Rendall & Rittner censor notes of residents’ meeting at Chelsea Bridge Wharf
Below is the text of an official complaint which I made to Rendall & Rittner regarding the notes of the last residents’ meeting (October 2016). The notes, which were not circulated for more than a month after the meeting, systematically censored the vocal criticism of Rendall & Rittner and Berkeley Homes which had occurred at the meeting. I made a complaint to Rendall & Rittner to which I have still received no meaningful reply, and so am pursuing the complaint with the Property Ombudsman. I attach the doctored notes which R&R circulated. Those who attended the meeting will be well aware what a complete misrepresentation of the meeting these notes are. Rendall & Rittner, and Mr Harry Fenner in particular, can add censorship and deliberately misleading residents to their long list of failings
This is an official complaint in relation to the notes of the residents’ meeting (11.10.16) which were supplied to me more than a month later on 14.11.16, following a complaint about their delay and the refusal to respond to queries which I made to Harry Fenner following the meeting (I still await a response on that complaint).
Having had time to read the notes I find that they have been blatantly censored.
At the meeting I said that Berkeley Homes had made life hell for me and other residents since opening five depots in Sopwith Way in April 2016 without planning permission. This does not appear in the notes.
I stated that I had started a petition to Berkeley Homes calling for the closure of the depots and that any resident effected was invited to sign this and also to submit a formal objection to Berkeley Homes’ planning application regarding the depots via the Wandsworth Council website. This does not appear in the notes.
Harry Fenner claimed that he had not know about the depots and when pressed by me claimed that he did know about them but that he did not know that they did not have planning permission which, as I pointed out, was also untrue as I had sent him a copy of the letter from Wandsworth Council stating that Berkeley Homes did not have planning permission. This does not appear in the notes.
I stated that R&R had tried to stop me distributing information about the planning application (which you had in refusing to distribute a leaflet about this, without explanation). Harry Fenner denied this. This does not appear in the notes.
The notes state that Harry Fenner confirmed that ‘the depots within the arches were outside of Rendall & Rittner’s management remit’. Incorrect. That was not ‘confirmed’ to me at the meeting – it was claimed by Harry Fenner and strongly disputed. I pointed out that Rendall & Rittner had a responsibility to distribute information to residents about important issues which concern them. It is disingenuous to claim that it is outside your remit to circulate information about something such as the depots, which has had a massive negative impact in so many residents, and yet to circulate notes on minor issues such as social events. It is very obvious to me that the real reason you do not wish to keep residents informed about this is because it is extremely controversial (to say the least ) and embarrassing for Berkeley Homes.
Your notes make no mention of the conflict of interest which Harry Fenner explicitly recognised in relation to Charlie Garton-Jones – namely that many of those who are responsible for noise from high performance cars are clients of Charlie Garton-Jones and yet he is head of the (somewhat invisible) Chelsea Bridge Wharf Residents’ Association. I note in passing that Mr Garton-Jones did not attend the meeting and there was no representative from the ‘Residents’ Association’ but obviously that does not form part of my complaint.
Your notes make no mention of the fact that only a tiny minority of residents (20% approx) supported the door replacement programme (which along with new access system will cost residents more than £750,000) and that this was something largely pushed through at the request of the residents’ association (i.e. Mr Garton-Jones) for aesthetic reasons (i.e. to please his performance-car owning clients).
Regardless of what you think of my views or what I said at the meeting it is not appropriate to censor the meeting notes, which you are clearly trying to do. These are not minor omissions they are extremely substantive and should have appeared in the notes of the meeting. This censorship of issues which you would rather not deal with or discuss is completely unacceptable.
At the next residents’ meeting I will raise this attempt to censor the notes.
Across the board, I intend to hold Rendall & Rittner up to proper and reasonable scrutiny, which has till now been absent.
Please bear in mind when you respond that there were many independent witnesses at the meeting (i.e. residents) who can verify what was said at the meeting.
If you are unwilling to correct the notes so that they are a more accurate reflection of the meeting then I will have no choice but to publish this complaint and your response, alongside the notes.
I note that you have once again failed to make any attempt to record the number of residents attending the residents’ meeting although I have asked you several times to do this.
For your information, at the time of this complaint (9.12.16), Berkeley Homes are still using the Sopwith Way Depots despite having been clearly instructed by the council to stop using them, and clear out all their materials by 11th November 2016 or face enforcement action.
(name of resident)
Download minutes of Residents’ meeting 11.10.16 Residents meetings minutes 11.10.2016 (1)