Central Property Management (Liverpool)

Whilst we take all feedback and criticism on board, this particular leaseholder fails to engage with our office productively, and has requested we do not email them or send any communication as they view this as spam. As such, they have chosen direct to not be kept informed. The vehicle gate formed part of a section 20 consultation due to cost, and we had to allow for funds to be collected prior to commencing the work. When funds were readily available, the works went ahead and the new gate, as well as a new fob system has been installed. The gate here was the original gate for the development. CPM work closely with the board of directors for the management company. As we have discussed many times before, the building was managed by a different company and CPM were brought up to un-do previous wrongs, and as such did mean an increase in service charge which we clearly outline in in-depth covering letters and budget information packs, along with numerous communication issued via our office, which this leaseholder does not want, yet wants answers in the form of negative reviews, however we welcome them to engage with our office, re-link their email address; that way they would be privy to all matters and important information re: the building and works. Finally, no one has been made homeless and we would respectively request that such mis-leading information is not made in a public forum, and the comment about 'collecting' millions is completely incorrect.