June 17, 2024

Elim Court: If you want right to manage, this is how NOT to go about it

But were there reptiles closer to home as well, Dudley?

Elim Court in Plymouth has escaped from its right to manage debacle by the skin of its teeth, having been led to near ruin by right to manage facilitators.

After having had its right to manage application turned down in the lower tribunal (freeholder’s costs: £10,000) and then thrown out by the upper tribunal (freeholder’s costs: £25,000), the pensioners were then led on to fight in the Court of Appeal.

We believe that the Right To Manage Federation, which is not a federation and only has one director, was irresponsible in advising this course of action.

It is giving out that it was making a stand against bullies, but all the risks for this course of action would have fallen on the leaseholders.

Nonetheless, in February Elim Court won its case and this month the freeholder has given up hopes of an appealing to the Supreme Court.

It is reprehensible that Israel Moskovitz, the freeholder, was prepared to take this step.

He is assisted by his associate Joseph Gurvits, a controversial property manager whose Y and Y Management firm has been admonished by the ARMA regulator.

ARMA tells Y and Y Management to mind its manners and control its temper

Related posts: Devon pensioners humiliate Y and Y Management and Avon Freeholds at tribunal Managing agent Joseph Gurvits named in Commons – an hour after MP attends ARMA round-table conference on tougher ethical standards ‘Don’t make the pensioners of Regent Court take you to court AGAIN, Mr Moskovitz,’ urges Bottomley First task for ARMA’s ethical […]

Their case was argued by “notorious landlord’s barrister” Justin Bates, as the RTMF describes him. (The Leasehold Knowledge Partnership has reported that Mr Bates claims to have done pro bono work in his career.)

The Right To Manage Federation had given some kind of assurance to the pensioners that it would pay the legal costs, win or lose – including the tens of thousands spent by the freeholder.

But the state of its business accounts made that an unlikely proposition.


In other words, the leaseholders could have faced catastrophic consequences had the legal action gone wrong.

Dudley Joiner, the proprietor of the RMTF, is cock-a-hoop, and has published an article on the RTMF website saying “Elim Court escapes the nest of vipers”. 

Severe criticisms, but not quite as severe Judge Edward Evans-Lombe, who in 1993 described Mr Joiner as “markedly cavalier” with other people’s money … and disqualified him as a company director for seven years.


Our view is that there were reptiles closer to home, and there is no significant difference between Mr Joiner and those he denigrates.

Retirement housing would be altogether healthier without any of them.

Full archive: https://www.betterretirementhousing.com/?s=elim+court

Please contact Better Retirement Housing for practitioners who have a track record of achieving right to manage with fewer dramas, delays and risks.

The full ruling concerning Mr Joiner can be read here


  1. Michael Epstein says

    Before engaging any company to carry out a Right To Manage Action, it is of great importance to carry out due diligence on any such company.
    Looking at Dudley Joiner’s companies it can be seen that his Right To Manage Federation is listed as Accounts Overdue. His Flats on Line, Conformation statement Overdue . His Leaseholder Association, Accounts and Conformation statement Overdue, His Right To Manage Federation Services, Accounts Filed (but only after a strike off action was suspended) My view would be that a leaseholder would be better advised to appoint someone who can actually file their accounts on time!