This one email encapsulates all that is wrong with Accent Housing.
The adverserial approach of protecting the organisation ahead of the welfare of residents. It exposes the lack of integrity exhibited by their most senior executives.
The email is printed in full and my response and comments are included.
EMAIL from JULIE WITTICH
Chief Operating Officer. Accent Housing
Julie Wittich:
'I have already provided you with the invoices for works undertaken by ESH at Lambert Court in 2017/18 and 2018/19, these were sent to you on the 21st March.'
Simply not true
You are fully aware that the ‘invoices' you have provided contain no determination as to the actual work undertaken or the associated rate that contractually has to be applied to that work. They simply show Accent Housing have paid an invoice presented by ESH Construction and that two individuals alone were responsible for overseeing the process.
Example 'invoice' pdf
The Tribunal agreed no invoices were ever checked by Accent Housing.
Julie Wittich: 'I confirm that there were three invoices in 2017/18 which were for the following works;
Fixing gate for which the charge was £38.20
Fitting of a door closer for which the charge was £55.86
Finally, there was a charge of £128.96 for stocking up the gritting bins, 50% of these charges have been refunded to the residents of Lambert Court.
In 2018/19 a variety of works were recharged to customers at Lambert Court; including but not exclusively; a replacement window, fitting of a fire door, installation of an access hatch, a variety of repairs to communal doors and door closers . There were also three call outs for blocked and over- flowing drains and a number of call outs in relation to change light bulbs or repair defects relating to the communal lighting at the scheme. The overall charge to customers for these works was £2,970.90 of which 50% has been refunded as a goodwill gesture.'
Simply a description of 'works'
Can I remind you of an email received from Robert Bloom in June 2021 in which he states;
‘there may have been some occasional errors in relation to invoicing’.
Out of all 42 invoices presented to the tribunal not one was genuine. These were more than ‘occasional errors’. Your Head of Homeownership attempted to cover up the scale of the problem. I believe this practice continues.
You have presented no evidence to disprove my assertion that ESH Construction have consistently defrauded residents. To the contrary you appear determined not to provide any evidence which could expose further mal practice.
As it appears you have access to these individual invoices I again request that you send me the copies which include the narrative and schedule of rate applied.
Julie Wittich: 'Sarah Ireland did not at any point in time indicate that we would undertake an independent investigation into any fraudulent practices.'
Simply not true
You are now backtracking on the promise of an independent investigation made by Sarah Ireland. A promise made in front of myself, Liz Attfield and my wife. We even discussed the fact Beevers and Struthers would not be considered suitable to undertake such an investigation as they had signed off the original accounts. (Liz Attfield made a note to that effect.)
I have an email from Sarah Ireland confirming the fact even those estates that had left for RTM would be included in that investigation.
Extract.
email 23/12/2022. 'We will be undertaking a full audit of works delivered by ESH and associated charges levied for these.
email 20/01/2023. Those estates that have left for right to manage. 'I have confirmed to Julie Wittich that these should be included in the investigation and audit of the Esh contract.'
Julie Wittich: 'She did agree that an independent investigation could be commissioned to look at the works undertaken, and the charges levied to residents at Lambert Court.'
Again not true.
An independent investigation was promised across the entire ESH contracted area.
Julie Wittich: 'You are aware that I took a pragmatic view given that these works were undertaken so many years ago, it would be very difficult for an independent professional to make a conclusive judgement and therefore, I made the decision to offer the goodwill gesture to conclude matters.'
Patronising and incorrect.
It is very simple as demonstrated to the Tribunal to make a conclusive judgement. All repair charges are strictly governed by the Schedule of rates. If the rate does not match the narrative then the charge is incorrect. Provide the invoices and I will identify the problems.
Julie Wittich: 'I have been very clear that there is absolutely no indication whatsoever that any fraud has taken place in relation to transactions with our contractors.'
No evidence to underpin that statement.
You again state that there is no indication that ESH Construction have defrauded residents. I would suggest you read the tribunal verdict on all 42 invoices presented to the tribunal. How else would you describe it?
Julie Wittich: 'However, as I have previously confirmed to you in my email dated 24th April, I have now instructed an independent RICS Building Surveyor to review the works undertaken and the invoice documentation alongside the charges to customers for the works undertaken.'
Once you have provided the requested underlying invoices for the works I will happily sit down with a RICS surveyor, any Accent representatives and other interested parties and go through those invoices.
I would request those invoices be provided by Friday 26th May 2023.