- This topic is empty.
July 15, 2010 at 7:08 pm #451
Amongst the false demands for administration fees for letting the flat I actually own and occupy, blue ties to attach to bikes or else they will be sold and “polite notices” telling us not to use precious communal storage space even for items that are clearly neither bulky nor health/fire risks, today I received from RMG a “FINAL DEMAND” for the balance of my service charges threatening me with a debt collection agency if I do not settle within 7 days of the 14th. This is the first I have heard of it! For the 8 years I have lived here I have paid monthly by standing order. If payment by standing order is to no longer be available then I think we should have had a little more notice than 7 days.
Is anyone else annoyed ?
July 15, 2010 at 8:14 pm #1094
RMG has had a spell of silly administrative errors of late. The letter about sublets was supposed to only go to those who have a contact address other than Rainbow Quay. The storage of items in the electrical cupboards is a health and safety issue and was raised by the fire officer who visited Rainbow Quay. The final demand you have received could be for your water bill? It is billed at part of the service charge. Thus if your late paying your water bill, even if you pay your service charge by standing order your could still get a demand. The exception to this is if your monthly payment exceeds your service charge in which case it shouldn't happen. Drop them an email and ask them to explain what its for. If it is another administrative error let me know.
July 15, 2010 at 8:16 pm #1095
I/we pay by monthly standing order as well, and have always done so, but have been on the receiving end of similarly worded payment demands. Without making any excuses on their behalf, I think RMG are a relatively large outfit with lots of properties to look after, but in my experience a politely worded letter pointing out their mistake to them will take care of the problem.
10, 2 RQ
July 18, 2010 at 11:44 am #1096
I pay my service charge in one go and also received a threatening letter. I thought the water rates were part of the service charge, and the letter of final demand does not mention water rates anywhere. Quite frankly I'm sick of threatening letters from this bunch of jokers. We pay them a lot of money each year for what is a pretty poor service. How do we get rid of them or make a complaint? I will be giving them both barrels tomorrow.
July 18, 2010 at 5:27 pm #1097
The water is metered and thus cannot be included in the service charge bill. However the water charge does get set against the service charge account. The water bill has on it a 15 day payment term, although I believe RMG pursues non-payment after 30 days. Thames waters payment terms is also 30 days.
Complaints should be sent to RMG at CustomerService@rmg.gb.com
July 19, 2010 at 4:15 pm #1098
I also got the payment letter and pay by standing order. I gave them a call and it was due to a water rates payment due in June although I didn't receive the letter requesting it – I have received them in the past.
The chap I spoke to was very helpful and said I could pay over the phone (which I did) or increase my standing order to cover the difference between now and the end of the year. I did raise that the tone of the letter was a little harsh but was told they are automated so you get the same letter if you are £10 or £1000 behind.
Although like the rest of you I can't say I was too happy with the letter but can't fault the service I got when I rang them.
July 22, 2010 at 12:57 pm #1099
Slightly off the topic of RMG but related to this discussion in terms of the Water Fund Recharge.
I rent our flat at Rainbow Quay from a landlord and this week he has forwarded me a number of bills from RMG relating to the Water Fund Recharge for the year to date.
We've been living here for over three years and have never had to pay any bills relating to the Water Fund Recharge – can somebody please clarify for me if these bills are supposed to be paid by the landlord or the tenant?
July 22, 2010 at 3:09 pm #1100
Hi Tim, this would normally be an agreement with your landlord. Unless your rental agreement included all bills, then you would be expected to pay the water charge.
There would certainly have been water bills sent out during that 3 year period so I would ask you landlord why he has only just started to pass the charge on to you. As an aside the water billing has had a major overhaul this year and its a lot clearer than it used to be, so it may just have been that your landlord hadn't realised the water charges were just getting added straight to his service charge account.
Hope that helps.
August 9, 2010 at 10:41 am #1101
Thanks for the info Simon, much appreciated.
August 13, 2010 at 7:34 pm #1102
I was told by RMG that I had to pay the full water charge when it arrived and that I could not just adjust the monthly payment, as I had been doing for around 3 years.
Now we have been notified that we can view our RMG accounts online. That is great, and actually useful, but in the “paying by card section” of the website I see that when paying by a debit card they take 35p plus 1% of the transaction.
Is this a normal charge ? Passing a credit card charge back to the customer is common (though I think the extra 0.5% for company cards is iffy) and understandable, but a debit card? Am I wrong believe that RMG is rather cynically trying to scam us?
August 17, 2010 at 7:43 pm #1103
I am glad the new online account viewing has proved useful. I am confused why RMG has told you that you cannot adjust the monthly payment. Its probably more to do that they don't want to do the maths to estimate what the payment should be.
I too thought the admin charges were a bit much, but then to play devils advocate you can understand RMG wanting to try to generate some revenue from this new service, as I am sure the capital outlay was quite a bit.
Anyway, my solution would be to just make payments via internet banking with the details they provide. This is the approach I have applied for paying my water.
All the best
August 27, 2010 at 7:31 pm #1104
Can we get some confirmation that the communal cupboard clearance applies only to the electrical cupboard and not the other two?
August 28, 2010 at 8:55 am #1105
It is my understanding that the clearing of the service cupboards includes all three of them on each floor.
The health and safety review by the fire brigade identified them as a problem and thus they must all be emptied.
August 28, 2010 at 7:34 pm #1106
sorry but what is the point of these additional cupboards if we can't put anything in them? Quite frankly getting sick of being told how to live in my own property by RMG.
August 29, 2010 at 8:37 am #1107
I cant understand why you're so upset. The cupboard is not part of your property. If you can prove otherwise then please do so.
August 31, 2010 at 7:24 pm #1108
What I have a little trouble with is the tone of the edict; presumably for at least the last 7 years the health and safety review by the fire brigade must have found this NOT to be an issue, and there has been no communication as to why suddenly this has changed.
August 31, 2010 at 9:00 pm #1109
I cant remember the exact details but 2009 was the first year that we were legally bound to have a health and safety review. Hence the extra cost heading in the budget.
The property manager informed us there had been a change in legislation making it a requirement. I am sure that the recent fires in flats in Southwark underlines the importance of such things.
I feel sure the details of the review were discussed at the 2009 AGM.
September 1, 2010 at 10:08 pm #1110
I have to agree with Ben and Calum, while the communcal storage cupboards are not officially part of our individual properties they are a feature that make up part of the development that we have all chosen to live in. When I made the decision to move here, the communal storage cupboards were presented to me by the real estate agent as just that – a 'feature' of the building that I would have access to use, just like the garden and the bike storage racks.
On the basis that hundreds of new developments have been granted building approval all over London (in the past year) which include communal storage cupboards, maybe it would be worthwhile getting specific details of the inspectors report in regards to the new legislation and maybe even seeking a second opinion. I'd be happy to pay my share towards covering the cost.
September 2, 2010 at 7:10 am #1111
The situation is thus, should the cupboards be used for storage there would be no control over the materials placed in them. We would expect common sense to prevail, but in these situations you cannot rely on that.
Somebody stores a material that produces a thick toxic smoke when heated.
Tragically a fire breaks out and there is smoke inhalation during the evacuation. The nature of the toxins in the smoke causes brain damage in an infant who was evacuated.
Because the material was stored in a common part, RMG and the Directors would be on the hook for it. I am sure I do not need to elaborate further.
September 2, 2010 at 11:14 am #1112
Further to this thread, I have attached the report drafted by the Chairman post the visit by the fire officer. I believe you have to log in to view.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.