Meeting – Friday 28 January 2011

Present:

Jackie A, 65 LS
Fiona & Chris, 44 LS
Tracey & Virgil, 46 LS
Jacqui M, 18 KW
Shelley, 44 KW
John,Brian & Jean, 23 KW
Andy & Anne, 16 LS
Cllr Mike Leaves

Apologies:
Wendy, 57 LS
Mike, 20 KW
Heather, 91 LS

Amplifying notes:

1. The aim of this meeting was to explain and convey concerns to Cllr Michael Leaves who kindly agreed to attend. Those actions listed as being for Cllr Leaves were areas in which he felt he could offer assistance to the Resident’s Association; our thanks to Cllr Leaves for his proactive and considerate participation.

2. The meeting was extended in duration and not all attendees were able to remain for all of the discussions. In order to organise the minutes, items are reported by grouping and not necessarily in the order they arose; it may be that some attendees spot actions or comments early in the text which occurred after they left the meeting.

1. MINUTES FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETING

Minutes from the previous meeting were agreed. Actions arising from the last meeting were as follows:

a. Invitation to Mike wrt Hooe Lake website: deferred for this meeting to allow focus to be made upon explanation of Wainhomes/TMS/Section 38 to Cllr Leaves. Detail of revised plan at section 6.a.

b. Site management/parking letter: Letter sent 20 Nov. Responses discussed at section 4 and 5.

c. Invitation to BBC Watchdog: e-mail sent 27 Jan, awaiting response.

d. TMS charges: Included in letter of 20 Nov. Further discussion at section 4.1.c & 4.3.e.

2. State of the Residents Association

An overview of the Residents Association (RA) was given for the benefit of new attendees and for Cllr Leaves.

3. Summary of responses made to the letter of 20 Nov

A summary of the situation facing the residents was given along with an overview of the responses to the letter of 20 Nov. The letter invited response from:

a. Wainhomes – no response received.

b. TMS – e-mail response from Joanna Seldon (previously Joanna Brown) declining to meet the Residents Association through lack of contractural obligation to do so.

c. Plymouth City Council:

Cllr Mike Leaves attended the meeting through separate e-mail invitation.
Planning Department – nil response.
Transport department – letter received 17 Jan (discussed at section 5).
V. Pengelly – nil response.

d. Rt Hon Gary Streeter. Copied on the letter but response not requested.

4. Wainhomes/TMS management of the site

4.1 A discussion of the Wainhomes/TMS stranglehold over residents Maintenance Fees was conducted. General agreement that:

a. Wainhomes hold control over Kingfisher Quays Management Company inappropriately extended for a prolonged period and unreasonably preventing residents from control of their maintenance fees usage.

b. TMS were engaging in ‘bully’ tactics which intimidate many residents and aimed to divide the residents in their response to threatening letters/action.

c. Retrospective billing for the period before Jul 08, received by most residents, was not in accordance with Wainhomes verbal and written undertaking and in contravention of TP1 documents.

d. Wainhomes have an apparent legal liability to pay all maintenance costs for the site until they relinquish control to the residents. (deduced from advice received by an individual residents consultation with solicitors).

e. Residents remain concerned over plans to develop other areas (in particular the Quarry).

f. The latest excuse as to why Wainhomes have failed to complete handover of the freehold to resident Directors involves inept use of a photocopier and resultant incorrect size of maps submitted; the RA were unconvinced that this was a plausible or acceptable reason for further delay.

4.2 A subsidiary discussion relating to the management company (KQMC) was that of the proposed directors. In summary:

a. Chris G, Jackie A and David Atkins (David does not attend the RA meeting but is a landlord on the estate)have applied to be Directors and their application forms are held by TMS in their capacity as secretary to KQMC.

b. John K, has also offered to make application for Directorship.

c. TMS wish to meet prospective Directors to explain their role/responsibilities

4.3 The following actions were agreed:

a. Check on status of any ‘Bond’ held by the council over Wainhomes for the completion of obligations wrt Kingfisher Quays.

b. Discuss issues arising with Gary Streeter with a view to identifying leverage which can be placed upon Wainhomes.

c. Residents Assoc to write to Gary Streeter with request for support.

d. Circulation of the appropriate paragraph from TP1 documentation to residents by e-mail such that Residents may consider quotation in their response to retrospective billing.

e. Individual letters of response to retrospective billing.

f. Check on the status of the Quarry with respect to ownership/planning/building.

g. John K to submit form AP-01 to become a director of KQMC

h. Prospective Directors to meet with TMS and feedback findings to residents asap

5. SECTION 38/PARKING

The letter of response by Plymouth City Council (see 3.c.) was reviewed and discussed with the following observations:

a. The letter appears to have been sent by Amey (a contractor) and not by the council (detail hidden in the apparently Council letter head identifies Amey as the likely author).

b. The letter includes evidence that it is a standard reply and has not been ‘thought through’ or researched (mention of personalities who have left their posts with the council at least 12 months ago).

c. A standard statement of policy regarding the number of parking spaces per household was made in the letter (1.5 spaces per household).

d. The letter dismisses, without adequate justification, the residents request for a consultation regarding prevailing conditions (e.g. Emergency Service access, over subscribed parking due to a local school and Masonic lodge , lack of restrictions to safeguard visbility and access on bends/junctions etc) and was considered to be an unsatisfactory response.

e. The way ahead was proposed to be a check of council records to establish if the builder has complied with obligations. While this does not address specific problems directly, if a review shows irregularities then this may provide the necessary leverage to get the Council engaged.

The following action was agreed:

a. Review of council records to check for builder’s compliance over provision of parking space.

6. AOB

a. Website. Although not discussed as a main agenda item, it was agreed that this still remains a pressing need to enable communications with all of the residents. Michael (Hooe Lake webmaster) remains very willing to help. A meeting with Michael is to be arranged as soon as is convenient to all party’s.

b. E-mail listings. This item is associated with the website. An e-mail list needs to be more thoroughly compiled and maintained. Wendy was proposed as co-ordinator (and has offered by e-mail to do so), but due to her absence from the meeting this needs to be discussed with her to confirm.

c. Financial. It was commented that Jackie A is incurring costs when publishing newsletters. It was proposed and accepted that she should be re-imbursed her costs from the fund.

7. DONM

The next meetings will be defined by the meeting of proposed directors of KQMC with TMS. It was agreed that a prompt follow up meeting by the proposed Directors with residents was needed and that this could be combined with a social event. Use of the Yacht club was suggested (Bryan may be able to help arrange although as this was a late item in the meeting he was not present to agree the proposal).

a. Anticipated latest date of proposed Directors meeting with TMS: Sat 12 Feb.

b. Notional date for next meeting at the Yacht Club (dependent upon availability): Fri 18 Feb