June 28, 2017

Moskovitz / Gurvits: We fight on for the ‘wider implications’ of RTM law and to stop ‘bully boy’ right to manage directors with ‘vested intestests’

Please follow and like us:

Freeholder Israel Moskovitz and his managing agent Joseph Gurvits, of Y and Y Management, are resisting the right to manage applications of Regent and Elim Courts, in Plymouth.

Regent Court this month won its appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) earlier this month.

Elim Court’s right to manage application failed at the LVT in January, and the issue is being appealed.

It may not be heard until next year.

The dispute has been reported at length on Carlex.

The following statement has been received by Carlex for publication from Joseph Gurvits, of Y and Y Management.

The Freeholder expresses the following views

1. The legal issue of the appeal is a matter the Freeholder and his legal advisers feel that it has wider implications in many arrears of law. The Freeholder is following his legal advice on this point of law. 

2. The Freeholder has been advised by the Property Manager Elena [Andreadis] (who you are free to speak to ) regarding leaseholders who feel intimated and bullied and who do not understand why and what they have signed for in the RTM process.

These silent leaseholders explain that they have to live with these people and the bully boy Directors are pushing and they don’t wish to speak up or fight.

These leaseholders do say that they are very happy with the management currently and do not really see the benefit of RTM. The Freeholder is worried that several leaseholders with vested interests  will actually take over only looking after themselves and their own interests.

The Freeholder has no problem in change of Management Company providing it is done of the benefit of all without any underhanded motives. At present this is driven by self-interested people.

 

Comments

  1. A Leaseholder Expresses Her Views::

    Exactley what is that you feel the so called ‘Bully Boys Directors’ are going to gain from apart from actually having a say in their own development? which is more than they will get with a profit orientated management company/landlord?

    You run your companies to make a profit, not because you are a nice man or because you have nothing better to do with your time… it is purely business which is understandable.

    Owners who live in leasehold properties want to run their site because they want a nice place to live and be in control of that nice place for ever without worrying who will be managing THEIR service charge fees and whether or not that service charge budget is in the black and not the red every year.
    They want transparency in all dealings and a say in what their SC are used for, they do not get that with a company that is there to earn a profit.

    If all the owners were happy then they wouldn’t sign to join the RTM as is their democrat right.
    How many other sites do you manage where the owners are unhappy?
    Do you think that they would be saying the same if they actually had somebody who had the bottle to challenge your company by doing a RTM? I doubt that very much, they would no doubt jump at the chance to have a RTM.
    Many elderly people do not understand what a RTM is until they have it explained to them in a logical manner, that includeds no scare mongering involved!

    The more owners that go down the route of Right To Manage the better as far as I am concerned.

    Where else in the world apart from London and Hawaii is a private company allowed to use peoples homes that they live in to make a profit without those owners having any say in it?

    I hear Hawaii is very nice 🙂

    • Trevor Bradley says:

      Well, what more can be said. You took the words right out of my mouth Karen. 1,0000% correct.
      Perhaps he/they might have the bottle to meet a group of us face face sometime with the press present(sooner than later) and talk about what these so called Managing Agents actually do that helps so many vunerable people in retirement Leasehold

      • Lesley Newnham says:

        I have wanted for many years to meet with other leaseholders happy or unhappy in order to exchange experiences. Preferably with the Freeholders/managing agents concerned also present to answer serious questions face to face but I don’t believe any of them have the bottle which is why they hide behind ARMA,ARHM and any other body that will support them against leaseholders.

        In response to article

        (1) I’m sure we would all like to know which point of law Mr Gurvits legal advisers feel have wider implications and

        (2) Why leaseholders would feel intimidated or bullied by Directors trying to help them. They would no doubt see the benefits of RTM in their bank accounts but perhaps some of them have more money than sense?!!

    • Dear Mr Gurvits

      The nonsense of your comments is only exceeded by the inaccuracy of the facts passed to you by your property manager. Who I believe is very reluctant to visit the property. So how would she know?

      There are no Bully Boy tactics going on at Elim Court the only tactics at large is the use and abuse of the law in the obfuscation of elderly people achieving the right to manage the property they live in.

      Your somewhat moral stance on the protection of elderly residents at Elim Court smacks of at the very least hypocrisy.
      You and your organisation have no interest other than maximising profits and paying the absolute minimum for services to the residents of Elim court. Your failure on numerous occasions to answer legitimate enquiries regarding escalating costs and then threatening legal action immediately someone withholds payment because they have a legitimate enquiry, I think maybe deserves the use of your description.
      If Y and Y are such paragons in the protection of the rights of their residents then why do you not stand aside, allow to the Right to Manage and then offer your services to manage the property on a competitive basis.

      Please surprise me with a reply.
      As you singularly fail to reply to your residents

  2. England!!!! Although Boris Johnson did say London was a country within a country!!!!

  3. For anyone interested in Peverels history to date and actions taken to the LVT by them and leaseholders that own on sites that Peverel own they can see ALL the cases heard at LVT hearings by searching the http://www.lease-advice.org web site page- Tribunal Decisions – Peverel…….I lost count of how many there were to be honest…….

  4. Karen,
    I had begun to read through the LVT at the end of July this year, and I am astounded at the number of Managing Agents that do not manage to fulfill the role that they are paid for.
    We at ABC are now waiting for a reply from Peverel Services Ltd regarding the Peverel/Cirrus/Glyn Jackson fiasco regarding Bid Fixing. Having checked the 2008/09 Expenses File and noted that the Invoice for the Warden Call System and all the other correspondence for the works was missing. Our Area Manager, who was working for Peverel at the time we had the Warden Call System upgraded, was asked by me, what and when will we receive any information regarding the Bid Fixing and his reply was, he knew nothing.
    We have checked the Trial Balance/ Audit Trail for the period and found other costs in other Cost Headings that may have also been for the Warden Call System which may have been left off the original Tender???
    We have asked for the return of the Expenses Files from 2006/07 to 2011/12 with all the missing information
    that should be available in each of the files, as we have only received photocopies up to mow.

  5. Chas

    Up until LKP and Carlex started to expose the ‘irregularaties’ and ‘corruption’ that some colluding managing agents, landlords and their legal teams got upto, they were able to have everything their own way and tried to baffle and scare people with legal threats.
    But thankfully, now that people are starting to get a little more savvy and all of us exchanging information and helping each other it is not quite so easy for them to gang up on leaseholders anymore.

    I know of one landlord/managing agent who has decided to off load their stock as they now feel it is not so profitable for them anymore… and they are also very concerned that their stock will lose a very valuable commodity,,,,service charge fees! Looks like we are beginning to win the battle!

    It will be interesting to see if ABC respond within the time that the law states they have to or if they say they can not find the files!!!!! this is the usual ploy. If it is the latter then the DATA protection rules come into play amongst a host of other rules that may have been broken…

  6. Trevor Bradley says:

    For the statement received by Carlex for publication from Joseph Gurvits, of Y and y Management to be of any substance it needs to contain some factual evidence etc.
    For me to believe in anything that Joseph G states I challenge him or Property Manager Elena Andreadis to reply to my post and state EXACTLY what he/she means by “bully boy directors” and what they as individuals will gain.
    Perhaps some of the residents concerned would like to add their views.
    Lets get it done and have it all out in the open now

    • Keith Phillips OBE says:

      Thanks for everyone’s helpful comments which have found most reassuring.

      As regards residents adding their views, once we have carefully considered our response options please be assured we will, we most certainly will.
      Watch this space!

  7. Below is a link to a lot of the LVT cases involving Y&Y and Gurvits’… a good read as to how they operate sorted by dater order the newest one first – 35 in total…………………… so far

    http://search.freefind.com/find.html?pageid=r&id=69799359&query=YY+Gurvits+&ics=1&srt=d&fr=0

  8. The new rules that apply to the First- Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) England http://www.lease-advice.org/documents/Application_to_Tribunal1.pdf

  9. William Dawes says:

    I went to the law centre in Croydon to get info about the lease and management company. They gave me carlex’s e-mail address and Mr O’Kelly’s phone number. I am floundering and need someone to talk to about my situation. The management company is Peverel and I think the landlord is Tchenguiz. The other residents are either colluding with Peverel or are not wanting hassle. I’ve started a complaint but they will surely slay me if I go on my own to their tribunal. The blurb says that there are many experienced willing campaigners out there to help? WD

    • William,
      If any person is to help we need to know:-
      1. What is your situation?
      2. Which Peverel Company is it, full name and address?
      3. Tchenguiz is a name of two brothers who own Freeholds, are they the LANDLORDS?
      4. Is it a dual lease or tripartite lease?
      5. How many residents collude with Peverel, what makes you believe this?
      6. Most residents are very elderly and prefer not to have hassle, you may work alone
      .
      William, we can help but you need to ask for my email address.

      I have only being reading the comments for about a year, but have read the past 4 years comments and they follow a pattern of similar happenings through the breadth of England.
      Chas

  10. Michael Epstein says:

    William Dawes,
    One step at a time my friend.
    The first thing you should do is make as many residents aware of the problems as you can.
    When visiting other developments i found at first i was met with disbelief, what’s in it for me? what’s it got to do with me? typical reaction. But as I explained and showed residents what was happening on the internet, attitudes soon changed. So one by one, patiently show people what is happening.
    Do your research. Start asking the awkward questions.
    But above all, remember, there is a great deal of information on this and other sites.
    You may be new to the battle, but you have the advantage of having years of experience available to you.
    Please use it.

  11. Tony Watson says:

    Tony Watson & Danny Shepherd Directors Regent Court RTM Co Ltd
    In response to the Freeholder’s expressed views published on the 12 Aug we wish to give our point of view.
    We unreservedly reject any accusation by Y&Y that we the Directors, employed Bully Boy tactics and that we at no time intimidated or bullied residents of Regent Court. In fact the opposite is true. Throughout the Right to Manage process we have held meetings where all residents, and or their representatives, have been invited to attend in order to be informed and to be given the opportunity to discuss any points raised. The culmination of such meetings has been a vote by the residents before proceeding further. It has been stated at every meeting that the decision is theirs and theirs alone and no pressure has been brought to coerce residents into voting one way or another. With reference to residents understanding of ‘what they signed for in the RTM’ it must be stated here that clear and full explanations have been given on a number of occasions by the Managing Director of the Right to Manage Federation, at which residents again had the opportunity to question and receive answers.
    In truth Y&Y have themselves employed threatening and bullying tactics through the Property Manager at meetings. She has stated that the Freeholder would do all in his power to resist RTM and if necessary would bankrupt us. Residents who attended such meetings will not hesitate to confirm this. History to date shows the resistance of the Freeholder to allow Right to Manage transfer taking place.
    We hereby state that we have no vested interest in ‘looking after ourselves and our interests’ at the expense of the other residents and we query what Y&Y mean by vested interest. We challenge Y&Y to provide proof of their statements.

    • Lesley Newnham says:

      Tony & Danny,

      We were also helped by RTMF to achieve RTM and are just up the road from you in Torquay. If you would like further encouragement to keep going please get in touch to see what we have been able to achieve in 3 years.

      I was shocked by the statement ” the Freeholder would resist RTM and if necessary bankrupt us”. That surely speaks volumes in itself about the type of people we are all dealing with here and why they have to be stopped!!

      I am not sure when your acquisition date is going to be but do make sure that any contractors are informed of your takeover well in advance. It is possible your managing agent will run up bills and then expect you to pay for them. You will not be responsible but it will not stop unscrupulous agents trying!!

      You and Elim Court both prove how worried all managing agents are becoming, not just Peverel at losing their EASY income.

      All the best to you all.

  12. Trevor Bradley says:

    Well, 5 days ago I challenged JG of Y and Y to respond and total silence.
    Shall I make it easier for you both – Initially, to prove you are honest and trustworthy and are “in it to help the elderly” as an introduction the first things I want proof of is that you only charge the residents the same amount for the buildings insurance as what you pay for it. The same goes for the communal electricity and all the contractors you pay. Once these basic things show you are operating properly and marking up/adding commission, we will proceed from there. Otherwise, “I am out”, just like you should be, or should have been ages ago.
    C’mon AHRMA and OFT start earning your money

  13. Trevor Bradley says:

    Sorry for my error. Obviously in my post it should read …………..you are operating properly and NOT marking up/adding commission.
    (wish there was the chance of editing ones post on this site)

    • Michael Epstein says:

      Seems to my simple mind, that any responsible freeholder(by that i mean any freeholder not using the freeholds to exploit leaseholders) would welcome any RTM, if only on the basis that leaseholders who bother enough to undertake a RTM clearly show a level of concern as to the property that they have a leasehold interest in, that must be of benefit to the feeholder.
      Similarly, a managing agent has nothing to fear if they are doing a good job. Very few managing agents get dismissed for doing a good job that i have heard of.