Urang and Chelsea Bridge Wharf Right to Manage Company hide from the ballot box again – September 14th elections postponed without explanation

In a move which is not particularly unexpected, Urang and the unelected directors of the Chelsea Bridge Wharf Right to manage company have again dodged the ballot box, cancelling the elections which Tony Hymers of Urang promised to an audience of leaseholders at a meeting on July 9th, without any meaningful explanation. This was announced in an email today (29th August) from Bella Metcalf of Urang. These games are very familiar to residents of Chelsea Bridge Wharf and follow the same pattern as the CBWRA chair elections over the last 4-5 years:

• That leaseholders have to fight for an election to be called
• Eventually and reluctantly an election date is agreed, usually many months past the agreed term
• That date is then itself continually extended often without explanation
• No process for elections is announced until a few weeks before the election to prevent any debate or campaigning and to minimise the chance of anyone coming forward to stand
• That the CBW app account of at least one potential candidate has been closed, to silence them
• There is no clarity in the voting process and no independent inspection of the results. Rules are changed at the last minute without explanation.

. As recently as September 2024 these directors insisted that there would be NO ELECTIONS for directors of the CBW right to manage company which shows astonishing arrogance and entitlement. After pressure from myself and others, these people (Louis Kendall, Larisa Villar Hauser – now resigned, Stephen Thompson, Tony Spoerer and Katherine Greenway) reluctantly agreed that there would be elections but refused to give a date. When Urang took over in May still no date was announced. Finally,  at the first residents’ meeting with Urang on June 9th they announced that there would be elections for directors on September 14^th {awarding themselves another unelected period of 4 months) but absolutely no details were given of how the elections would be conducted. So here we are, 2 and a half months later, and just 3 weeks from the supposed date of the elections, with no consultation to leaseholders about how to stand for director posts, what the process will be, how votes will be counted and checked. There is no provision for any discussion or debate. There has been no consultation with leaseholders about their priorities and it seems that Urang and the CBW RTM company are proceeding with plans for major expenditure including (mysteriously) a site-wide replacement of the entryphone system which most people have no interest in since their entry phone is working fine. Such feeble consultation as has been carried out ( a very badly designed poll at the June 9^th meeting) shows that by far the priority (for 74% of leaseholders) was controlling service charges but it is cleat that Urang and the RTM directors think that ‘upgrades’ are the priority. This is not based on any mandate or consultation.

I have repeatedly asked Urang (Tony Hymers and CEO Paul Cleaver) why no procedure for election of Directors has been published and they are unable to give any answer. Similarly they are unable to explain why leaseholders cannot see the contract with Urang and why no AGM of the Chelsea Bridge Wharf Right to Manage Company has been held or is planned.

Urang are ‘approved’ by the Leasehold Knowledge Partnership (a supposed champion of leaseholder rights) who made much of the achievement of RTM at Chelsea Bridge Wharf as some sort of great victory for leaseholders, not just at CBW but across the nation. Incredibly, LKP have also defended the behaviour of the Chelsea Bridge Wharf RTM directors, bizarrely trying to portray them as some sort of shining example when they are clear a dumpster fire of leaseholder empowerment and are abusing the lack of checks and balances in the RTM legislation.

As numerous people pointed out at the time (see the comments at the end of LKP’s blog piece), LKP’s version of events was seriously erroneous in several key respects, especially in omitting:

• The fact that the current directors of CBW RTM denied for many years that RTM was possible and people who said it was (including myself) were targeted, bullied and censored. They only changed position after I obtained and published independent advice that RTM was possible.  My CBW App remains closed which in itself prevents fair elections.
• The fact that one director has been the subject of several police complaints including an allegation of assault on a CBW leaseholder which resulted in the police approving charges of common assault be brought (this process was timed out due to police error).
• The fact that a CBWRA committee member allegedly advocated acts of terrorism against the UK on her Twitter account
• The fact that Urang were engaged at CBW without any meaningful leaseholder consultation and that even the CBWRA committee were not allowed to see the contract with Urang. To this day we still don’t know who has signed the contract or what it has committed us to.
• The long history of electoral manipulation / unfair elections at CBW which I have documented extensively on my blog (which LKP admit they follow and so they were well aware of this) which continue to the current time.
• The fact that CBWRA funds decreased from around £40,000 to almost nothing between 2021 and 2025 (when it was closed without consultation) due to a series of very poor decisions and declining interest from residents due to CBWRA’s behaviour

LKP’s blog piece also fails to mention a national campaign against Rendall and Rittner’s appalling performance by myself which resulted in a petition of over 6,000 signatures and their appearance before MPs in the house of commons and the establishment of a national network of leaseholders at Rendall and Rittner development has been created and we held an online conference for which 300 leaseholders registered, This also raised awareness about RTM at Chelsea Bridge Wharf and was  a major factor in 50% of leaseholders signing  up for RTM. If LKP really is a champion of leaseholder rights then they should be challenging Urang and the Chelsea Bridge Wharf Right to Manage company,  not defending their disgusting behaviour.

Clearly the directors of the CBW RTM company and Urang (who depend on them to remain in post) do not rate their chances of success at the ballot box and thus have to continue with these pathetic manipulations and evasions.