December 4, 2022

Is our money safe if Peverel goes bust (again)?

Can anyone help this reader with his query about Peverel bank accounts? Please leave comments.

I am contacting you to ask if you can give me some advice about an issue concerning Peverel Management Services.

I am delegated by the leaseholders at XXX to deal with Peverel and Fairhold Homes on any matters concerning our finances.

I have recently attempted to open discussions with Peverel Retirement concerning a procedure they have introduced in connection with our development bank account.

Since the 1st of September last year, when our bank accounts were transferred to NatWest, Peverel has introduced a novel procedure for paying our bills.

When invoices are due for payment a number of payments are consolidated into one debit, which is then transferred internally into an unnamed account.

The separate bills are then paid within a day or two. The process is not consistent in that some invoices, often for utilities such as electricity supplies, are still paid directly.

When I raised this matter with Peverel’s financial section I was told that it was not practical to maintain a separate cheque account for each development.

I regard this as irrelevant nonsense, and note that it did not appear to be a problem when the account was with the Bank of Scotland. Since then, I have been trying for over six weeks to obtain a response to my query from Carol Crowe of Peverel Retirement.

The practice raises a number of questions, concerning the trust status of the account which is used as a kind of half-way house, the name on the account – I assume this is Peverel or a variant of that – the possibility that the practice is illegal and certainly in breach of the so-called codes of practice, whether or not the account used earns interest, and who receives the interest, and above all whether or not any money in the account is safe in the event of OM going bust while client funds are not in their trust account but somewhere else.

I’d like to know two things:

  • 1. Are you aware of any other developments which have raised this issue?
  • 2. Is there a legitimate reason for this practice, which I might have missed because of my suspicious mind?

Comments

  1. ROUNDHAY says

    LESS PAPERWORK FOR LARGE COMPANIES MAY MEAN LARGER DISCOUNTS FOR PEVEREL. I DO NOT THINK IT IS WIDLEY KNOWN THAT PEVEREL HAVE CHANGED BANKS, IS THIS BECAUSE OF FAIRHOLD? IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE NEW BANK ARE WILLING TO GRANT THEM A CHEAPER OVERDRAFT AND LOAN BECAUSE THE BANK HAS A GREAT DEAL OF RESIDENTS MONEY WHICH THEY ARE MAKING CONSIDERABLE INTEREST ON.

    E-MAIL ADDRESS NOT TO BE DISCLOSED!!!!

  2. Michael Epstein says

    I am not sure how much is understood about the protection of service charge funds.
    Only clearly identifiable funds have any protection. However, though the total funds may be clear it would be very complicated to clearly identify which development money belongs to, as Peverel operate the accounts and their administration process is in utter chaos. Of course, Peverel cannot use service charge funds against their own costs. But what they can do is transfer money to Kingsborough, Cirrus or any other connected company. Once they have done this any funds held by the connected companies are beyond protection. They would be able (in theory) to contribute to the running costs of Peverel.
    The next question is what are the service charge funds protected from?
    The only protection i have come across thus far is from the bank. If Peverel go bust (my sources say they are on the edge and have some really bad news on the way) and they owe the bank £1,000,000 but have £750,000 deposited as service charge funds, the protection means that the bank will not use those funds against the debt.
    No one should be under any illusion that our service charge funds are safe, nor should they assume that Peverel are contractually authorised to even collect service charges.

  3. A Reviewer says

    Roundhay

    First lets deal with single bulk payments
    a) insurance
    b) electricity
    both of these are bulk purchased, and in effect sold on to residents at a much enhanced price
    electricity under purchased under an affinity agreement used to net peverel 40% of gross.

    that then leaves the smaller ones which can be “batched”

    these will be for suppliers and contractors like gardeners who do several sites and peverel will deduct a percentage – may be 10% for “quick settlement” which of course they will keep and NOT declare.

    then the “consultancy” costs which are cheap to provide and sold on expensively
    a) property rebuilding cost valuation
    b) fire safety

    transparency can mean a cloudy glass through which you cannot see – its just a lower rating than clean glass.

    although peverel do all these things so do many others.

    regulation accompanied by scrutiny to a defined standard is required.

    its called iso9001

    happy days

  4. Get your local MP to stand up in Parliament and ask questions about Peverel and the pooling service charge money belonging to many retirement blocks in one bank account .

    Is it safe to do this ? How to stop mis-management of service charge money by managing agents ?