How To Become Better With Pre Purchase Valuations
Category : Business Valuation
It seems probable, then, that P’s fee would have been lower had investment begun earlier. I therefore asked the then Chief Executive if she would calculate the effect of the delay in investing on the fees paid by P and consider making a refund if it was found that he had paid more than he should have done. The then Chief Executive agreed to do that. She said that the re-casting of the strata building replacement cost paid by P should affect only those levied for the period from the notional date of the first investment to 6 September 1993.
Thus PTO calculated that fees of £2,601 should be refunded to P. I welcomed that decision. In the light of PTO’s subsequent acceptance that 6 May 1991 should be the notional start date of investment, I asked the present Chief Executive if the matter of fees payable could be reviewed. He replied that the fee for the period 16 July 1990 to 15 July 1991 would have been £1,366 instead of the £1,538 actually paid. Although PTO said in their letter of 8 July 1997 that they would investigate the questions Mr and Mrs H had raised about investment.
They did not take that forward at the time because Mr and Mrs H said that they were too busy to give their full attention to the matter. While I accept that it was not possible for PTO to consider changes to the arrangements for handling P’s investments at that time without Mr and Mrs H’s involvement, I take the view that PTO should have addressed their concerns about delay.
I have seen no evidence that they did so until after Mr and Mrs H had written again on 17 October. Further, although PTO subsequently accepted that investment could have begun earlier than it had, they refused to consider whether P might have been financially disadvantaged by their error. That was a very poor performance. PTO were seriously at fault in failing to begin investment on P’s behalf until September 1993 and, until the Ombudsman’s intervention, they made no serious attempt to consider redress for that.