The parallels between managing agent contracts and the 1922 committee

Before her resignation, it was widely known that, under Conservative party rules, Liz Truss couldn’t face a confidence vote until a full year of her leadership had elapsed.

The parallels with the leasehold property management industry are uncanny.

We see managing agents tying customers to 12-month contracts which doesn’t allow for a consistently high service. When I was at University, I was not a model student. I generally coasted through the academic year and would go on a study binge in the two months leading up to the final year exams. This ensured that I completed my studies and graduated but my tutors were far from happy.

This is EXACTLY what happens in 12 month agreements with property management firms…..10 months of coasting followed by two months of actually doing the job they were employed for.

Sadly, it gets far, far worse.

Some of the “larger” agents have been written as parties to leases meaning they are as difficult to remove as Japanese knotweed. The only way to remove them as managing agents is to get EVERY single lease amended. There is next to no incentive for managing agents who operate in this way to perform.

At Common Ground we work on a 90 day notice period. We prefer for our customers to stay because we are doing a good job, not because we are protected by legislation, dodgy leases or a contract.

We would like to see this stance adopted by the rest of the leasehold property market…….oh, and the 1922 committee.