“First Port relies on the lack of time of hardworking ......”
1 Star Review
Aug 03,2017
By:
'Skyline'
Aug 03,2017
Branch: New Milton, Queensway House, 11 Queensway
Services: They manage our building
Would you recommend?: No
Postcode: E1
Branch: New Milton, Queensway House, 11 Queensway
They manage our building
Postcode: E1
20
people found
this helpful
First Port relies on the lack of time of hardworking people and disregards investors to forcefully and arbitrarily increase their profits without delivering the professional and comprehensive service it promises. Its practices and policies are condescending and an insult to all the professionals that are obliged to accept them due to FP reluctance to respond in a meaningful manner.
The statements that FP express in their advertisement are false and quite the opposite to the service and value we receive. Customers feedback DOES NOT MATTER at all and excellence is a word that has no meaning for FP values. We are so unimpressed with the service and the condescending attitude received through the years.
As Leaseholders, we are held between a knife and a wall forced to accept FP 'legal' conditions of payment that allows the company to charge whatever amount FP feels adequate according to their expected revenue, without consultation and a professional approach to property management. I am forced to set up a direct debit under the FP harassment charging and services policy, despite having continuously argued that a standing order (with a fixed charge) should be set up after FP and the leaseholders make a professional agreement of budgets, Instead FP feel the freedom to dip their fingers into our accounts without a professional budget and a proper legal consultation.
Comment on agent fees
Fees are a day light robbery, since their fees are 15% on whatever is spend on maintenance and services to the building. For the approximately £500,000 a year in service charges we get a minimalistic service where maintenance is done in a reactive manner under emergency circumstances and without adequate supervision of the works. This results in poor quality fixes which have to be re-done often on multiple occasions. This of course suits FP business model which also allows for;
• ineffective competition for contracts – which are often subcontracts with multiple layers (+ VAT and commission in each)
• lack of supervision not only in emergency but routine maintenance – so works have to be re-done. An excellent example is window cleaning, where FP increased the budget by 175% to increase the frequency of cleaning, instead of supervising the quality of the service provided, which still is a problem at hand.
Seven month of meetings and ‘communication’ have not been enough to get our budget under control and properly planed. We had an adjustment charge of 6% on the 29 of June 2017 of the estimated budget for this year plus 2.5% that was increased from last year budget, a total of 8% of an extremely unappropriated budgeting. This means that instead of the 17.8% arbitrary, illegal and not consulted increase in January 2017, we must accept an 8.25% increase, way above 2016 inflation and without a knowledgeable explanation!
20
people found
this helpful
Was this helpful?
Yes