FREE tenancy agreement
FREE landlord software
A follow up on our questioning of the validity of the NLA women in property awards, that any regular PH readers would know we haven't got a great deal of time for. (but that might say more about us)(... maybe we're just too metropolitan man for our own good and should take a chill pill and fire up the quattro back to 1980s attitudinal).
Anyway following on from a comment placed on the post a Moregeous has posted questioning the validity of the whole judging criteria.
She questions -
"How can the judges decide on the regional winners, based on the competition’s stated criteria, when:
No verification checks have been done about the claims made by the entrants on their own entry forms
No evidence has been provided as to how they run their businesses, in the form of an interview, or references provided by, for example, a bank or trade contacts
No examination has been made of the condition of the entrants’ properties, even in the form of photographs, which every landlord has for marketing purposes."
Morgeous continues to inform us that "The organisers then admitted that “overcoming personal obstacles” was one of the criteria given to the judges, even though it hadn’t been advertised, so those entrants who’d also included a great sob story were at an advantage."
Cue the music and tears and where's Cilla Black when you need her.
Not a patronising, opportunistic PR opportunity then?
Read Moregeous very enlightening post here
PS Before we annoy the NLA any further - we do think they are the best of all the landlord associations.
Discounted landlord insurance here
Posts
6 comments:
Loving the Ashes to Ashes referencing and thanks for your reply to my blog post / link to the same.
I must make clear that my initial querying of the judging criteria took place two years ago when Bradford & Bingley were the hosts as opposed to the NLA (of which I am a member) and other sponsors.
I haven't re-entered the competition (due to obvious reasons!) so you'd have to check with current entrants to find out whether their properties / tenants were checked out, ie. whether the competition is being run 'properly' and according to the ASA guidlelines.
As far as the sob stories / overcoming personal difficulties issue goes, whether this remains one of the advertised and then applied judging criteria is entirely a choice for the competition organisers, but it's hardly objective is it :-)
I wasn't going to comment here but two things come to mind.
1. The 2008 Awards was run by Bradford & Bingley.
We were aware of the issues raised by moregeous when we took over the awards in 2009. And the awards were amended and changed to take on board the feedback. The ASA also signed off the Ts and Cs.
Everything is above board.
2. It is hard not to highlight the following:
"In 2008 I was shortlisted for the NW regional award, then sponsored by Bradford & Bingley."
The person in question did not win and, therefore, raised some objections. Would objections have been raised if she had won? I guess not.
Anyway, people may have issues about the CONCEPT of the NLA campaigns but absolutely no funny-business has gone on in terms of IMPLEMENTATION while under the NLA brand.
Any assertions or allegations of funny-business would be treated seriously and investigated.
Thanks Steve for getting back again.
We appreciate all your honest responses.
We will not knock the NLA for at least a week.
...and you are the best landlord association of them all.
Can I ask you to expand as to why you think we're the best?
In all seriousness it wouldbe good to know where we're getting things right (for a change!)
Steve
Steve,
I find your comment regarding 'if I'd won' quite insulting. I included the information that I'd been an entrant in my original post as I thought it was entirely relevant. It appears you are insinuating that it was 'sour grapes' which drove my complaint. It wasn't. I was completely horrified that I'd been part of a competition with was unfair, poorly run and didn't in any way objectively compare the properties / businesses in its initial stages. I only approached the ASA as my enquiries were so roundly rejected by both the Bradford & Bingley and their PR company. It was only the ASA who managed to get the truth about the altered criteria. I am very pleased that the NLA are determined to run the competition properly, but the importance of "wimmin's issues" within it means I still consider it demeaning to Women in Property :-)
Moregeous,
I do feel that the NLA response was somewhat shirty.
I think Steve has now moved his PR skills onto another organisation promoting various art collections.
It seems that the PR world is built on fickle superficiality and spin after all, sweetie. No real surprise, darling.
You are obviously a 'woman of substance' and integrity in a world of fluff and mirrors.
Many thanks for your honest and substantial comments on the topic of the "Women in Property" pat-ronise on head awards.
Hawkeye
Post a Comment