Having experienced poor service from Warwick Estates previously at another block of apartments, I was concerned when I discovered my new freeholder was considering using the services of Warwick Estates. I didn't want to be lumbered with Warwick Estates again, not just because of their poor customer service, or their poorly trained property managers, but because of their considerable loan, used to acquire their competitor Urban Owners. Ordinarily this wouldn't have been a concern, except for the fact that Urban Owners managed predominantly Right To Manage (RTM) developments. And RTM developments are free to appoint any managing agent they choose, without the freeholder's permission. So the combination of the poor level of service from Warwick Estates and an increased number of RTM developments was only ever going to have one outcome, which is the RTM developments leaving Warwick Estates in droves, with Warwick Estates still owing a considerable debt. Purchasing Urban Owners was only worth as much as the service charge payments from the leaseholders they aquired. Deliver the usual abysmal service, then lose those leaseholders, and there's nothing left, except a big debt to pay off, but none of those acquired leaseholders to fund that debt. Unsurprisingly, this justified concern on hearing my freeholder was considering using the services of Warwick Estates is how things have turned out, as the RTM companies quickly discovered the terrible service from Warwick Estates and terminated their contracts. Freeholders rarely consider the interests of their leaseholers, as they have their own reasons for selecting certain managing agents, reasons which frequently benefit themselves through various financial channels. My service charge has increased twofold in this time which was no surprise. Management fees increased significantly. Obviously Warwick Estates needs to pay off that debt by increasing fees from a much smaller pool of remaining leaseholders. Their service has been absolutely terrible.