Tuesday, 11th November, 2025 - CVRL - Response to Claims

We, along with numerous other addresses both within the Village, and beyond, received the following email from Joe Griffin of London Penthouse. As per Mr Griffin’s request to publish this email more widely, we have included it here, along with CVRL’s responses to his various points, included in the email below italics for clarity.

Our overall position remains:

• There is and never has been any benefit whatsoever to the Board of CVRL in failing to pass on information to leaseholders or residents, sent to CVRL by the Developers

• In the course of our engagement with Solo Estates and Mr Colin Tett, we have been contacted by no less than four different third-party developers working on behalf of Mr Tett, with seven on-site meetings and numerous discussions both by telephone and email

• During all this time, over all these meetings, none of the various third-party developers we have met have ever given us anything more than vague assurances about their plans potential benefits to the Village, with each developer then being replaced by another, different third party

• Neither Solo States nor any of these various third parties has ever offered in writing, detailed plans for the entire build, detailed designs, nor indeed detailed statements of benefits or plan in writing

• As Mr. Griffen clearly states below, CVRL only received a definitive start date for work on September 8th, 2025, one week before work actually started. 

• As of November 9th, 2025, CVRL has still not received detailed plans for the build. Indeed, Mr Griffen himself states below that contractors have not yet been employed.

• Our professional team await meaningful plans rather than the vague aspirations received so far, from which they can advise both the Board and Mr Tett of the likely practical consequences and possible harm to Chiswick Village, its leaseholders and residents of what the build entails.

We will continue to keep all interested parties appraised of any specific, written commitments from the Developers as and when we receive them. We do not however feel that there is merit in passing on vague aspirations and indications of intent, unsupported by written contracts and commitments.

From: Joe Griffin <joe@londonpenthouse.co.uk>

Sent: 04 November 2025 16:04

Subject: Chiswick Village - Response to Claims

Dear Residents,

Since we have become involved in the penthouse project at Chiswick Village, we have made a real effort to foster a good working relationship with the board of CVRL and their managing agents. We have also been mindful to avoid getting involved in the ‘he said, she said’ antagonistic nature of a lot of the correspondence we have seen originating from the board of CVRL and its managing agents Michael Richards & Co.

Ultimately, the penthouse development team, the CV residents, leaseholders, and estate management are going to be living and working alongside each other for the next few years and a “us and them” mentality, is not beneficial for anyone involved. 

This is something we have wanted to avoid, but we do understand that the project is a big change for the village and our presence will inevitably upset some people, so we know that people will want to vent their frustrations - we get that. 

However, given the nature of the updates we have seen recently from the board of CVRL, which are constantly trying to portray us in a bad light, we now feel that we have a responsibility to respond directly to these claims made and provide evidence to the contrary where necessary.

We have not wanted to do this as we are about looking forward and not backwards, but our hand has been forced by the constant, fabricated narrative being pushed to residents, leaseholders, and local representatives by the board of CVRL. 

Communication and Updates on Works – Folder 1

Firstly, there have been claims made within a letter to local representatives and uploaded on the CVRL website, that “scaffold has been erected without prior warning” and that “at no time was the board informed of a start date of September 15th 2025.”– This is untrue.

I have attached several communications (Folder 1) directly to the chairman of the board of CVRL and managing agents (Michael Richards).

1. 29th April 2025 - Haydon Murton provides Martin Weaver, Chairman of CVRL, confirmation that we anticipate works commencing in Late Summer/Early Autumn.

2. 22nd August 2025 – Freddie Fox informs Martin Weaver that scaffold erection to facilitate the second phase of works will commence in Early September.

3. 8th September 2025 – Joe Griffin wites to Martin Weaver with board of CVRL and Michael Richard copied advising that we will be writing later than day with a notice of commencement of scaffolding from Monday 15th September 2025.

4. 8th September 2025 - Following a meeting with Joe Griffin on site at Chiswick Village, Freddie Fox informs Martin Weaver that scaffold installation is due to commence on the 15th September 2025 – During the site meeting a week or so earlier we agreed to delay erection of scaffold by a week on Martin Weaver’s request so that he had time to inform residents that this element of work was commencing as this was not done after our previous update. 

We fully understand why residents of the village would be disgruntled to wake up or return home to scaffold being installed outside their homes with seemingly no warning, but we weren’t to know that CVRL were being selective with what they were choosing to share with leaseholders and residents.

CVRL - It remains position of CVRL that one week’s notice of the intention to erect scaffolding, as described in item 4 above, did not constitute adequate warning of the intent to proceed, nor did it provide our residents and leaseholders with time to plan accordingly. It is difficult to believe that the Developers only determined the date on which scaffolding was to be erected, one week in advance, however they elected for whatever reason, to provide us with only seven days’ warning, nevertheless. We therefore believe that our contention that “scaffold has been erected without prior warning” remains a reasonable description of events.

Building Safety & Building Control – Folder 2

Secondly, I would like to address the issue of building control and the building safety act. Again, this is something we have clarified to the board and their team but does not seem to have been passed on.

In the letter which has been shared with leaseholders Martin Weaver states “the developer is using old permission that relate to the building of garages some distance away from the penthouses as a way to avoid the new safety checks” – This is not correct.  Works were commenced and sufficiently progressed with the fire upgrade works carried out to all blocks (new fire doors to all existing apartments together with the installation of dry risers).

 At the point these new doors were installed the village had non-compliant flat entrance doors throughout, providing no protection in the event of a fire. In addition, the newly installed dry riser now enables the London Fire Brigade’s hoses to reach each floor of the building and effectively fight any potential fire, which prior to installation they were unable to do. The existing property was a far greater fire risk prior to this development being started.

This was a significant amount of work, replacing some 280+ doors with 60 minute rated fire doors along with the installation of new dry risers to every building in the estate. The total cost for these works was £850,000 of which £500,000 was paid for by the developer. An agreement was signed in 2018 with CVRL enabling them to pay the balance by instalments over a prolonged period to the substantial benefit of all leaseholders. With or without the development the leaseholders would have been responsible for these works given the inadequate fire safety of the blocks at that time.

For clarity, along with the fire upgrade works that have already been carried out (upgrading fire doors and installation of the dry risers) we will also be installing a new communal fire detection & alarm system to the building, along with new automatic smoke ventilation in the staircases. A sprinkler system will also be installed to the new flats.

The fire doors that have been installed also go above and beyond the requirements of the regulations – By law an FD30 Fire Door (a door providing 30 minutes fire protection) is required. The doors that have been installed are FD60 (60 minutes fire protection), providing twice the fire resistance required by law. 

The initial notice for the scheme was submitted to the local authority and accepted in 2017 - This notice remains valid.

As the scheme was consented at planning, had an initial notice submitted, and works progressed on-site prior to the 6 April 2024, the scheme does not fall under the new Building Safety Act regulations higher risk regime and does not need to go through the gateway process. We instead fall into a transitional arrangement where work can continue under a private sector building control approver, in this case SWECO.

As part of the transitional arrangement for works that have commenced prior to the introduction of the new regulations, works will be signed off by a Registered Building Control Inspector/Approver and a final building control certificate issued in the normal manner.

As some of the blocks will be over 7 storeys when complete, these blocks will need to be registered as Higher Risk Buildings (HRBs) on completion. Whilst the process to register the new HRBs is the responsibility of the freeholder, we will compile all the relevant information relating to the new penthouses and fire upgrade works and work with the freeholder to facilitate the registrations.

All of the works that will be carried out on site will comply with the relevant fire safety regulations. 

The proposed fire strategy has been issued to the London Fire Brigade via our approved building control inspector, and the fire brigade have confirmed they are satisfied with the strategy. As part of their appointment, our fire engineer will also be ensuring the scheme is EWS1 compliant. A EWS1 certificate will be provided on completion of the works confirming the fire safety of the external wall construction.

I attach a full suite of information relating to the above. (Folder 2).

CVRL – CVRL contested the validity of use of the work on both internal flat doors and the garages as grounds to avoid the impact of the changes to building safety regulations enacted in the wake of the fire at Grenfell Towers.

In September 2018, London Fire Brigade (LFB) required CVRL to fit FD30 standard fire doors,  plans for the full funding of which were then included in the budget for CVRL. The Developers however required doors to meet the FD60 standard in order for them to be allowed to continue with the penthouse development. After long negotiations, the Developers then contributed to the uplift in costs to meet their higher standard requirement, without which the Developers would not have been able to proceed with the penthouses.

The Lease and Payment Of Costs – Folder 3 (attached here)

Whilst it is correct that there is provision in the roof space lease for the developer to cover CVRL’s reasonable fees, we are under no obligation to cover any fees until the completion of the development under the terms of the lease issued and signed by CVRL. However, to show goodwill with CVRL and the residents of Chiswick Village, as well as avoiding placing unnecessary financial burden on the leaseholders we have agreed to cover these costs well in advance of when they are legally due to be met.

There is also the claim made that “the developer has consistently dragged his feet in meeting these costs”. -  The development team have given a number of undertakings to cover CVRL’s cost as scheduled below and evidenced in the attached folder.

• 12th November 2024 – Developer provided an undertaking of £5,000 (+Vat) to Winckworth Sherwood to cover CVRL’s legal fees.

• 22nd November 2024 – Developer provided an undertaking of £12,700 (+Vat) to Winckworth Sherwood to cover fees for CVRL’s professional team: Hollis Global Surveyors, Ron Galton (Services Consultant), and Michael Richards and Co. (Managing Agents) 

• 1st October 2025 – Developer provided an undertaking of £13,000 (+Vat) to Winckworth Sherwood to cover fees for CVRL’s professional team: Pi Consult Ltd (services Consultant) and Michael Richards & Co.

 The above amounts to a total of over £30,000 plus VAT paid out to CVRL’s professional advisors – to date we have seen one report from a services engineer that had clearly never been to Chiswick Village and a handful of false claims and scaremongering from the managing agent.

CVRL – CVRL has had an agreement in place with the Developers for the payment of various professional fees as laid out in the 1997 lease.  The developers have consistently challenged every request for payment of fees, the detailed payment of which was agreed as part of negotiating the 2018 agreement.  It’s particularly interesting to note that these fees, notified to the Developers on numerous occasions, were only actually settled on the same day that this email was issued.

“Major Leak”

The claim that “There has been major leak caused by the new pipework installed on the roof by the penthouse developers” is simply incorrect. – The leak was caused by a heavily corroded steel pipe that sat within the existing roof build up. This was not a new pipe that had been installed by our team, nor was it a new pipework connection that had failed. This was an existing steel pipe that had rusted through and failed from years of water ingress where it penetrated the roof. This is a failure in long term building maintenance, not an issue caused by the development.

Secondly, this was not a “major leak” but a small intermittent drip that had clearly been ongoing for some time. Given that we have a team of plumbers present on site we have carried out a replacement of this section of pipework as a goodwill gesture. This was a minor repair took approximately one hour to complete.

The tone of this update, coupled with presenting incorrect information prior to carrying out any investigation seems to serve no other purpose than to cause unnecessary alarm to residents and attempt to discredit us and our construction team. 

I have attached photos of the corroded pipe which has now been replaced (attached here).

CVRL – CVRL is well aware of the state of the communal plumbing in the village and has been implementing remedial work to address this since 2011. At no point did CVRL make any secret of the state of the pipework in question. It remains the Developers responsibility to take account of the state of the plumbing now and in future, in implementing any changes to it required by them and them alone. To suggest that a failure on their part to take account of the state of some elements of the Village’s plumbing is somehow the fault of CVRL frankly, beggars belief.

The fact remains that the leak which caused such severe damage to residents property occurred immediately after work conducted by the Developers. Had the leak occurred at any other point, it would be entirely reasonable for CVRL to have borne the costs of remediation associated. Instead, the Developers have consistently taken the stand that having caused the leak, they are now fixing the problem as a favour to CVRL and its residents.

“Rumours and Misinformation”

In addition to the above, we would like to provide some clarification around the “rumours and misinformation” and the responses to these rumours that have been shared with residents via the CVRL website:

Programme and Build Period - “In the absence of a confirmed, detailed plan from the Developers, it’s near impossible for CVRL to confirm anything about how long the build work will take.”

The build phase is confirmed. The construction of this phase of the development which comprises Blocks 4-11 is scheduled to take approximately 18 months. We anticipate a further 18 months for the construction of the last phase (Blocks 1-3 and Blocks 12-15).

There is no absence of a plan. We provided an updated programme of works to Michael Richards and the board of CVRL on the 13th September 2025 (email attached). – we received no comment from CVRL or Michael Richards on this programme.

At the request of a number of residents we provided a high-level written overview of the programme on the 23rd October 2025 as we had spoken to a number of residents who had struggled to follow the Gantt programme and requested a simpler, written format outlining what sort of works and noise they could expect and when. 

Common Parts Upgrade - “CVRL currently has no plans to overhaul the common parts of the buildings, nor have we received any proposals to do so from the Developers. Should that change, we will of course inform all residents and leaseholders.”

 It has long been proposed that the common staircases and entrance lobbies would be refurbished as part of our works – CVRL and Michael Richards know this.

We have requested to meet with CVRL and Michael Richards & Co. on numerous occasions but our attempts have been rebuffed as there seems to be more focus on throwing mud at us rather than representing the best interests of the village and communicating with us to agree what works will be carried out to benefit the village and residents – such as common parts upgrades.

CVRL – Since the start of this process in 2018 CVRL has met with the Developers at their request, a total of seven times. Not once in any of these meetings, have any plans, proposals or designs been provided by the Developers in writing, as to when or in what way they may make any changes or improvements to the common parts of the Village. Numerous promises have been made verbally to CVRL in the past, none of which have been delivered. Given the Developers’ track record of failing to provide significant commitments in writing, we have no reason to believe that these vague promises will be met.

It only remains to say the potential for this development has been clear since the airspace leases were granted by CVRL in 1997. Planning was achieved in 2017 and then enabling works completed in stages since that date as further regulatory change and building methodology advanced. The longer term benefits for Chiswick Village as a whole are clear to see and whilst there will of course be disruption during the development phase surely it is best to collaborate to achieve the best possible finished product and outcome for all parties rather than to disrupt and spread false information in an attempt to undermine something CVRL have been aware of for over two decades.

This correspondence has been written and sent as a last resort given the refusal of the board of CVRL and their managing agents to engage and interact constructively. We are committed to delivering projects that are a success for both new and existing residents alike and we work tirelessly to achieve this. We are still very much committed to doing that here at Chiswick Village and remain available to engage in a positive, collaborative working relationship with any stakeholders – when they are ready.

It would be appreciated if this email could be shared with other residents as it sets out the current situation from a different perspective.

Best regards,

  M.  07506009415

   T.  020 7665 9604

  W.  londonpenthouse.co.uk

Monday, 3rd November, 2025 - Reply to “Developer Works Update and Programme”

Having received Freddie Fox’s email, “Developer Works Update and Programme”, Adam Goldwater of Michael Richards, CVRL’s managing Agents, replied on behalf of CVRL on October 23rd. We have now received a reply from Freddie Fox, the text of which is provided below. Links are also provided to the supporting documents described in Mr. Fox’s reply. For completeness, we have also included Adam Goldwater’s comments on the replies.

AG - We sent you the quote for CVRL to have an independent schedule of condition done (£3,450+vat). You have sent us the schedule produced by your surveyor in response. CVRL are entitled to have this done independently and it is a reasonable request for the developer to cover these fees. Will you please now agree to this?

 FF - We will not be paying for another condition survey as the survey that has been carried out and paid for by us already has been done by David Maycox & Co. who have been described on CVRL’s website as ‘well regarded’ and CVRL’s legal team advised that they ‘are confident that David Maycox & Co. would carry out an independent process’

 AG - It remains the opinion of the Board and our Managing Agent, Michael Richards, that the survey commissioned by the Developer is insufficiently detailed to meet CVRL’s needs. With that in mind, CVRL’S own independent survery and schedule of condition has been commissioned. A copy of that report will be provided as soon as possible.

AG - You have told us that you did carry out pressure tests of the pipes before you reconnected the water. Can you please provide evidence of this?

FF - Please find site report from our services consultant attached - Site Report - Inspection of Existing Pipework

AG - This has now been referred to PI Consulting for comment

AG - Thank you for confirming that you will pay for the increase in the insurance premium ((£12,821.18) – we will forward this invoice when received. Can you please send evidence that you have increased your PL cover to £10m?

 FF- Please find policies attached – £5m initial with a £5m top up policy - Policy Schedule - CAOX0223 and Policy Schedule - 752316

AG - These will now be submitted to CVRL’s brokers, to confirm that they are sufficient to the need.                         

AG - When will we receive the technical information promised in your comments on the M&E design review?

FF - There were a large number of items with the comment “to be issued at detailed design stage”. We are still procuring some of the specialist subcontractors for various elements of the MEP package who will all have design input. We will have these packages finalised in the coming month or so and will issue in due course.

AG - These will be posted here when they are received.

AG - When will we receive the full structural survey with calculations so that CVRL’s checking engineer can verify independently to the residents that the proposed structure is safe? We note you intend to commence structural works shortly, so this is quite urgent.

FF - Structural feasibility report and supporting documents/calculations attached. This was sent under previous cover - Rooftop Extension Feasibility Report, Load Take Down Comparison and Site Report

AG - This is information from 2023, it is quite brief, and in our opinion, may not be adequate as a full structural assessment. Hollis Global, the surveyors engaged as part of CVRL’s professional team, have been asked to comment.

AG - Higher Risk Buildings - we have been waiting for a response since October 6th to this query. You indicated that the Transitional Provisions contained in Schedule 3 to the Higher Risk Buildings (Building Procedures) (England) Regulations 2023 apply. As you’d expect, a number of residents have raised queries about this. In order that my client can update them can you provide copies of the following correspondence relating to the 21 June 2017 Initial Notice:

• The joint correspondence from South Quay Commercial Ltd, who were identified in the Initial Notice as the party intending to carry out the redevelopment works

• The correspondence from Sweco to the Local Authority informing them that your client, London Penthouses, intended to carry out the works instead of South Quay

• Your notice(s) to the Local Authority confirming that the works referred to in the Initial Notice were sufficiently progressed by the requisite dates

FF – Attached change of person notice fyi. Solo Estates (2007) Ltd are the owner of the airspace leases and we are their joint venture partner, delivering the scheme - Change of Person Notice

FF - Certificate of Lawfulness from the Local Authority - CLEUD Decision Notice

AG – these have been referred to CVRL’s legal team for clarification and comment