A very strange letter from CBWRA and what it really means

On 2.3.23 CBWRA published a very strange letter on the CBW app.

This letter appears to claim that CBWRA has

i) Always ‘supported’ Right to Manage at CBW – despite the fact that they said in their May 2022 newsletter that Right to Manage was not possible at CBW

”‘’leaseholders in large estates are unable to sever ties with the former management company by utilising the right to manage scheme’’ (CBWRA newsletter May 2022)

and that Mike O’Driscoll was misleading residents for claiming that Right to Manage was possible

ii) They claim that they have an ongoing tender process for the management contract.

CBWRA also claimed on the app (2.3.23) that Berkley Homes had ”started a retender process of the management contract” and that this was due to lobbying by CBWRA. Both of those claims are denied by Berkeley Homes.

It seems possible to me that CBWRA wish to create the idea that the retendering process which Berkeley Homes MAY carry out is somehow a continuation of CBWRA’s failed retendering process via Roger Southam. However there is literally no relationship between these two processes. The CBWRA process started in Jan 22 through an agreement with Fairhold Artemis – Berkeley Homes never participated in it, which is why it failed. The Berkeley Homes process (if it happens) will obviously be BH led and CBWRA will have little input according to BH. BH also deny that CBWRA has had any lobbying impact on their decision of whether to retender or not.

In fact Berkeley Homes state (2.3.23) THEY HAVE NOT initiated a retender process but are considering doing do. They state they would not make any decision during a Chair election process – it is a shame CBWRA have not shown the same respect for their own election process.

They also note they have given CBWRA notice of withdrawing their recognition because they cannot prove that they have 50% of leaseholders as members.

What CBWRA’s letter should have said in my view is ”we are being derecognised because we outsourced our membership management/ fee taking to Rendall and Rittner , rather than run our own membership databases, and Rendall and Rittner then withdrew that service (according to CBWRA) when they heard that Right to manage might start and we now have no way to prove we have 50% leaseholder membership”

The attempts by various committee members to try to blame Mike O’Driscoll for this derecognition, when they are well aware of the real cause (i.e. their own poor choices with regard to holding membership data) is despicable.

This underlines both of my main manifesto polices – i.e. that there are massive issues with governance in CBWRA and that (relatedly) the current leadership/committee cannot deliver Right to Manage.

There has been huge unfairness in this election process – please vote for me and I will end these games, put our house in order, and pursue Right to Manage at the earliest opportunity (if BH proceed with retendering, which CBWRA apparently support, RTM will inevitably be delayed).