent surveyor presented to you? Who was that person please? And who approved the estimated list of works from Lewisham Homes to go ahead with please?

5. Further enquiries will follow once the replies have been examined thoroughly, as I mentioned above I have not received some of the information I needed/asked for in both of my emails.

I feel that your department does not have a full knowledge of what jobs are needed to be done or familiar with the site and this is the reason I am asking to have a meeting with you in Standlake so you can show me one by one all the jobs on the list/ jobs in question.

Please confirm the receipt of my electronic response to the Section 20, Notice of Estimate, Major Works, Standlake Point, Bampton Estate, SE23-2XB, Phase S8-3S.

Kind regards,
Kat
XXX Standlake Point

24.01.2018
meeting summary

Leaseholders versus Lewisham Homes

Residents brought up the following:

1. Bryer contractor - poor standards of works in the past, poor standards of checks and management from Bryer and from Lewisham Homes

2. Negligence in maintaining the block by Lewisham Council in the past resulting in large amount of works needed to be done to bring the block to decent state within short period of time, resulting in massive bills.

3. Duplication of works, works that could be carried out during previouse repairs, charging for repairs in the past and charging again for replacements that resulting in overspending. Lewisham Homes gave explainations such as previous surveys did not show the need for replacements (roof as example), the works carried out in the past were from different program and different from the ones that are due to take place now (masonry repairs, survey checks, etc). However leaseholders found it unsatisfactory and shows poor management from Lewisham Council /Lewisham Homes that causes leaseholder to bear the financial burden.

4. Lewisham Homes not checking the surveyor report on the list of jobs, some jobs on the list are not there or not needed resulting in overspending, as a result, Standlake leaseholders arranged a meeting on site to go through works list one by one

5. paying for major works’s huge bill: leaseholders were very concerned about how to pay the bill off, the standard options from Lewisham Homes available are not suitable/unrealistic/unreasonable to leaseholders who are not in control of the works, money, decisions.

6. Lewisham Homes will meet leaseholders to go through the list of works and provide a copy of the final list of works/estimates after completing the survey.

7. Lewisham Homes will provide the leaseholders with a copy of warranties for works - window, roof, etc.

8. Lewisham Homes undestands the difficulty of paying the huge bill by leaseholders and will look into suitable resolutions, personal circumstances, etc. Leaseholders were reassured not to worry. Leaseholders were also advised to obtain a professional independent legal advice.

9. Lewisham Homes assured that they continue communications with leaseholders during the whole major works process and leaseholders should get in touch with them if there any concerns/ problems/issues.

10. Lewisham Homes will be on site to oversee the works.

11. leaseholders were grateful to Lewisham Home for meeting with them

Today communications with LH major works team regarding meeting them on site to go through list of works one by one:

Hi Karen, thank you for your email. Can you please give the reason for your objection to filming of the to be discussed areas. There is nothing to hide from what I can see…or… it is something that Lewisham Homes does not want to be seen/exposed/known?

Kat

If filming is a problem voice recording will suffice surely this cannot be a problem as it can be used to prepare minutes of the meeting?

My concern they don’t want to show either the state of the building (negligence ) or evidence of works they put on the list (and prepared to bill for) that actually are not there. When you do voice recording it is hard to tell what is refered to, for example there are 2 lists of works, one - align bricks, second - replace 75 bricks. How, through the voice recording, to proof that the works are actually needed or not needed without seeing the part the replacement or alignment reffers to.

Our words against theirs… What are the chances to proof we are right?

P. S madam Karen has not replied…because there is no reason to object if everything is fair and correct… and she knows that

Okay my misunderstanding, photographing the areas under discussion should be acceptable even video of the area being discussed on a point by point basis should be acceptable. I believe video of LH personnel may be subject to personal preference and the right to refuse.
So audio recording the explanation of the work required to enable accurate minutes should be accepted which I believe is agreed? Photos or video of the areas in question should also be allowed perhaps seperate from the audio for the purpose of establishing the dilapidation/structural requirements possibly requiring rectification and repair and will allow judgement as to the value/cost of such items.

Sherlina specifically mentioned when replied to them that ‘no people’ filming, but areas in question.

Major works

UPD
We had a meeting on site. Here is the summary of the meeting that emailed to Karen at Lewisham Homes:

Dear Karen, please see the summary of the meeting, which took place on 5/02/2018, below. If you have anything to add, please let me know.

Kat.

Summary of the meeting on 5/02/2018, Standlake Point block, SE23-2XB

Attended:

Kat, leaseholder, flat X, Standlake Point

X, leaseholder, flat X, Standlake Point

X leaseholder, flat X, Standlake Point

X leaseholder, flat X, Standlake Point

Karen Sweeney – Assistant contract manager for Lewisham Homes

Kiley Marr – construction project officer for Lewisham Homes

2 representatives from Breyer, works contractor

1 representative from Ridge, property and construction consultants

Reason for the meeting: clarification of the list of works proposed for the planned major works, S8-3S, Standlake Point, SE23-2XB

Discussed at the meeting:

• smoke vent windows are proposed to be replaced with aluminium vents - leaseholders say there is no need to, all vent windows are in good order, also they were installed during last major works and leaseholder have already been charged/paid for the replacements in the past.

• east and west side canopies - suggested by leaseholders: as an alternative, to enclose the areas to stop people urinating there, leaseholders insist Lewisham Homes to choose the cheapest option

• leaseholders pointed out that wall tiles and floor tiles in the lobby are in good order and there is no need to replace them

• leaseholders pointed out that a lot of works on the list are cosmetic works (protective mesh, removal of water tanks, lobby wall and floor tiles, floor steps cover to reduce noise, etc) and it is a waste of public and leaseholders money

• a revised version of the list of works will be available for leaseholders to examine, however it was pointed out that it would be a goodwill gesture from Lewisham Homes; the leaseholders disagreed and pointed out that the current list of works is a ‘guesstimate’ and not acceptable.

• leaseholders will be issued with a separate letter to sign if they wish to change their separate balcony door, it was pointed out that flat windows and balcony doors should match

Also:

1. report says: Spot 258, spot 969 – asbestos survey, total: £411.83

my comment: there was asbestos survey carried out already on 12/06/2015, job #4341242 – why repeating the survey again and making leaseholders pay twice? Or no survey took place on 12/06/2015 but leaseholders were charged for??

At the meeting: requested to see survey reports when they are completed, Lewisham homes agreed to show them for leaseholders to examine

2. report says: Spot 1036 - specialist subcontractors used to carrying out repairs to existing asphalt paving prior to Procol application, quantity: 55 items, £15,743.45

my comment: we have 40 balconies in our block, where quantity 55 came from?

At the meeting: quantity 55 were suggested to include the communal balconies in addition to flat balconies but pointed out, by leaseholders, that communal balconies floors are concrete – the surveyor from Ridge was not aware of the latter

3. report says: spot 827 – building notice fees, quantity: 409,5 (unit price £1), total £409,50

my comment: block has 40 flats, where 409,9 number came from??

At the meeting: clarified that it is 1 notice

4. report says: #307703 – cladding: remove existing and renew with cellular cored PVC shiplap boarding, quantity 9,9sm

my comment: the block does not have cladding, it has external brickwork. Where is this 9,9sm cladding??

At the meeting: Leaseholder Kat was given answer before the meeting took place, at earlier date, that the cladding was on the tenth floor in communal area; Leaseholder Samir was given explanation, before the meeting, at earlier date, that the cladding was on the ground floor, under the canopy, next to the bin chamber. The answer at the meeting was that the cladding was actually on the roof of the block. Leaseholders requested to see photos, Lewisham Home representatives agreed to show photos for examination

5. report says: spot 234,232, 233 – contingencies, total: 17, ranged from £500 per unit to £10,000 per unit; total: 33,45 units = £280,000

my question: what are those 33,45 units that cost £280,000???

At the meeting: contingencies were said to include security mesh on the south (back) side of the building, plus removal of 4 old water tanks (1mx1.5m) on the roof. It was pointed out by leaseholders whether or not the replacement of the mesh is needed and whether it will be cheaper to sand it and paint it. In respect to the old water tanks, photos of the tanks were requested to see in order to establish the need for their removal and agreed to be shown by Lewisham Homes. One photo of one water tank was shown and the water tank appeared to be in good order and did not show the need for the removal.

6. report says: #436203 – door frame: rub down, prepare, apply coat of primer, one undercoat, two coats of gloss paint on external surface of metal frames; total quantity: 63.6 lm

my question: where are the metal door frames in quantity 63,6 lm?? All communal doors are wooden.

At the meeting: the surveyor was not sure, works explained to be frames under the east and west side canopies of not-in- use and boarded sheds on the ground floor outside.

7. report says: 17.7.5 – floor covering: renew any size or type of noising to steps, quantity 110 nr, £1953.60

my question: where exactly 110nr are?

At the meeting: clarified to be all steps in communal areas on all floors, however, the surveyor was confused about their number, surveyor suggested their quantity needs reviewing

8. report says: spot 348 – painting to masonry, quantity 1012 lm, £4,614.72

my comment: is it external or internal, how did you come to this amount?

At the meeting: clarified – external masonry strips between brickworks

9. report says: #9.9.1 – prep&redec to external walls, flats: painting to masonry, total: 563sqm, £3124.65

my question: the outside walls of the block are made of bricks, which is around 95% of the external walls, where 563sqm came from??

At the meeting: clarified – all flat balconies ceilings and walls, ground floor outside

10. report says: #9.9.3 – prep&redec to external walls, flats: painting to timber surface, total: 114sqm, £1277.21

my question: there is no timbers on external walls, where are the timber surface on the external walls in our block exactly??

At the meeting: no answer received, the surveyor did not know, possibly ground floor shed doors, further clarification will follow

11. report says: #9.9.5 – prep&redec to external walls, flats: wash down with detergent, total: 551,93 sqm, £1225,28

my comment: why external surface needs to be washed with detergent??

At the meeting: clarified – ground floor outside in front of the building under the canopy – walls, ceilings, supporting posts prior painting, however, the quantity suggested needs to be reviewed

12. report says: # 9.12.8 – prep&redec to fences and railings: open type:painting to metal fences 1-1.5m high, total: 1491m, £39720.24

my question: we dont have 1491m of fence around our block, where this figure came from??

At the meeting: clarified – communal railings, flat/balconies railings, stairs, however, the quantity has to be reviewed, it does not appear to be right

13. report says: #17.5.8, #17.5.2 – specialist treatment – apply anti-graffiti paint, total 1203.1 sqm, £16025.17

my qestion: we dont have problem with graffiti in our block, never was an issue, no need for anti-grffiti paint, why on the list of works???

At the meeting: the current state of the internal painting in the block is good, it was acknowledged by the surveyor that some spots require repairs and repainting. It was also confirmed the internal communal walls had been already painted with anti-graffiti paint in the past, leaseholders questioned whether it is needed to paint walls again with anti-graffiti paint

14. report says: #43551 – surfaces: apply anti-graffiti paint to vulnerable external surface of brickwork, concrete, timber, total: 1070sm, £9616.09

my question: there is no problem with graffiti on external parts of the block, why on the list of works?

At the meeting: the surveyor was not sure where the area for painting was, further clarifications will follow

15. report says: #435501 – clean existing graffiti covered surface, apply high pressure hot water to remove all traces of remover, paint, debris, total: 1070sm, £12380.97

my qestion: there is no graffity covered surface, where exactly 1070sm are covered with graffiti that you are prepared to spend £12380.97 for???

At the meeting: no graffiti found on external or internal walls, the surveyor was not sure where the area to be washed was, further clarification will follow.

16. report says: #436205 – door: rub down, prepare for and apply one coat of primer, one undercoat and two coats of gloss paint on any size single metal door, quantity: 40.58 IT, cost: £2416.38

my comment: we dont have metal doors except for the main entry door and caretaker door which are in good order, where 40.58 It came from??

At the meeting: the surveyor did not know the answer, further clarification will follow

17. report says: #135001 – meter cupboard: renew or fix new approved meter cupboard…complete with locking device…quantity: 4, cost: £261.30

my comment: I have no problem with my meter cupboard, why am I charged for smbd’d cupboards?? Also, one of this 4 cupboards have different price from another 3. Why?

At the meeting: meter cupboards in communal areas for some flats

18. reports says: #070115 – shed door: renew any type of hasp, staple…or other equal and approved padlock to shed or bin doo, supply two keys…quantity:20, cost:£467.97

my question: sheds are not in use, I dont use any shed why am I charged for the lock??

At the meeting: the surveyor did not know that the sheds were boarded, further review and clarification will follow, sheds are not in use

19. report says:# 070107 - shed door: renew shed or bin store door with any size softwood framed, ledged, braced door, quantity: 20, cost £3769.79

my comment: sheds are not in use, I dont use any shed, why am I charged for it?

At the meeting: the surveyor did not know that the sheds were boarded, further review and clarification will follow.

20. you report says: #324125 – door: overhaul external door and frame and fanlight complete, remove all ironmongery, piece out, make good, resecure beads, architraves, rehang door, ease, adjust, reglaze fanligh, quanity 1, cost £106.23

my comment: it is recently changed door, nothing wrong with it, why you charged massive amount to replace the door and now you repairing it?

21. report says: 11.35.0 – repair of PVCu windows/doors: doors: ease, adjust, lubricate hinges, fittings, quantity; 25, cost: £555

my comment: we dont have communal PVC doors, if they are doors to flats, why am I charged for somebody’s else door?? My door is wooden.

At the meeting: clarified – flat doors for council flats only, not leaseholders

22. report says: 17.10.4 – replace door to caretaker store, quantaty: 1, cost £205.35

my comment: the caretaker’s door is fairly new, it is in good order, why replacing it??

At the meeting: the caretaker’s door, outside, witnessed by all attended, was in good order and fairly new: no replacement is needed.

23. report says: #16.21.5 – renew door and frame with PVC door and frame, quantity: 75, cost: £ 26556.74

my comment: what doors are they? If flat doors to balconies, there are 40 of them, all communal doors are wooden and there are about 20 of them (10 to stairs, 5 on south and north sides each), why do they need replacement?? Where quantity 75 came from??

At the meeting: the surveyor did not have an explanation, the quantity 75 appeared to be incorrect, the quantity will be reviewed.

24. report says: spot 1041 – standard upgrade of integrated reception system, quantity: 40, cost £5063.20

my comment: IRS has been renewed during the last major works, it was charged lots of moneys for basic fanctions, why we are charged again for the upgrade when the good IRS should have been installed in the first place??

At the meeting: the works are for the communal aerial, it is one communal aerial, not 40. It was pointed out that leaseholders do not use Sky and dont require an upgrade.

25. report says: 14.1.0 – CCTV survey of drain runs, quantity 16, cost: £1332

my comment: CCTV survey of drains were done on 9/06/2015, job # 4340705 – wasn’t it good enough or was it done at all? Why to do it again?

At the meeting: the surveyor did not know that CCTV survey has been recently done, so no need to do it again

26. report says: spot 420 – lightning conductor works at 1st tower block at Woodvale, quantity: 1, cost: £1713.97

my comment: why are we charged for works in the block at Woodvale?? We are Bampton Estate!

At the meeting: confirmed it is one lightning conductor per block and the job was a duplicate. Spot 381 has already included works with the lightning conductor. The job spot 420 should be taken off the list.

27. report says: 8.19.0 – re-pointing in masonry: existing brickwork: repointing areas exceeding 3.0sqm, quantity: 23sqm, cost: £714.84

my comment: where are these 23sqm? Where is the problem with the brickwork?

At the meeting: the area in question was not found

28. report says: 101907 – wall: cut out bricks from face of the wall, clean and clear away, lay up to 15No new facing bricks in cement lime mortar, bond, bed, point to match existing, quantity: 75it, cost: £2106.15

my comment: where are the bricks that need replacemen? 2106.15 pounds to replace 75 bricks???

At the meeting: the area in question was not found

29. report says: 6.12.51 – general repairs: former hopper and chute, quantity:10, cost £512.79

my comment: waste chutes were already renewed during last major works, why do it again??

At the meeting: the majority of works were planned to upgrade the bin chamber. Pointed out by leaseholder that there is no need for the upgrade. The bin chamber has metal doors and always locked - no problem with safety.

30. report says: 6.12.34 – take down satellite dish and re-fix it, quantity: 58, cost £8,369.40

my comment: I dont have any satellite dish, why am I charged for it??

At the meeting: confirmed – there is one communal aerial for residents to use, no private satellite dishes are meant to be on the roof. It was pointed out that leaseholders don’t have satellite dishes and should not be billed for.

31. report says: 029305 – supply standard NO BALL GAMES sign, screw to timber, quantity: 55, cost £3260.77

my comment: the building has 4 external walls!!! Where 55 signs came from???

At the meeting: 55 signs - all signs for the block, not only NO BALL GAMES; it was pointed out that the signs in the block have been recently replaced and leaseholders were billed for them. The current signs are new and dont need to be replaced. This works leaseholders should not be billed for.

Hi Karen, in additiin of the summary, some things were missed for the record:

• the surveyor was checking the works sheets for Radcot Point when aswering questions, not Standlake Point. When the leaseholder pointed it out to him, the surveyor said that it is the same.

• Electrical works include replacent of emergency lights. It was pointed out by leaseholders that some communal lights have been replaced with emergency ones and not all communal lights need to be replaced.

• Painting meter cupboards in communal areas - leaseholder pointed out that they are in good state and dont need painting

Kat

Also, received a letter from Karen@Lewisham Homes that the major works have been delayed until unknown date.

It will be suicidal for LH to go ahead with the works that dont exist. But, hey, this is only beginning. Mr Potter, LH CEO, is the next to get our portion of letters.

DSC_13975984×3366 3.8 MB

Sevice charges

Good evening Victoria,

My appology for the delayed response to your reply.

I appreciate your time for gathering information. I did look through your answers and but dont feel some of my questions have been answered.

4446817
27/06/2016
LM179 SUPPLY & FIT NEW SUSPENSION ROPES AS PER SOR02B
This cost is to replace the main ropes for the lift £973.56

4446834
27/06/2016
BLK LM180 SUP & FIT SUSPENSION ROPES AS PER SOR02B
This cost is to replace the main ropes for the lift £973.56

I live on the 10th floor and use lifts daily, i also live opposite the lift engine room and did not see any works to replace lift suspension ropes. I will be needing to see the proof of that please.

4432280

03/05/2016
BLOCK DOOR ENTRY FAULTY. TENANTS CANNOT BE BUZZED IN- Defective Door entry panel reported by the resident and when attended no fault was found.
£38.23

4407747
02/02/2016
BLOCK DOOR ENTRY SYSTEM NOT WORKING- Defective Door entry panel reported by the resident and when attended no fault was found.
£33.33

Those 2 jobs above should be addressed to the tenants who called reporting the faulty buzzer. They are the one to be charged. I did not call therefore the charge should be removed from my bill please.

On the list: BLOCK PNEUMATIC AUTO OPENERS SERVICE
the frequency of the service is suspicious - April, Jun, August 2016 - why such high frequency? Was it meant to be done quarterly? The time frequency does not match.

I asked: “pest control - £1002.00 – I believe John, another leaseholder from our block, questioned yourself and got a reply that £54 were spent to remove a dead pigeon by the caretaker – we are charged £40.17 per hour caretaking service and charged again £54 for cleaning the dead pigeon by the caretaker? It is a clear charging for the same service twice. The refund of £54 is due to the block leaseholders, please. £950 were spent for the pigeon proofing - can you please provide the details of what job exactly was done, where exactly was done so we can investigate the repair. Please find below breakdown of the pest control.”

Your answer: Our Environmental services team have confirmed that they have not asked a caretaker to carry out a job the same time the pest control team attended.

My response: to remove one dead pigeon you do not need to call a pest control team out, the caretaker easily can do that, it is his job. Are you saying you called out the whole pestcontrol team to remove one dead pigeon? Victoria, this is not acceptable. I insist the refind is provided for the pigeon removal please. Also, I have not received the information as to where exactly the pigeon proofing was so i can inspect the place please. £200 for survey - when it was done, what exactly was done?

I asked: Caretaking charges: Mr Kanareck confirmed the price Lewisham Homes charge per hour of caretaking - £40.17. Estimated charges for three blocks on our estate for years 2017-2018 are 53,023.86 pounds. You kindly provided the breakdown of the hourly costs of caretaking which are: equipment, supervision, uniforms, telephones, IT, transportation and associated running costs, wages for caretaker, supervisor and manager, cleaning materials, admin support, office accommodation. As you are probably aware, we obtained quotes from commercial cleaning companies for the same amount of services currently provided by Lewisham Homes, with one caretaker cleaning our three blocks only (more weekly hours per block) and providing service 52 weeks a year, not 44 weeks as currently provided by Lewisham Homes. The quotes came as 30 percent cheaper from both commercial companies. It raised further questions as to why Lewisham Homes, a not-for-profit organisation, charges so high prices that affect not only leaseholders, but council funds your company source the money from. Therefore please provide a comprehensive breakdown of how £53,023.86 pounds distributed between equipment, supervision, uniforms, telephones, IT, transportation and associated running costs, wages for caretaker, supervisor and manager, cleaning materials, admin support, office accommodation. Once the breakdown is provided by yourself, I will be requesting to see every single invoice, receipt, etc. that supports the breakdown of £53,023.86 for further assessments.

You answered: please email our Environmental services team for additional information on the caretaking.
My response: Victoria, this is not acceptable, you department issues bills to leaseholders therefore your department is responsible to provide answers. I expect an answer from your department about the catetaking charges. I would also like to see invoices that match the charged amount please with full and detailed description of how £53,000 are spent.

I asked: Window repairs: job # 4445412 on 22/06/2016 – erect scaffold and renew window frame to bedroom of flat number 17 and the job # 4508107 on 25/01/2017 – measure up balcony door for renewal flat number 33. On what ground do you charge leaseholders for repairs carried out in other, not belonging to leaseholders flats, please? The lease (the tenth schedule, part one, the service charges, contribution formula, repairs and maintenance section) clearly states that leaseholders contribute to the repairs of their own leasehold properties and common parts only. Windows, as doors, as any other parts of each separate flat are not common parts, they are not shared areas. Refund due to leaseholders for the wrong billing, please.

You said: our repairs team have confirmed that the repairs numbers 4445412 and 4508107 are all logged as communal repairs.

These repairs were in relation to the window frame and balcony door in the communal areas which forms part of the fabric and structure of your building which are chargeable, in accordance to the terms set in your lease agreement. The description was for the purpose of identifying the areas the repairs was needed.

My response: Victoria, the jobs say FLAT 17 and FLAT 33 - their windows inside the flats are not communal windows. They are classed as reserved property but not communal shared - the tenth schedule, section 5, maintainance and repairs; definition of the common parts - “which are used in common with the lessees or occupiers” - the third schedule. I dont use windows in flat 17 and flat 33! Do you guys know the building at all? The jobs done inside the flats, my lease says that i can only be charged for repairs of communal areas, areas that used in common. PLEASE PROVIDE THE EVIDENCE - THE CLAUSE in MY LEASE that shows I am legaly responsible to pay for windows in other tenants flats or you remove the charges if there is no such evidence.

I asked: Kitchen sinks blockages:

job #4433137 on 06/05/2016 – jetters to clear blocked stack affecting kitchen flat 23

job # 4485545 on 4/11/2016 – clear stack affecting utilities to flat 35 causing blockages

job # 4485545 on 4/11/2016 – clear blocked stack affecting flat 35 sink

Can you provide details of where exactly all three blockages were, please?

Your response: The stack is within the structure of the building which gets blocked up from time to time. Our repairs team confirmed that this is not necessarily caused by the tenants detailed within the repairs request.

My response: if the communal stack is blocked, it will affect number of flats, not one flat. Can you please provide the evidence of where exactly the blockages were, i would like to see the documentation of those jobs please.

We have already seen the number jobs that have been crossed of the bill because they were billed incorrectly. I have trusted your department but it seems the department is a complete mess and bills leaseholders for something they dont suppose to pay! And if I did not check and query, you will take my money like you did in the past! That is ILLIGAL and will be taken further not only to Tribunal, but to the high ranking people in Lewisham Council and Central Government, and even the Police, if your department does not strat perform professionally and correctly.

Having said all above, here is my requests:

1. i am expecting clarifications of my queries above and removal of incorrect charges
2. i would like to examine ALL invoices, documentation, supporting evidence of ALL jobs and services billed in Service Charge summary and its breakdown for 2016-2017 please. Please let me know the day I can attend your office to inspect all supporting documents.

Kind regards,
Kat
Standlake

LEWISHAM HOMES: LEASEHOLDERS FLEECED IN DECENT HOMES SCANDAL

Wow, interesting reading. As a Lewisham leaseholder who is currently paying yet another large major works bill for shoddy and disorganised works carried out by Breyer and also informed my Lewisham homes I had to buy a new front door due to fire regulations, which now after reading this I did not have to do makes me so angry. It also explains why service charges have risen so much over the years despite the fact my block is lucky if a caretaker attends once a week now and is rarely cleaned. I wonder if the ‘profit’ made from fleecing leaseholders will be returned? I think not!!!

We are joining forces and would welcome leaseholders who are serviced by LH to come forward. It seems a certain pattern - crap works, crap services, massive bills, charging for smth that is not provided, charging for smth that should not be, coming up so far from leaseholders from different areas. It is very alarming and needs definitely investigating.

My email: kat.standlake.point@gmail.com
feel free to write.

Major works

Dear XXX

Thank you for your email to Andrew Potter on behalf of Standlake Point leaseholders. I head the planned delivery team, responsible for managing major works contracts and have been asked to respond.

You raised concerns for:-

• Estimate and schedule of works recently received by leaseholders

I have reviewed the estimate and schedule of works and I am happy to provide further clarification.

The project team were keen to engage with tenants and leaseholders on the Bampton Estate to obtain your views of the proposed works and identify local priorities. The intention was to remove the contingency sums from the estimate once a high level inspection took place and replace them with quantified works and costs. Any variations would have been shared with you for comment, prior to work starting. I am sorry if you feel this was not communicated effectively.

Our contractor, Breyer Group, have only recently submitted a planning application for the work to your block and have not been instructed to start work.

Having considered leaseholders comments and observations, I have requested the estimate and schedule of works be re-issued, once work identified from ground level is quantified and existing scheduled items are checked.

The new estimate will include a building contingency sum for any unforeseen work.

Works will not be instructed until the new estimate has been issued and leaseholders observations have been considered and responded to.

A letter will be sent to all leaseholders explaining the notice of estimate will be re-issued

• Capabilities of Karen Sweeney

Following the meeting held on 24 November and 5 February, our assistant contract manager, Karen Sweeney, escalated the concerns raised by leaseholders, which have been considered along with your email.

Our major works programme is being delivered under a design and build contract, Breyer Group have design responsibility and our client representative, Ridge, review and approve works schedules, prior to Lewisham Homes instructing the work.

Karen is an assistant contract manager with a number of years’ experience of our major works programme. Karen is very customer focused and looks after site progress and our residents experience. Karen reports to contract manager, David Pritchard who can be contacted via email XXX should you have any specific concerns.

• Audio recording refused

Following the event held on 24 November, Karen referred the request to make an audio recording of the site visit on 5 February to our head of communications, Gavin Jones. Gavin confirmed you could make written notes of the visit and share these with other residents but did not believe it was appropriate to video or make audio recordings of our staff. As you will appreciate, making recordings can be quite intimidating and we believed it unnecessary.

• Meeting request

A further meeting with leaseholders will be arranged once the revised estimate has been issued. I will make sure the correct people are present to answer questions relating to the specification, delivery of work, costs and repayment options

I hope this meeting will help instil more confidence in the work proposed to your block

Kind regards

Sandra Hart

Head of Planned Delivery

Major works

This is my communications with Gavin (p.s. still dont have evidence from LH showing we wanted to film the staff. Nice words manipulations)

Good morning Gavin,

I received your email but i dont think you sent your email to the correct leaseholder. I was not the one who were planning to film but I am the one who is suprised and puzzled by the ‘panic’ from Lewisham Homes regarding filming.

However, as the email addressed to myself I will respond as I was the one requested this meeting in the first place.

First of all, I sent an email to all attendees yesterday requesting no video or audio recording at the meeting coming. I will be taking notes and there will be enough leaseholders to witness and verify their correctness.

Second of all, as I witnessed the initial email from the leaseholder to Major Works team about filming, I dont see any expressed intentions to film the staff that you are referring to. The filming was intended for the areas and points in questions. Therefore please show me quotes from the emails that express intentions to film the staff, till then I will take your email as incorrect representation of what has been communicated .

Third of all, the meeting on the 5th of February has been requested, and consequently arranged, due to:

• extortionate amount of public money and leaseholders money Lewisham Homes are planning to spend on improvements in Standlake block that leaseholders would like to see the proof of.
• unclear, contradictive and not making sense responses from Major Works department on selected jobs in question.
• based on the responses from Major Works team there were evidently no one from Lewisham Homes major works team attended the site to confirm the validity of the works survey that had been carried out by the independent surveyor (during questioning the works by leaseholders, it has been brought to Lewisham Homes attention that there were works that we should not be billed for, there were works on the list that are not required in the block, there were works that have been done in the past that will be done again - all of that resulting in public funds and leaseholders billed twice, overbilled, charged for smth that should not be charged)

The meeting requested is to be able to obtain satisfactory answers from Lewisham Homes as there are multiple grounds for the doubt of Lewisham Homes competence, professionalism, correctness of information recieved from Lewisham Homes. It is in both, leaseholders and Lewisham Homes, interests to meet and discuss the works on the list and works in questions to reach mutual understanding. I hope Lewisham Himes has no objection to that?

Kat
Standlake

Good evening,

Dear Councillor Hall,

My name is Kat and I am writing this email in the support of Mr XXX. I am a leaseholder as he is and Lewisham Homes is a managing agent of the block where I have my flat. Lewisham Homes is currently under investigation being carried out by some leaseholders in our bock since April 2017 including myself. Once the investigation is over, I will be seeking an opportunity to present our findings to Lewisham Councillors. The subject of our investigations is poor block and estate management, very strange financial activities that affect leaseholders budgets and public funds. As an example:

• Lewisham Homes claims over £53,000 for caretaking services for three tower blocks. The service consist of 10 hrs per week per block cleaning (30 hrs per three blocks per week), 44 weeks of cleaning services out of 52 where 8 weeks reserved for staff sickness and holidays.

• The recent major works estimate was issued by Lewisham Homes to leaseholders of our estate where the estimated bill for one leaseholder came to £25,000. We invited Lewisham Homes representatives together with its contractors and surveyor to come to our block and show us the works on the list and some works on the list did not exist or could not be pointed out be Lewisham Homes representatives or its surveyor. The estimate was actually a guesstimate. I believe if such guesstimate is presented to me by a private contractor, I would involve the police to have such company investigated and criminally prosecuted. I am currently enquiring the possibility of such actions towards Lewisham Homes.

I would like to stress that Mr XXX is not the only victim of Lewisham Homes strange management and financial activities. Bampton leaseholders are also suspicious about management and financial activities carried out by Lewisham Homes and if Mr XXX goes ahead with legal actions against Lewisham Council, he will certainly be supported by us, leaseholders from Bampton estate.

I will be in touch once our investigation is over so I can present a report with supporting information.

Yours sincerely,

Kat

Standlake Point

Councillor Hall has just replied. Fantastic. With actions and recommendations that I will follow.

Good evening,

Dear Councillor Egan,

My name is Kat and I am a leaseholder of a flat on Bampton Estate, SE23-2XB.

I have recently contacted Councillor Alan Hall in the support of Mr XXX who happened to be in dispute with Lewisham Homes to the point that the matter has been escalated to yourself and Councillor. Mr Hall kindly replied to my email and advised to alert the Cabinet member for Housing as well. As I mentioned in the email to Mr Hall, Mr XXX is not the only victim of Lewisham Homes’ strange management and financial activities. Leaseholders from Standlake Point on Bampton Estate have been investigating Lewisham Homes on various matters since April 2017. The investigation is ongoing and once it is completed I will be preparing a report which I will be seeking to deliver to Lewisham Councillors and Cabinet Members. It will be a multiple pages report with a lot of evidence and communications.

I would like to highlight 2 issues out of many that show the seriousness of leaseholders concerns on our estate and in our block:

Lewisham Homes claims over £53,000 for caretaking services for three tower blocks. The service consists of 10 hrs per week per block cleaning (30 hrs per three blocks per week), 44 weeks of cleaning services out of 52 where 8 weeks reserved for staff sickness and holidays. (Please see attachments). I still have not received an explanation on how they came to this amount, Lewisham Homes skillfully avoid answers, but i must say I will not rest until I see all invoices that justify these £53,000. The quality of services is another issue which will form a part of my report as well.

The recent major works estimate was issued by Lewisham Homes to leaseholders of our estate where the estimated bill for one leaseholder came to £25,000. We invited Lewisham Homes representatives together with its contractors and surveyor to come to our block and show us the works on the list and some works on the list did not exist or could not be pointed out by Lewisham Homes representatives or its surveyor (please see attachments) The estimate was actually a guesstimate. I believe if such guesstimate is presented to me by a private contractor, I would involve the police to have such company investigated and criminally prosecuted. I am currently enquiring the possibility of such actions towards Lewisham Homes. It needs mentioning that we have recently received communications from Lewisham Homes that the estimate will be reissued (please see attachments), I hope Lewisham Homes understood consequences of issuing guesstimates which in fact is quite shocking and illegal.

Concluding my email, I would also like to make a small comment on one sentence addressed by XXX to Mr XXX (the reply was Cc to me). XXX said: "We still think these are essential for both the protection of residents’ safety and to comply with fire safety law…This is an area we take very seriously, and will take legal action if required.’’

Just to show how ‘residents’ safety and ‘comply with fire law’ Lewisham Homes take “very seriously”:

From the evidence that will be a part of my report:

Standlake Point, Bampton Estate
Photos taken on 17/04/2016, 22/06/2016, 31/08/2016, 31/10/2016, 8/11/2016, 13/11/2016, 16/11/2016, 21/11/2016, 23/11/2016, 28/11/2016, 03/12/2016, 06/12/2016, 12/12/2016, 22/01/2017 (the dates under each photo is in reverse order): photos show that the front of the building is a dumping ground for months and months, creating fire hazard with cigarette buds landing next to the dumped items; the picture of wood boards used to patch the canopy ceiling that costed over £120 when the real price with materials, labor and VAT is about £70

I think legal actions are definitely required, please forgive me,…against Lewisham Homes. And as I mentioned to Mr Hall, if Mr XXX decides to go ahead with legal actions, he will certainly have support from Bampton leaseholders. We have enough evidence to show Lewisham Homes strange management and financial activities which Mr XXX is trying to bring to the attention of all of us. I hope it will never reach this point and all troubles will be resolved amicably.

I will be writing again when I am ready to present my report. I also hope that Mr XXX will receive support from councillors and resolution of his problems with Lewisham Homes.

Yours sincerely,
Kat
Standlake Point

Service charges

Just an UPD with our service charges claims. So far to be returned to Standlake leaseholders (all these charges were billed in error, we should not be billed for. But if we did not check, we would have paid for them) :

1) job #4318269 / 06/03/2015 – rebuild wall in garage area - £715.66 block cost

2) job # 4457545 / 28/07/2016 – fit new lock case and cylinder to caretakers - £224.25 block cost

3) job # 4481137 / 19/10/2016 – jetters to clear caretakers toilet - £165.52 block cost

4) job # 4434639 / 11/05/2016 – flat 19 reports faulty entry phone system - £74.56 block cost

5) job # 4508107 / 25/01/2017 – measure up balcony door flat 33 - £41.00 block cost

Total for above: £1220.99 per block

£30.52 per leaseholder

Plus:

6) caretaking service adjustment for year 2015/16/17/18 - £106.21 refund to each leaseholder

Total: £136.73 refund due to each leaseholder in Standlake block.

It will be another battle to get this money back. Got service charge bill for 2018-1019, no adjustment showing.

IF YOU ARE A LEASEHOLDER - ASK YOUR MANAGING AGENT FOR A BREAKFOWN OF SERVICE CHARGES SUMMARY. It shows what services/products you are billed for. CHECK YOUR LEASE, to see if the charges are or are not in breach of the lease.

We met Duwayne Brooks today. The only election candidate who invited us to talk about our leasehold troubles. I wont go into much deatails of our meeting but he had some picture already about how leaseholders are fleeced in Lewisham. He kinda confirmed our fears and guesses in terms of what is going on in the Council and managing agents when it comes to contracts, money, dealing with issues, etc. We are not the first ones to stand up against this whole leasehold (and public funds) fleecing machine, probably won’t be the last. However, i liked his suggestions in terms what he would do if he happens to win. And i think he drew targets I will be aiming to achieve as an outcome of our saga . His suggestions are:

1. disclosure of all contracts and subcontracts of the managing agents, no more secrecy due to the commercial nature

2. Leaseholders protection department in the Council that can deal with issues without bias

3. independent and transparent audit of the managing agents with full disclosure of audit outcomes.

To me, it seems like realistic ways to put things right as all this managing agents business fleeces not only leaseholders but public funds too.

Duwayne said if anyone wants to get in touch with him to talk about leasehold issues, he will be happy to meet and talk. His contact number 07999821441.

SERVICE CHARGES

To: the head of the leasehold department, Lewisham Homes

Cc. complaint department, Lewisham Homes

Dear sir, madam,

My name is Kat. I am a leaseholder of flat XXX in Standlake Point, Windrush Lane, Forest Hill, SE23-2XB. I have recently received the service charge bill for 2018/19.

The following refunds are due to leaseholders of Standlake Block, SE23-2XB that were agreed by Lewisham Homes staff due to incorrect billing/missing services:

1. job #4318269 / 06/03/2015 – rebuild wall in garage area - £715.66 block cost - refund due to leaseholders, ref. letter from Victoria Akiwowo on 2/10/2017 ref. 032257/VA

2. job # 4457545 / 28/07/2016 – fit new lock case and cylinder to caretakers - £224.25 block cost - refund due to leaseholders, ref. letter from Victoria Akiwowo/ ref. 032257/VA on 7/11/2017

3. job # 4481137 / 19/10/2016 – jetters to clear caretakers toilet - £165.52 block cost - refund due to leaseholders, ref. letter from Victoria Akiwowo/ ref. 032257/VA on 7/11/2017

4. job # 4434639 / 11/05/2016 – flat 19 reports faulty entry phone system - £74.56 block cost - refund due to leaseholders, ref. email from Victoria Akiwowo on 12/01/2018

5. job # 4508107 / 25/01/2017 – measure up balcony door flat 33 - £41.00 block cost - refund due to leaseholders, ref. email from Victoria Joseph on 7/03/2018

Total refund for above: £1220.99 per block
£30.52 per leaseholder

Plus:

6. caretaking service adjustment for year 2015/16/17/18 - £106.21 refund due to each leaseholder - ref. email from Emma Donnelly on 15/03/2018

Total: £136.73 refund due to each leaseholder in Standlake block.

However the refund adjustmens are not reflected in my bill. Could you please explain why? I expect the above amount to be deducted from the service charge total for 2018/19. Can you please urgently arrange to resend the service charge bill for the correct amount so I can arranged my payments.

Please note, I will be escalating this matter further if the correct bill is not issued withing 7 working days.

I must mention that what I and other leaseholders in our block have been experiencing for the past year is absolutely disgusting. I have been already in touch with Damien Egan and reported to him few out of many issues we encountered with your organisation. My next step will be meeting him and discussing our troubles in person. I will inform you formally when that happens.

Kind regards,
Kat
25/03/2018

Sent on 9th April
Dear complaint department,

I would like to place a complaint about your leasehold department and the head of the leasehold department.

Two weeks ago I sent an email for the attention of the head of the leasehold department regarding missing service charge adjustments which were due to leaseholders of Standlake Block, SE23-2XB. Please see attached. I have received no response, neither acknowledgement of the receipt of my email.

Leaseholders of Standlake Block were charged for missing services and works that they did not have to pay. We were billed incorrectly. The leasehold department staff confirmed errors and promised to remove charges/ return money for missing services. However the refunds are not reflected in our service charge bill for 2018/19. I asked the head of the leasehold department to explain why it had not been done and re-issue the correct bill reflecting the adjustments so i, and other leaseholders, can arrange payments. But I received no communications from the homeownership team. I have no choice but to escalate this matter further to yourself. Can you please ask the head of the leasehold department to respond to my original email with an explanation why the adjustments are missing and re-issue the correct bill (including refunds due to us) to Standlake Point leaseholders so I and others can arrange payments.

I trust 5 working days are sufficient to respond and to put things right.

Kind regard
Kat
Standlake Point
Leaseholder

The email below was copied to Councillor Damien Egan and Councillor Alan Hall, sent today:

Dear Jana, thank you for your reply.

I would like to clarify that my email to the head of the leasehold department was not an enquiry but a complaint.

The department charged Standlake leaseholders for works/services which were missed or we did not suppose to pay. Then, after us questioning the charges, the errors were admitted and promised to be removed. Having enough time to compose the correct service charge bill for 2018/19, the department still issues it with errors. Hoping that leaseholders will not notice? As with the current major works estimate that had works that did not exist or overly estimated. Hoping leaseholders will not notice as well?

Jana, i think your organisation does not realise the seriousness of the issues we have been bringing to the attention of Lewisham Homes staff for the past year. I have your leaseholders from other areas in Lewisham contacting me with the same problems as we have been having in Standlake Block which only points out to their consistency across the Bourough and therefore its deliberate nature.

As I may appreciate the full response before 13th April, i am expecting for the correct bill, reflecting the refunds to Standlake block leaseholders, to be received by us by 16th April. If we dont, I will escalate this matter further down the dispute line.

Kind regards,

Kat
Standlake Point

Sent today to complaint depart:

Dear Jana, i hope you are well.

I have not received the correct service charge bill reflecting the refunds that are due to Standlake leaseholders, neither the response from the head of the leasehold department that I asked for. It needs to be noticed that 3 weeks have already gone in my attempt to receive the correct bill from your organisation (and 2 deadlines for response have already missed by Lewisham Homes)

Money are due back to Standlake leaseholders for missed services and incorrect charges claimed by Lewisham Homes.

I am now proceeding further with my grievance.

Can you please provide me with Lewisham Homes standard complaint procedure for Leaseholders to ensure I am giving your organisation all opportunities to resolve the greviance amicably before seeking external enforcement means.

Kind Regards,

Kat
Standlake Point

UPD, i finally received the confirmation of the refund. It took me over 3 weeks and intiation of a complaint process.

icase 450063- Stage-1-Response- 37 Standlake Point-final- 13apr18.pdf (147.4 KB)

Now, each leaseholder in our block will receive £136 pounds of returns. We have 11 leaseholders in our block, that is over £1400 due to LH claims errors and unprovided services. Lewisham Homes has 5000 leaseholders and counting. If they make £100 worth of mistakes/claims for services they dont provide a year per leaseholder on avarage, it is around £500,000 profit for Lewisham Homes per year if leaseholders dont check, dont investigate, dont claim. These are leaseholders moneys Lewisham Homes potentially received from us. I find it beyond outrageous and feel it should be deal with.

I receive emails suggesting the establishment of Leasehold Association. It is doable. It can cover all Lewisham Homes leaseholders. BUT it will require people who can dedicate some of their time for the association plus good support from the rest of the leaseholder as dealing with Lewisham Homes is time consuming and can be stressfull. I will certainly be one of very active members of the association if it happens to be established. It is a question of who would be those few at the heart of the organisation to undertake the management. Initiatives are very welcomed. Let me know of your thoughts.

Well done.

Sent today:

To: Lewisham Homes complaint department.
To: Jana B.

Good morning Jana, thank you for resolving the issue with the incorrect billing for Standlake Leaseholders.

To close this matter, could you please confirm that the correct bill was posted to all Standlake Leaseholders, SE23-2XB (I spoke to one of the leaseholders in our block and the person did not receive anything from Lewisham Homes yet).

Can you please also provide the direct email address of Glenda Omogbai, Leasehold Services Team Manager as we have few unresolved enquiries that need clarification.

I would also like to metion for the record:

The response stated: The service charge refunds were not reflected on your estimated service charge bill 2018/19. The bills were printed before the adjustments were applied on your account.

My comment to the above, without prejudice: please advise all staff of Lewisham Homes to stop lying. The original bill was received in March 2018 with my payments records up to date, including the last March payment due at the end of March which was correctly reflected as not received. The leasehold department had full information upto March and bill was printed in March. 3 refund adjustments due to leaseholders had confirmation in 2017 and one in January 2018 - well before the compiling and issuing the bill for 2018/19. The adjustments were not applied when Lewisham Homes had plenty of time to do correct calculations and issues correct billing. Please advise your organisation to ensure that it will never happen again as Standlake leaseholders are keeping all cases and communications on records which are also available to public and press. Another instances in the future of incorrect claims, billing, unprovided services and other dodgy activities by Lewisham Homes will lead to severe consequences for Lewisham Homes and Lewisham Council. I am also having consultations with other Lewisham leasholders in respect to establishing a leaseholders association. Your organisation will be informed if and when one takes place.

Please confirm the receipt of this email.

Kind regards,
Kat
Standlake

Good morning,

Dear complaint department team, I have not received the reply/ confirmation to my email, please see attached.

I am still waiting for the direct email address of Glenda Omogbai, Leasehold Services Team Manager, also the confirmation that the refund adjustments were sent to all leaseholders in Standlake Block, SE23-2XB.

Can you please reply.

Kat,
Standlake Point

Responsr from Lewsham Homes homeownership team:

Dear XXX,

Thank you for your email received 24 April 2018.

The contents of your email have been noted.

You requested for confirmation of the correct bill sent to all Standlake Point leaseholders.

Other leaseholders will be contacted individually.

Request for Glenda Omogbai email address.

You can contact Glenda Omogbai using our generic email address which is: homeownershipservices@lewishamhomes.org.uk. All correspondence will be logged using our generic email address.

Service charge Adjustments

All adjustments due to you have been applied to your account. I have attached a copy of the letter to confirm this and hard copy sent in the post to you.

I hope this is useful.

Kind regards

Victoria Joseph

Leasehold Services Officer

Well done Kat, just goes to show with determination the under dog can win.

Next stop the planning review, the council is ignoring the old Brent Knoll school site and abusing their power over their tenants.

Without prejudice,

Dear Victoria,

Cc. Glenda.Omogbai, the head of the leasehold department.
Cc. Jana B., complaint department
Cc. Damien Egan
Cc. Cllr Alan Hall

Thank you for your reply. I appreciate that. However I find you reply unsatisfactory.

You reply stated that the refund due to me is £42.38 when the actual amount due to me is £60.27 this year and £76.47 next year. Please see a confirmation letter from Ms Omogbai. You reduced the amount due to me by £17.89. I consider that as a fraud and insist that Ms Omogbai and Lewisham Homes Complaint Department initiate an internal investigation of the homeownership department. I am not accepting apologies and excuses for mistakes any longer, there are far too many of them for human errors.

You said that other Standlake leaseholders will be contacted individually regarding refund adjustments. I understand that, but why they have not been contacted already?? The response received from Ms G. Omogbai was in the middle of April, we are almost in the middle of May now.

The complaint department has kindly provided me with Ms. Omogbai’s personal work email address. I am confused as why the homeownership department refuses to provide the email of their manager.

As you can see, Mr Egan, now the Mayor of Lewisham, and Councillor Alan Hall are copied in our communications as the issues with Lewisham Homes and leaseholders are going out of being internal and local.

I will be contacting Ms Omogbai and Complaint Department for further action.

Kind regards,
Kat
Standlake Point

2018-05-08-Credit Adjustment notification-37 Standlake Point.doc (63.5 KB)
icase 450063- Stage-1-Response- 37 Standlake Point-final- 13apr18.pdf (147.4 KB)

Hi John, it is not over. I am requesting an internal investigation, see post above. Ms Joseph reduced the amount due by £17.89. I call that a fraud.

Without prejudice,

Dear Glenda Omogbai, Jana Blahova,

I would like to request an investigation of your home ownership department please.

I received a response from Victoria Joseph today which i find very unsatisfactory. Her response stated that £42.38 was due to be refunded to me (and consequently to other Standlake Leaseholders) when the actual amount due is £60.27 for this year. She reduced the amount by £17.89 and I consider it as fraud.

Also she refused to give me the email of the leasehold department manager and, from her reply, it is clear that other leaseholders from Standlake Block have not been contacted yet regarding the refunds adjustments.

I am not accepting apologies and excuses as there are too many errors happening in Lewisham Homes for them to be classed as human errors. I demand the home ownership department is investigated. I would like to receive a copy of the investigation report which should be also copeid to all recipients on the list, including the Mayor of Lewisham and Councillor Alan Hall.

Please see relevant information attached.

Please confirm the receipt of this email.

Kind regards,
Kat
Standlake Point

Have any media outlets taken interest in your work here Kat? I swear I saw something happening at Southwark council similar to what you are experiencing reporting on BBC London News a couple of years back

No, but we will probably go to the press at some stage. At the moment we are collecting evidence and for public to see what is actually going on.

Fair play. Good luck to you!

Thank you

Sent today to Lewisham Homes:

To: Naddine Hay
Cc. Glenda Omogbai
Cc. Complaint department

Dear Naddine, i received a letter from you today, pls see attached and called you today to speak to yourself but you were not available. I left my number to call me back. However i would like answers to the following:

• why you are sending me a letter demanding full payment when i sent my request to your department to pay my service charge by 10 monthly installments on 25th April ? However, I received no reply from your department. I sent an email on 9th May chasing your reply. On what grounds you are demanding full payment when you failed to respond?

• How did you come to £1177.76 amount when my balance on 13/04 was £1150 and I already made another payment at the end of April, my balance should be £1035.

I am expecting you reply within 3 working days including today. Please also note, all your correspondence is kept on record and maybe available to public, the press or can be used in any legal disputes against you or your organistaion.

Kind regards,
Kat
Standlake Point

TimePhoto_20180511_1417422448×3264 1.38 MB

I got the same letter despite also filling in the standing order form and posting it back as I have done for the last 20 years. Every few months I also seem to get letter saying I have missed payments for my major works bill despite also having a standing order for major works and each time I call up it seems they ha e allocated payments to the wrong account. Totally chaotic and dangerous work practices.

The complaint dep. forwarded my request for internal investigation of the homeownership department to the next complaint stage.

Thank you for your email.

I am sorry you were unhappy with the clarification following your stage 1 complaint response.

Your case is now being reviewed by a Head of Service at stage two ref: 450063 of our complaints procedure. A full response will be sent to you on or before 30 May 2018.

I am sick and tired of them. When they took over, they sent me a cash payment card for major works, that was around 2010- my money gone missing. Then they offered the direct debit option - tried and my money gone missing again. I use only one cash payment card now that works - the service charge card that i pay my service charge and major works to and they still getting it wrong. I no longer believe they are human error mistakes.

I agree, each time the money is missing they suddenly can find it when I tell them the exact date it left my account and each time they try to say my standing order is set up wrong despite the fact both my service charge and major works are set up with the information given to me by them which is all correct.

Yes, exactly that but we need to waste our time to put things right every time that happens. Everything is just so wrong about them.

Thank you so so so much for this dear Kat,
My mother is a leaseholder at Radcot Point I thought we are alone against Lewisham Homes, and now feel much more supported.
I’ll keep an eye on the developments and happy to support your efforts as much as I can.
Blessing
Illi

Dear Illi, can you please check your personal messages.

Kat

Dear all, this thread is no longer active. If you have problems, issues or concerns please contact us

Lewisham Council Leasholder Alliance

lewishamcla@gmail.com

Or myself kat.standlake.point@gmail.com

Big thank you to Chris for letting to host this thread.

Kat