Chelsea Bridge Wharf Residents’ Newsletter – Summer 2022

Read online Click to access cbw-news-summer-2022-final-110822.pdf

The Chelsea Bridge Wharf Residents’ Association (CBWRA) has claimed RTM is not achievable at CBW – experts say otherwise! Independent expert advice obtained by residents in June 2022 shows that CBW can achieve Right to Manage (https://tinyurl.com/28dht6ya) and therefore it appears CBWRA may have misinformed residents in stating that Right to Manage was not possible at CBW because of the judgement of First Port v Settler’s Court.

Rendall and Rittner have refused to confirm or deny anecdotal evidence from residents suggesting
service charge increases in summer 2022 of 15-25%, varying considerably by block). Clearly this is way beyond the current or projected inflation rate for 2022/23. Rendall and Rittner must go and Right to Manage is the only way to do that.

Click to access cbw-news-summer-2022-final-110822.pdf

Right to Manage is still the only
way forward at Chelsea Bridge Wharf!
cbw-news-summer-2022-final-110822Download
etter from Roger Southam 21.5.22, written at the invitation of CBWRA. It claims that Right to Manage is not possible at CBW because of First Port v Settlers Court. But in fact this judgement has no relevance to Chelsea Bridge Wharf
Letter from Roger Southam 21.5.22, written at the invitation of CBWRA. It claims that Right to Manage is not possible at CBW because of First Port v Settlers Court. But in fact this judgement has no relevance to Chelsea Bridge Wharf as per advice from Canonbury Estate Management (below)
Independent advice from Canonbury Estate Management June 2022 which directly contradicts the claim by Chelsea Bridge Wharf Residents’ Association and Mr Roger Southam (above) that Right to Manage is not possible at Chelsea Bridge Wharf because of the ‘First Port v Settlers Court’ judgement

Furthermore CBWRA circulated a newsletter (presumably written or approved by its Chair Mr Stephen Thompson) on 23.5.22 claiming that

”.. the 12 Jan 2022 Supreme Court decision in First Port v Settlers Court RTM Ltd (see link below) means that leaseholders in large estates are unable to sever ties with the former management company by utilising the right to manage scheme”

This is completely incorrect. As stated in the letter from Canonbury, the First Port v Settlers Court judgement only applies to (a relatively few developments) where there is more than one RTM or where there is one RTM but it has not taken over all the blocks in a development. First Port v Settlers Court DOES NOT mean that that ”leaseholders in large estates are unable to sever ties with the former management company by utilising the right to manage scheme”, as even the most basic reading of the judgement would confirm.

So in summary, in true Orwellian fashion, the author of this blog was accused of ‘misleading’ residents, for stating what is obviously true – that Right to Manage is possible at Chelsea Bridge Wharf. It would appear that it is in fact CBWRA who have misinformed residents. My CBW app account was closed without any due process or meaningful explanation. Such is the state of governance and freedom of speech within the Chelsea Bridge Wharf Residents’ Association.

Category : Berkeley Homes, Burnelli Building, cash call, CBWRA, CBWRA finances, Chelsea Bridge Wharf Residents' Association, feedback from residents, Horace Building, Howard Building, Issues with the developer (Berkeley Homes), Oswald Building, profiteering, Rendall & Rittner, rendall and rittner, resident complaints about Berkeley Homes, Richard Daver, Richard Daver, Right to Manage, Roger Southam, satisfaction survey, Service charges, The Chelsea Bridge Wharf 'Residents' Association', Transparency, Warwick Building