The UK's Largest Customer Review Website for the Property Industry
The UK's Largest Customer Review Website for the Property Industry

1/5, 5 Reviews
0% Recommended
0% letting valuation accuracy
50% letting fee satisfaction
By : 'Anon'
Services : Property Management(They manage our building)
Would you recommend ? : No
Rude, threatening, offensive and bullying in their dealings. They have exceptionally poor communication skills, refuse to compromise with the resident's association. Demand huge sums of money and do very little in return. We all regret that we are stuck with them and their nasty draconian attitude. They own the lease so we cannot escape from their unpleasant clutches.
No
By : Darren Winter AssocRICS MIRPM MIoD
6 Jul 2012Under the Law of Agency an Agent owes fiduciary duties to its Client/Principal (which is a legal or ethical relationship of confidence or trust requiring that Agent to be extremely loyal to its Client/Principal), including the duty to avoid conflicts of interest. Under Landlord and Tenant Law a Residential Block Manager’s Client/Principal is the Landlord, not any Leaseholder or Residents’ Association. The Agent managing the block on behalf of a Landlord is duty bound to manage in accordance with requirements of the Lease agreements appertaining to the block and of the recognised RICS Code so far as is applicable to the Agent’s management contract, or client instruction. These requirements and restrictions may not always suit the individual needs and requirements of some Leaseholders or Residents and may not always be understood by them. Indeed, in the Annual Report 2011 published by the Ombudsman Service:Property they stated "... Many leaseholders do not understand the limitations of what can and cannot be done without the consent or instruction of other people or what a managing agent has been contracted to do." In dealing with complaints it is often the case that the Leaseholder or Resident does not have a copy of their Lease/Tenancy Contract to refer to, or does not understand what they have agreed and what the Landlord/Agent must do. It is because of such misunderstandings that this type of unregulated forum is not appropriate at all to Block Managers/Agents and it is not appropriate to allow persons to post potentially defamatory comments without first having vetted the comments for accuracy and validity. This complainant (who has posted anonymously) complains about our not compromising with their Residents' Association. Despite our requests, Residents continue to misuse the common parts of this block in breach of the Lease requirements and of the fire and health and safety regulations and with no understanding, assistance or co-operation of the Residents' Association in this respect. As any worthy Landlord and Agent will know, there can be no compromise to the law, particularly on legal matters to do with people's safety. Matters are considered so serious at this block that the local Enforcing Authority has been notified and we await their order/instruction. With regards to the comment about demanding "huge sums of money", there is a legal requirement to carry out one-off fire precaution works which were previously subject to the statutory consultation procedures whereby Leaseholders can participate in the arrangements and nominate contractors of their choice to be included in the tender to obtain comparable estimates and which works are for the safety, protection and benefit of the block as a whole. It should also be noted that the complainant did not choose the more appropriate option and follow our published Complaints Handling Procedure which would have enabled the Ombudsman Service:Property to deal with the complaint fairly. If a Leaseholder or Resident believes they have a complaint then they should refrain from posting defamatory or slanderous comments to an unregulated forum such as this and should instead follow the procedures set out by the Ombudsman Service:Property to have their complaint dealt with in a fair and just manner.
| Services | Valuation | Fees | Min Price of property reviewed | Max Price of property reviewed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Letting | 0% | 50.00% | £0 | £0 |
| From Landlords | From Tenants | From Vendors | From Buyers | From Other | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
By : 'Anon'
Branch : Worthing, The Old Bank, 85 Rowlands Road
Services : Property Management (They manage our building)
Would you recommend ? : No
Postcode : BN11
Like other reviewers, we find this organisation difficult to deal with. Our personal experience of their operating style is that it is combative and somewhat derogatory. There is a tendency for them to continually refer to rules, regulations, legislation, documentation etc. The law of agency this, ... Read Full Review

By : 'Miss'
Branch : Worthing, The Old Bank, 85 Rowlands Road
Services : Letting (As a Tenant)
Would you recommend ? : No
Postcode : BN3
I have been trying for months now to resolve a problem. There is damp entering my flat due to damaged rendering on the exterior of the property. They are using every excuse in the book to get out of carrying out repairs and when they do reply, their emails are extremely condescending. I, in the ... Read Full Review
Nothing can change my feelings about this company. They are charlatans.
By : 'Disgruntled'
Branch : Worthing, The Old Bank, 85 Rowlands Road
Services : Property Management (They manage our building)
Would you recommend ? : No
This company should be avoided at all cost , take heed of this waning. They overcharge , you cannot easily communicate and the paperwork needs a degree in adavnced maths and english to understand it. If you try calling them you will get the impression that your calling a massive company , its all a ... Read Full Review
By : Susan
20 Feb 2016Please can someone contact me about this...
By : 'anon'
Branch : Worthing, The Old Bank, 85 Rowlands Road
Services : Property Management (They manage our building)
Would you recommend ? : No
DJW agency formerly Worthing & District Management increased our service charge from £600 to £1800. Without any justification. We decided to get rid of them by empowering the leaseholders to form a legal company to manage our building. We fought a one year drwan out battle to get rid of ... Read Full Review
reduce service charge change of personality and character be able to discuss lacks negiotiation old style authoritan management
By : Darren Winter AssocRICS MIRPM MIoD
6 Jul 2012Under the Law of Agency an Agent owes fiduciary duties to its Client/Principal (which is a legal or ethical relationship of confidence or trust requiring that Agent to be extremely loyal to its...
By : 'Anon'
Branch : Worthing, The Old Bank, 85 Rowlands Road
Services : Property Management (They manage our building)
Would you recommend ? : No
Rude, threatening, offensive and bullying in their dealings. They have exceptionally poor communication skills, refuse to compromise with the resident's association. Demand huge sums of money and do very little in return. We all regret that we are stuck with them and their nasty draconian attitude. ... Read Full Review
No
By : Darren Winter AssocRICS MIRPM MIoD
6 Jul 2012Under the Law of Agency an Agent owes fiduciary duties to its Client/Principal (which is a legal or ethical relationship of confidence or trust requiring that Agent to be extremely loyal to its...
Kindly note that legally, letting agents need to publish information about their tenancy fees, government-approved redress schemes and client money protection schemes on their website and on third party websites (on which agents are listed). For properties to lease/rent in England, agents need to keep this information up to date and precise on allAgents or specify within the property description.