26 Feb 2026
Case study here.
The situation:
- Everest Miles Contractors not opening emails and refusing to answer any questions or provide any insurance details.
- Everest Miles still working in position of high trust roles in building(s) with unresolved questions about resident attacks and residents tracking and having keys to residences and being in charge of CCTV which is lost or damaged after reported attacks.
- NatWest/Nationwide still providing mortgages in impacted buildings.
- The court refusing to open emails about a mystery hearing in Natwest case.
- At least one building 2 months late on resident meetings.
- Oakley Property abandoning service charges for 16 months and along with directors refusing to answer questions. AXA still insuring directors.
- The police refusing to specify which crime reports they are ignoring in correspondance.
- Estate agents still marketing and selling, see Aston Vaughan here and Winkworth here.
- Natwest solicitor TLT’s shocking actions.
- Questions not answered by Veriforce CHAS (see list below) who are accrediting Everest Miles as they work in schools, offices, other residences etc
Veriforce CHAS ignored questions:
- Could you provide a detailed account of what happened in response to the request below (see email below), and all associated requests from us, including the corresponding notes, audit trail, and activity history from your CRM system (and any other internal case-management systems).
- We have notes indicating complex SAR stonewalling by your organisation in the past. So, to be explicit: yes or no — are you willing to hold an open SAR scope discussion with us (i.e., a practical discussion to agree scope, sources, and search terms before you finalise your response)?
- Please confirm whether you are comfortable with Everest Miles Contractors refusing to provide evidence of their professional indemnity insurance. From your perspective, is providing this information optional? I’m seeking to validate that you are a trustworthy organisation before sharing any further information. Also: would you expect an authorised contractor to reply to emails in a timely manner?
- Could you outline your best-practice standards and what you expect from any contractor/company you authorise. Please also provide all relevant compliance materials (policies, onboarding/approval criteria, vetting standards, complaints handling, insurance requirements, and any contractor governance documents).
- What handover from the eg May 2025 interactions with your firms were you given? please detail them and say if this is in line with your policies and the potential impact if I handover didn’t happen?
- Can you confirm the date Everest Miles Contractors joined your scheme (or were first authorised/approved by you)?
- Did Everest Miles Contractors inform you of any ongoing disputesor any material changes to the situation? Do you require contractors to disclose these as part of your governance process — and if so, how?
- Who is your organisation’s professional indemnity insurer(provider name) and what is the coverage type (e.g., PI / public liability), at a high level?
- Given this matter involves allegations of attempted murderand a multi-entity issue (which we believe may have contributed to the resignation of NatWest’s Chief Risk Officer), is it appropriate for this to be handled solely at customer support level?
- What qualifications and remit does the current handler/team have to assess issues of this seriousness
- Please provide your organisational structure for escalation, including the escalation stages, who is involved at each stage (functions/roles), and the decision-making process and timelines.
- Could you please read through this and reply with bullet points of your understanding to ensure we are on same page: https://propertycorruption.com/courtcase-1-natwest-tlt-vs-editor/
- Would you be happy to answer further questions?
Conclusion
So the question is – is this signs of a criminal conspiracy? How vast is the portfolio risk here? Is this typical of these companies broader activities and risk profiles?
Key questions:
- Will Oakley Property managed buildings continue to get insured?
- At what point does AXA have to start acting?
- Will the Natwest/Nationwide etc CEO/CFO/CRO’s get further dragged into this and still be able to still secure insurance? See here.
- And will the government have to intervene to help Natwest?
- How does this impact the broader portfolio risk of Apax (funder of Veriforce), is their due diligence sufficient?