0% lettings valuation accuracy
33% lettings fee satisfaction
Jun 10,2024
Jun 10,2024
1
people found
this helpful
this helpful
Having resided at Fizzy E16 for several years, I've noted some discrepancies and issues potential tenants should be aware of, particularly regarding the financial aspects of renting here. As of 2024, the promotional materials on Fizzy E16's website suggest that a studio apartment rents from £1,750 per month. However, the reality is somewhat different. Apartments on higher floors are subject to significantly higher rates, often 10-20% above the advertised prices. Prospective tenants should also be prepared for additional monthly charges for furniture rental. This separation of furniture and flat rental is concerning; unlike flat rental, which is regulated, furniture rental lacks similar protections and could see unregulated price increases at any time, placing tenants in a disadvantageous position. Furthermore, for those with pets, an additional pet license fee is applicable.
During initial viewings, agents might reassure you that rent increases are modest, typically no more than 5% annually. However, this assurance falls short given the one-year contract term. After this period, the rent can be increased without adherence to the previously suggested cap, a detail that merits careful consideration.
The contract structure at Fizzy E16 is another point of contention. All leases are fixed for a year with an annual renewal, limiting opportunities to terminate the agreement. If a tenant needs to exit the lease mid-term, the penalty is steep—originally two months' rent. Although this fee was reduced to one month following complaints from tenants who highlighted that only advertising fees and rent until a new tenant is found should be legally required by Tenant Fee Act 2019 guidance, the property management made a one-month-rent-free promotion on their website and claim that the charge is for advertising. However, they reverted back to the original two-month penalty after a short while.
Some long-term residents have successfully transitioned to a rolling contract after their fixed term, which theoretically offers greater flexibility, allowing either party to terminate the agreement without additional fees. However, this flexibility comes at a steep cost, requiring a 25% rent increase to switch to a rolling contract. Alarmingly, there have been instances where, shortly after switching to a rolling contract, the lease was terminated by the management after just one month, catching tenants off guard.
These practices highlight the need for potential renters at Fizzy E16 to approach with caution, fully aware of the financial and contractual commitments involved.
The quality of the apartments at Fizzy E16 is, at best, average. Concerns about the construction of the building, such as mold and persistent water issues, have been reported extensively under the term Fizzy Vice, highlighting significant deficiencies. Even today, residents may experience abrupt water shortages or a lack of hot water, although the response times from Greystar, the new management company, have improved compared to the previous administration.
Noise pollution is another significant concern for tenants at Fizzy E16. The west side of the building is adjacent to the Jubilee Line, while the opposite side faces a busy main road. Continuous traffic noise from both sources is a daily reality. Traffic on Silvertown Way starts as early as 5 AM. While closing the windows can mitigate the noise, this is hardly a solution during the warmer months and can make living conditions quite unbearable.
The management's tendency to overpromise yet underdeliver remains unchanged before and after the takeover by Greystar. Despite claims of comprehensive management, in practice, the support provided is far from complete. Greystar does a commendable job in communicating with tenants about issues as they arise, but when it comes to actual repairs, tenants often find themselves having to arrange and chase up repair services independently, as the management's role does not extend to hands-on repairs.
The concierge service, while polite, appears to serve more as a marketing tool to attract new tenants rather than a functional benefit to the residents. The processes for check-in and check-out are particularly problematic; they seem disproportionately biased in favor of management. I advise future tenants to meticulously document the condition of their apartment upon moving in and out, including taking time-stamped photos, to avoid potential disputes. Regarding the repair services, there has been a noticeable decline in quality under Greystar's management. Technicians often resort to taking photographs of the problem areas and dismissing them as too complex to fix promptly. This discrepancy between the promises made and the service delivered is a recurring theme that potential tenants should be wary of.
Fizzy E16's approach to tenant deposits is stringent, with efforts seemingly focused on retaining as much of the deposit as possible. The third-party checking team, commissioned by Fizzy, operates with a lack of transparency and is unresponsive to tenant inquiries or discussions. Regardless of the cleanliness of the apartment at move-out, many tenants receive a bill for professional cleaning services. This practice suggests a tendency to extract additional fees unfairly.
Security concerns have diminished over time, but the building's past issues with security cannot be overlooked. In December 2021, tenants organized a meeting with the management due to significant concerns about security and ongoing heating problems. The management promised compensation during this meeting—a promise that remains unfulfilled. After Greystar taking over, the management resfue to admit the matter. They threated passed the case to their legal team for legal action, tenants have yet to receive any form of compensation.
The building's security staff, while not direct employees of Greystar but rather part of the building community, perform commendably, especially those on the night shift. This distinction highlights a partial outsourcing of critical services which, while effective in this instance, contributes to the complex management structure.
Another point of contention is the heating fee, which is dictated by the building's reliance on a district heating system not regulated by Ofgem. Over the past two years, both the standing charge and the power fee have significantly exceeded the standard cap, with tenants currently paying a daily standing charge of £1. This system places an undue financial burden on tenants, exacerbated by the lack of regulatory oversight.
On a more positive note, Fizzy occasionally organizes community events and parties, which, while only average in quality, do offer a valuable opportunity for residents to connect with neighbors. These gatherings, often showcased by tenants on platforms like Instagram, seem primarily designed to enhance Fizzy's public image rather than genuinely enrich the community.
Fizzy E16 is relatively inclusive regarding tenant selection. As long as prospective residents pass the background check, they are likely to secure an apartment. This inclusivity is one of the few straightforward aspects of dealing with Fizzy E16.
In the context of rental options, Fizzy E16 does present a more structured environment than some investment landlords who show little to no concern for their properties. Nonetheless, it's important to note that Fizzy charges a premium compared to private landlords. This extra cost often feels like it goes towards funding a robust legal team that seems more geared towards supporting Fizzy's interests against challenges from tenants. A major deterrent for potential renters is the fixed-term contract and the punitive fees associated with breaking it prematurely. Fizzy employs attractive incentives that can initially seem appealing but might ultimately entrap tenants in unfavorable terms. The question arises: is it wise to enter into an agreement that feels akin to dealing with a well-equipped adversary waiting for a slip-up?
The disparity between actual tenant experiences and the positive online ratings Fizzy E16 receives on platforms like Homeview and Google Reviews is also worth examining. Fizzy actively promotes online reviews by offering incentives such as a £10 Amazon voucher, which could skew the genuine sentiment of the residents. This practice raises concerns about the authenticity of their high ratings. I have even come across promotional materials explicitly advertising this incentive, which I am prepared to share for those interested.
Moreover, any apologies from Fizzy that claim commitments to address issues raised in reviews should be taken with caution. From discussions with fellow tenants, these often appear to be empty promisesr.
During initial viewings, agents might reassure you that rent increases are modest, typically no more than 5% annually. However, this assurance falls short given the one-year contract term. After this period, the rent can be increased without adherence to the previously suggested cap, a detail that merits careful consideration.
The contract structure at Fizzy E16 is another point of contention. All leases are fixed for a year with an annual renewal, limiting opportunities to terminate the agreement. If a tenant needs to exit the lease mid-term, the penalty is steep—originally two months' rent. Although this fee was reduced to one month following complaints from tenants who highlighted that only advertising fees and rent until a new tenant is found should be legally required by Tenant Fee Act 2019 guidance, the property management made a one-month-rent-free promotion on their website and claim that the charge is for advertising. However, they reverted back to the original two-month penalty after a short while.
Some long-term residents have successfully transitioned to a rolling contract after their fixed term, which theoretically offers greater flexibility, allowing either party to terminate the agreement without additional fees. However, this flexibility comes at a steep cost, requiring a 25% rent increase to switch to a rolling contract. Alarmingly, there have been instances where, shortly after switching to a rolling contract, the lease was terminated by the management after just one month, catching tenants off guard.
These practices highlight the need for potential renters at Fizzy E16 to approach with caution, fully aware of the financial and contractual commitments involved.
The quality of the apartments at Fizzy E16 is, at best, average. Concerns about the construction of the building, such as mold and persistent water issues, have been reported extensively under the term Fizzy Vice, highlighting significant deficiencies. Even today, residents may experience abrupt water shortages or a lack of hot water, although the response times from Greystar, the new management company, have improved compared to the previous administration.
Noise pollution is another significant concern for tenants at Fizzy E16. The west side of the building is adjacent to the Jubilee Line, while the opposite side faces a busy main road. Continuous traffic noise from both sources is a daily reality. Traffic on Silvertown Way starts as early as 5 AM. While closing the windows can mitigate the noise, this is hardly a solution during the warmer months and can make living conditions quite unbearable.
The management's tendency to overpromise yet underdeliver remains unchanged before and after the takeover by Greystar. Despite claims of comprehensive management, in practice, the support provided is far from complete. Greystar does a commendable job in communicating with tenants about issues as they arise, but when it comes to actual repairs, tenants often find themselves having to arrange and chase up repair services independently, as the management's role does not extend to hands-on repairs.
The concierge service, while polite, appears to serve more as a marketing tool to attract new tenants rather than a functional benefit to the residents. The processes for check-in and check-out are particularly problematic; they seem disproportionately biased in favor of management. I advise future tenants to meticulously document the condition of their apartment upon moving in and out, including taking time-stamped photos, to avoid potential disputes. Regarding the repair services, there has been a noticeable decline in quality under Greystar's management. Technicians often resort to taking photographs of the problem areas and dismissing them as too complex to fix promptly. This discrepancy between the promises made and the service delivered is a recurring theme that potential tenants should be wary of.
Fizzy E16's approach to tenant deposits is stringent, with efforts seemingly focused on retaining as much of the deposit as possible. The third-party checking team, commissioned by Fizzy, operates with a lack of transparency and is unresponsive to tenant inquiries or discussions. Regardless of the cleanliness of the apartment at move-out, many tenants receive a bill for professional cleaning services. This practice suggests a tendency to extract additional fees unfairly.
Security concerns have diminished over time, but the building's past issues with security cannot be overlooked. In December 2021, tenants organized a meeting with the management due to significant concerns about security and ongoing heating problems. The management promised compensation during this meeting—a promise that remains unfulfilled. After Greystar taking over, the management resfue to admit the matter. They threated passed the case to their legal team for legal action, tenants have yet to receive any form of compensation.
The building's security staff, while not direct employees of Greystar but rather part of the building community, perform commendably, especially those on the night shift. This distinction highlights a partial outsourcing of critical services which, while effective in this instance, contributes to the complex management structure.
Another point of contention is the heating fee, which is dictated by the building's reliance on a district heating system not regulated by Ofgem. Over the past two years, both the standing charge and the power fee have significantly exceeded the standard cap, with tenants currently paying a daily standing charge of £1. This system places an undue financial burden on tenants, exacerbated by the lack of regulatory oversight.
On a more positive note, Fizzy occasionally organizes community events and parties, which, while only average in quality, do offer a valuable opportunity for residents to connect with neighbors. These gatherings, often showcased by tenants on platforms like Instagram, seem primarily designed to enhance Fizzy's public image rather than genuinely enrich the community.
Fizzy E16 is relatively inclusive regarding tenant selection. As long as prospective residents pass the background check, they are likely to secure an apartment. This inclusivity is one of the few straightforward aspects of dealing with Fizzy E16.
In the context of rental options, Fizzy E16 does present a more structured environment than some investment landlords who show little to no concern for their properties. Nonetheless, it's important to note that Fizzy charges a premium compared to private landlords. This extra cost often feels like it goes towards funding a robust legal team that seems more geared towards supporting Fizzy's interests against challenges from tenants. A major deterrent for potential renters is the fixed-term contract and the punitive fees associated with breaking it prematurely. Fizzy employs attractive incentives that can initially seem appealing but might ultimately entrap tenants in unfavorable terms. The question arises: is it wise to enter into an agreement that feels akin to dealing with a well-equipped adversary waiting for a slip-up?
The disparity between actual tenant experiences and the positive online ratings Fizzy E16 receives on platforms like Homeview and Google Reviews is also worth examining. Fizzy actively promotes online reviews by offering incentives such as a £10 Amazon voucher, which could skew the genuine sentiment of the residents. This practice raises concerns about the authenticity of their high ratings. I have even come across promotional materials explicitly advertising this incentive, which I am prepared to share for those interested.
Moreover, any apologies from Fizzy that claim commitments to address issues raised in reviews should be taken with caution. From discussions with fellow tenants, these often appear to be empty promisesr.
Was this helpful?
Yes
Yes
Agent Response / Add a Comment
You can use this form to reply to the above review or a displayed comment on the above review.
Browse popular links for estate agents, letting agents and properties nearby
Latest Reviews
13th Mar 2017
reviewed by 'Stepney'
22nd Jan 2017
reviewed by 'Fizzy's'
24th Oct 2016
reviewed by 'Customer1'
Opening Hours
Address
Fizzy Living
Heathgate House
2-4 The Green
Twickenham
Middlesex
TW1 6QF
07717 330 108
Performance statistics
| Services | Valuation Accuracy | Fees Satisfaction | Min Price of property reviewed | Max Price of property reviewed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lettings | 0% | 33% | £1,400 | £2,000 |
Review statistics
| From Landlords | From Tenants | From Vendors | From Buyers | Other | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Areas covered
Services offered
- Sales
- Lettings
- Block Management
- Surveys
- Conveyancing
- Mortgage Advice
- Home Builder
Advertise on
Members of
Rankings
Overall
Overall
Latest Properties
No Properties
Jun 10,2024
Jun 10,2024
1
people found
this helpful
this helpful
Having resided at Fizzy E16 for several years, I've noted some discrepancies and issues potential tenants should be aware of, particularly regarding the financial aspects of renting here. As of 2024, the promotional materials on Fizzy E16's website suggest that a studio apartment rents from £1,750 ...
read full review
read full review
Was this helpful?
Yes
Yes
Mar 13,2017
Mar 13,2017
2
people found
this helpful
this helpful
Fizzy Stepney Green is a pleasure to live in. My neighbours are really easy to get on with and the building manager Kassy is awesome - she's always there to help with any requests and organises excellent socials for us!...
read full review
read full review
Comment on agent fees
I feel the rates are really reasonable given the amount and quality of service that Fizzy provides, especially the fact they allow pets and cater for them with a lot of love!
Was this helpful?
Yes
Yes
Jan 22,2017
Jan 22,2017
6
people found
this helpful
this helpful
AVOID AVOID AVOID Abussive deposit claims. Avoid then if you want to keep your deposit. They enhance abussive deposit claims, they will manipulate evidences and destroy proofs in order to avoid spending money in "ware and tare". Be ready for the DPS dispute. Make pictures ...
read full review
read full review
Comment on agent fees
Bad
Was this helpful?
Yes
Yes
Oct 24,2016
Oct 24,2016
6
people found
this helpful
this helpful
I would strongly recommend avoiding this company. They are unprofessional and unethical and offer zero customer service. Avoid them unless you want to have an ultimately unpleasant experience....
read full review
read full review
Was this helpful?
Yes
Yes
Feb 01,2022
Feb 01,2022
39
people found
this helpful
this helpful
TLDR: Fizzy/ Greystar will overpromise and underdeliver, and will not accept responsibility for anything. Maintenance is a mess, the building is unsafe, and most of the amenities they advertised are either nonexistent or inaccessible. If you’re looking for no hassle luxury service, look elsewhere. ...
read full review
read full review
Was this helpful?
Yes
Yes
No fees information available
Kindly note that legally, letting agents need to publish information about their tenancy fees, government-approved redress schemes and client money protection schemes on their website and on third party websites (on which agents are listed). For properties to lease/rent in England, agents need to keep this information up to date and precise on allAgents or specify within the property description.
Complaints Procedure
No procedure available.
