Rendall and Rittner refuse to take membership fees on behalf of CBWRA-the end of the collegiate relationship?

It appears that Rendall and Rittner are no longer prepared to deduct the Chelsea Bridge Wharf Residents’ association fees at ‘source’ i.e. added to the service charge. Since the end of 2021 Rendall and Rittner have been making all leaseholders members of CBWRA by default (i.e. without explicit consent) and adding £20 membership to the service charge (up from £10, from early 2022) . Leaseholders can opt out but many would be unaware they were added as members unless they read through the very small print in service charge billing. I said at the time that I felt this was inappropriate as members should always be aware they are joining CBWRA and CBWRA should always hold its own membership data for a variety of reasons from GDPR compliance through to being able to run votes directly and not through Rendall and Rittner.

In any case, in February 2023, Rendall and Rittner decided to stop this arrangement which was very convenient for CBWRA (because all leaseholders were members of CBWRA by default). It is not clear why this happened – possibly because of what seems to be a deteriorating relationship with CBWRA (the Feb. CBWRA committee meeting notes make some reference to this) following a very inappropriate estate management hire, which most residents will be aware of.

Ending this arrangement is a good thing in the long term but in the short term it is very bad news for CBWRA because now they can only get members if they consciously decide to opt in and this inevitably will mean a significant decline in membership. At the same time (and probably not a coincidence) CBWRA have hiked their membership fee by 140% (from £20 to £48). No meaningful justification has been given other than ‘well they charge £200 at BPS’.

Obviously CBWRA will now have a much reduced membership and may need to charge each person more in order to have the same income. But increasing membership fee by 140% just at the time when you need people to opt in, and not giving a clear justification, is in my view a bad decision, compounded by poor communication.

Berkeley Homes have noted that CBWRA is having trouble providing evidence of membership sufficient to justify being recognised. Could it be that CBWRA are looking round for people to blame if their recognition is withdrawn? (and hence the slightly bonkers claims about me trying to get CBWRA derecognised).

Personally I would be happy to pay a bit more if CBWRA was better governed, more democratic and was transparent regarding its finances. It will be interesting to see how many leaseholders do opt in (if we are ever told) and clearly CBWRA should not expect too many non leaseholders to join given that they are not allowed to attend committee meetings and are not infrequently treated disrespectfully on the CBW app.

Is this the end of the ‘collegiate relationship’? Or just a tiff? Either way, as I have been saying for many years, we really need a new managing agent and one that we have control over (i.e. Right to Manage). The narrative of ‘the one bad apple which has been removed’ and massive improvement under the ‘new regime’ under Brian Klue never had any credibility in my view.

If elected Chair I will use my knowledge of GDPR and data handling to help put our house in order. I will ensure that all committee members understand how to comply with GDPR in handling personal data of residents and I will review the 140% increase in membership fees which seems hard to justify. I will also publish a statement of income and expenditure within one month and will seek resident feedback on any issues arising from that. I will devise a plan to increase CBWRA membership on an opt in basis, by highlighting the benefits of membership and massively increasing resident engagement through regular meetings and consultations. That is what good governance means.

Please vote for me, to help bring about a new model of residents’ association not just a rebrand of the current offering.