Yes to both. It is Metropolitan Thames Valley, not highly rated on Trust Pilot. Metropolitan Thames Valley is rated "Poor" with 2.1 / 5 on Trustpilot UK.TRUSTPILOT.COM Do you agree with Metropolitan Thames Valley's TrustScore? Voice your opinion today and hear what 34 customers have already said.

Further update. The buyer has now pulled out due to the delays

Further update Although I have paid the ground rent to the HA, apparently they have not paid the freeholder, Homeground. I have formally complained about the HA.

Thank you stu, all in hand. I am waiting until the flat gets sold and then, if the action of the HA?Homeground has disadvantaged me, I shall consider my retaliation.

Thank you, AN SRA will be sent to Homeground . The MA have assured that they have not contracted out collection nt pf the ground rent to Homeground.

My OP has largely been overtaken by events. It s a leasehpld investment property, the ground rent is paid monthly to the MA along with the service charge, it is up to date The HA manage the property. . AFAIAA, Homeground have no involvement in managing my flat whatsoever Their solicitors know that I have complained to the SRA are are frantically back peddling. It i s all a total mess and may have been started by my solicitor mistakenly contacting Homeground. I am awaiting his. explanation. The fact remains that Homeground told my solicitor that my ground rent was outstanding, it was not, and that they had passed the matter to their solicitors, which apparently they did not.. I am firing off complaints and threats of litigation like there was no tomorrow.

Update The ground rent is not unpaid. It is collected monthly by the HA along with the service charge. Either the HA or Homaguard has FUBARed . What are my chances of getting compensation for my time?

My solicitor has discovered that the ground rent has not been paid on one of my investment properties which I am in the process of selling and that the company, Homeground have referred the matter to their solicitors, J B Leitch . I telephoned their solicitor they could throw no light on the matter. Despite the fact that they had informed my solicitor that I was in default. The reason I had not paid. Is that, despite Section 166 of CALRA 2002, no demand was received. Homeground have recently purchased the ground rent from the head lease holder, a housing association. Both firms have extremely poor ratings on Trust-pilot https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/jbleitch.co.uk https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/www.homegroundonline.com and, unless you have an account with them, which , I do not, refuse to correspond by telephone or email. I have complained to the SRA and the Housing Association and I have therefore written to them in very assertive term copying to both sets sots of solicitors. My question is, can I do anything more to give this company a poke in the eye? I have informed them that if their precipitous action causes any delay in the sale I shall be seeking compensation. I have complained to the SRA and the Housing Association and am preparing a dossier for Action Fraud.

Of course letting properties is s business, but HMG do not think so. I am taxed on SA and the properties are not incorporated into the company. I suggest that it is a platypus. In any case would chummy pass the "clean hands" test?.

As HMRC do not recognise small landlords as a business for tax purposes, a court is unlikely to either. I very much doubt if chummy will take me to court over a few pounds, in any case the police or TS may save him the bother. Also he appears to be unfamiliar with the process, I sent him a letter marked "without prejudice" and he accused me of being prejudiced. He is also unlikely to be able to produce a compliant LBA without legal assistance. I do not think that, with his rapsheet, CPR27.14(2)(g) costs are likely. Why a lesser amount? Perhaps not, perhaps a fiver more, and a cheque in full and final settlement is a good idea, let us see if he has the cojones to return it uncashed, but not until I have received a letter from a DCA. .

Thank you GSi416, (Rover?) I agree with para 2 it was unethical and I have decided to report the matter to the police and inform Trading Standards. My position is, if chummy rejects my offer of £140.00 IFAFS I shall pay a lesser amount (s ay £125) into his bank account and he can sue me for the balance if it wants to. I am no stranger to the CC and my hobby is helping people battle the private parking cowboys. I very much doubt that HH will view his behaviour with approval.

You were prepared to pay £181 + VAT before so why not now? Where did I say that? In any case that figure included vat. Bear in mind that locksmiths undergo training of between a few days and less than a year. It is hardly rocket science.

You are being naughty, I mentioned plumbers as an analogy.

I asked for a job to be done and it was done, The plumber phoned me two hours later and demanded payment of £231 plus v.a.t.. I asked him to send me an invoice and the threats started. I then started investigating the company and found a series of appalling reviews on Trust Pilot , Yell, Facebook, and Money Saving Expert, no doubt there are more elsewhere. Normal behaviour in such circumstances is to attempt to resolve the situation by negotiation, failing that go to ADR, and finally, if all else fails, go to court and let a judge decide. This case is somewhat different, threats were used and there appears to be serial over-charging and breaches of the Trade Descriptions Act by the company. The MD of the company has failed to negotiate, (I have offered him£140.00 in full and final settlement, and his reply was to threaten me with court. I have no fear of County Court, I have won five cases out of five, and have some good stuff to show the judge. Some of you are correct in telling me what I should have done, but I did not. Wrongly I gave the company the benefit of the doubt. Mine is an honest business, and I expect the same from those companies with whom I deal. If I am cheated I use my knowledge of consumer law to obtain satisfaction. I own several rental properties and engage plumbers, electricians, etc., several times a year. I have never encountered this sort of thing before in 40 years of trading.

If I can save few people from being cheated I shall be happy.

I can assure you that there is much more where that came from Bazza, (substantive argument that is). I do not usually resort to grammar/spelling flames, but the Sergeant set himself for it. I rather think that he is trying to box above his weight. He seems totally unaware of the nature of this company. Facebook, Trust Pilot and Money Saving Expert all contain damning reviews, and allegations of overcharging, surely they cannot all be wrong.

Bazza, no doubt the original poster will Say your unhelpful as well. The chances of committing such a gross grammatical error are indeed slim Mr Bush. Pay the bill or he may take you to court That is precisely what I am hoping for. I am no stranger to the SCC, with five wins from five appearances, I do not fancy his chances. It is time rogue traders such as he were taught a lesson.

You should have got an estimate / agreed a maximum price before he started work. I agree, but I own several properties and am always prepared to pay a reasonable price. If people treat me fairly I reciprocate. I would suggest, from the horrendous reviews on TrustPilot, that he does not treat people fairly. Have you ever watched "Rogue Traders"?

Yes, I know all that, but his remedy is to take me to court, not threaten to "break my door" or stage a sit in. Some trades are known for overcharging, that is why TDA, SOGA, DSR, CPUTR el al were all enacted. I regret that I find your contribution unhelpful.

Unfortunately not. Most are HA tenants, many on HB. Apathy prevails.

The chap has form, read this https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/londonlocksmith24h.co.uk

Well not actually ripped off, I have not paid them. I hold my hand up to being a bit slack here. A tenant complained of a broken lock on a patio door. I googled and called a locksmith in Reading without doing my usual due diligence as I am busy refurbishing two flats. Locksmith arrives, does the job, and phones me. He wants £281, ask him for a v.a.t. invoice and he gets nasty, threatens to "break my door" or sit in. I threaten police action and he calms down, will ask office to phone me. That afternoon he phones me, office has reduced the cost to £181 including v.a.t. Ask for an invoice. Invoice arrives next day for £254.00 Query this with head office, (a one man micro company), and next day they send a revised bill for £181. I am now negotiating a further discount on the basis that, if I make a complaint to the Police about Reading locksmith's threats it could hurt their business. I have told him I shall be contacting Trading Standards. FWIIW, I found a similar complaint of this company over-charging on MSE. I have been away from this board for some time and have forgotten the rules, can I name and shame?

Some follow up. I was talking to th block manager the other day about another issue. The HA are fed tp with UKPC and have sappointed a "better company", PCM, I despair.

The company is Heat and Plumb, Stanmore. However, I have persuaded them to waive the charge, so no odour attached to them in this instance. However, the method of setting this charge as a percentage of the cost price of the item is, imo manifestly unfair.

Thank you, most interesting. I would willingly "name and shame", but is it not against CAG policy?