What’s happening at Chelsea Bridge Wharf: the 30 second (or possibly 60 second) summary
The ‘retendering of the management contract’ has failed, as I predicted in January 2022 and as I described in the newsletter I circulated a few weeks ago, wasting up to £15,000 of residents’ cash. There has been no apology from Stephen Thompson, Chair of CBWRA or Charlie Garton-Jones who promised that the retendering would be a quicker and cheaper alternative to Right to Manage and that we would have ‘a new managing agent’ by June 2022.
Right to Manage for the whole development is the only way forward, so that we can choose our own managing agent and gain control of expenditure and decision-making
The Chelsea Bridge Wharf Residents’ Association (CBWRA) misinformed residents (in my view and that of independent advice) about the law regarding Right to Manage, in stating that the supreme Court judgement of First Port v Settlers Court prevents Right to Manage at Chelsea Bridge Wharf. In fact, the judgement has NO RELEVANCE to Right to Manage at Chelsea Bridge Wharf as independent advice clearly shows I do not claim any intent to misinform but nonetheless it appears this claim, that RTM is not possible because of First Port v Settlers Court seems to be incorrect.
Right to Manage for the whole development IS therefore possible, indeed it is the only way that residents can gain the right to choose the managing agent for the development
CBWRA concede that here has been little or no improvement from Rendall and Rittner (committee meeting notes)
CBWRA continue to censor opposing views and discussion on Right to Manage on the CBW app (through the closure of my account) and do not apparently plan to consult residents about Right to Manage strategy.
Since January 2021 there has been ONE meeting between CBWRA and residents (May 2022) and two meetings between Rendall and Rittner and residents (Dec 2021 and October 2022).
Residents were promised recordings of the meeting with Rendall and Rittner in December 2021 and the failed AGM in May 2022 but these have not been produced for either meeting.
Only leaseholders (not residents more generally) may attend CBWRA monthly committee meetings but only as mute observers – they cannot ask questions or comment. Attendance is only in person (no online access) which makes it much harder for leaseholders to join the meetings (especially those with a disability, those who have caring responsibilities, those who are not able to work from home or those who do not live at Chelsea Bridge Wharf or even in the UK (a significant proportion of leaseholders at CBW are landlords who live outside London or live abroad),
The meeting room used for committee meeting only allows for 3 to 4 residents to attend (although given that they are not allowed to speak during the meeting, there is not high demand to attend).
No recordings of the CBWRA committee meetings are available to residents, and sometimes transcripts rather than notes are produced. Residents are not allowed to join the meeting remotely/by zoom etc. The location of the meeting is not announced until the day of the meeting. A ‘transcript’ (as opposed to notes) is provided usually a 3-4 weeks after the meeting. This is odd given that a transcript takes only a few days to produce.
No quorate AGM has ever been held
No statement of the number of members has ever been given (to the best of my knowledge)
Service charges continue to increase massively and way beyond inflation – neither CBWRA or Rendall and Rittner have given any meaningful explanation for these shocking increases
The ”management audit” of service charge accounts promised in January has apparently still not even started and will not be a management audit but rather a superficial audit of service charge accounts, led by someone who is not an accountant and who is being paid £250 an hour
The vote on options for the fountains (e.g. filling some of them in) which was promised for September has seemingly been quietly forgotten
CBWRA are continuing to ignore their own constitution by making changes to it at the request of Berkeley Homes, and not having these approved at an AGM
No one on the CBWRA committee has been elected (apart from the Chair)
Residents who are not leaseholders (i.e. tenants or family members of leaseholders) are not allowed to join the committee, not allowed to attend committee meetings and as there are no elections they cannot vote for a representative either and thus are totally disenfranchised. Non-leaseholders being committee members would prevent recognition but I see no reason why they cannot attend meetings.
The CBWRA committee are banned from making complaints or petitions against Rendall and Rittner (committee meeting September 2021)
Last updated 24.10.22