Memorandum submitted by The Royal Oak
I wrote to say that, having listened to evidence
from Enterprise to the Committee, I refute absolutely their claim
that they provide benefits to tenants which compensate for the
increased costs of purchases. Mr. Tuppen even claimed that "property
reviews" are a benefit. In fact they are conducted solely
for the purpose of ensuring that the tenant is compliant with
the repairing and redecorating covenants in the lease.
I also deny there is any business assistance
from Regional Managers or Business Development Managers (BDMs).
Their function is principally to carry out administrative tasks,
and to conduct rent reviews. I have been an Enterprise tenant
for over 12 years, and have never received any assistance with
business development from any Enterprise employee. I have received
no training. I did try to use their free rating advice but I had
previously negotiated a rates reduction, and was told that if
anything my rates were too low.
I was most surprised that the TISC took the
view that there are benefits, and that these compensate in some
way for the costs of the tie. I hope you will have the good sense
to take a different view.
If tenants were offered a specific reduction
in their rent to compensate for the loss of these benefits, and
given the opportunity to buy into them, I do not know of one tenant
(and I know quite a few) who would buy into the benefits at any
cost. Nor do I know one tenant who would not opt out of both benefits
and tie given the option. Could you perhaps ask Enterprise to
give tenants the opportunity to choose?