English: Diolch, Llywydd. It's an honour to be able to propose a law in this Parliament that will be of benefit to my constituents in Caerphilly, and I believe, and I will argue, that it will be of benefit to the people of Wales as a whole. This debate and proposed law comes about following two debates that have already taken place in this Chamber - one on leasehold properties and the limited rights faced by leaseholders, and the other one on the plight of unadopted roads and estates affected by those. This today is the missing piece of the jigsaw: the rights of freeholders who own properties on managed estates and the role in relation to those rights of property management companies and estate management companies by whom residents are often trapped in property management contracts. It's a deeply unfair, unregulated market. It is a UK-wide problem. I've got a copy of The Guardian here - well, a printed copy; a modern copy - in which it says, 'Homeowners trapped by "fleecehold" - the new cash cow for developers. They own the freehold but are forced to pay often escalating estate management fees with no accountability.' That article contains two examples from estates in Cumbria where there is no obligation on estate management companies to keep costs down or provide evidence that the services they charge for are being carried out. This is an absolute scandal and it's unregulated. Also in Kent, from KentOnline, an online newspaper: 'Homeowners in Kent suffering extra housing charges.' It's happening there too, with 122,000 people in that county trapped in controversial contracts. We should pay credit to the Rochester MP Kelly Tolhurst, who has raised this in a Westminster Hall debate in Westminster. But it's happening in Wales as well. I've had casework from Cwm Calon in Ystrad Mynach where residents are trapped in these contracts, and Members from across this Chamber, from my party and others, have also mentioned that they've found constituents who have faced exactly the same issues - and I can see Members from across the Chamber nodding. Cwm Calon has an estate management company called Meadfleet, and they're managing agents to a company called Cwm Calon Management Company One Ltd. They're incorporated and registered at Companies House as the residents management company or RMC. RMCs are usually set up - recently, in modern times - on private estates to own the communal areas, with each freeholder, each householder who is a freeholder, becoming a member of that company and having the opportunity to become a director of that company. However, Cwm Calon Management Company One Ltd was set up in April 2005, over a year before the first property on the estate was even bought, according to council tax records. No-one had the chance to become a director or a member of this company when it was set up. Furthermore, the documents of incorporation show that most of the company's directors are Redrow employees, and until the last property was completed in May 2015, these Redrow employees had a built-in controlling majority in terms of votes at the RMC's annual general meeting, and were therefore able to completely override individual freehold residents should they so wish. How can that be a residents management company, with Redrow, the developer, being the majority shareholders on the RMC - in fact, the only shareholder on the RMC? It is a clear conflict of interest, because the RMC was responsible for appointing the estate management company, Meadfleet, who are responsible for managing the estate, and therefore in the pocket of Redrow. What you see is a very clear conflict of interest. Residents refer to Meadfleet to me as 'Meadfleece', given the fact that they are paying these charges and seeing little return. The payment of a monthly fee to a property management and estate company is common practice among leasehold properties, where the monthly fee is known as ground rent, and leaseholders now have statutory rights, including recourse to a tribunal, to appeal against what they perceive as poor standards of service. Freeholders don't have this right. So, I bring to you today the case of Janine Jones, who has represented many residents, regarding poor, shoddy work, and in fact, in many cases, work that was never done, has sent many e-mails to Meadfleet. In one case - I've mentioned before in this Chamber - the managing director of Meadfleet sent her an e-mail back telling her to get a life, with respect. Although Redrow were very apologetic about that, it showed that they really don't care, and they have no regulation to stop them from just taking the money and doing minimal work. That's what was happening on this estate. Janine Jones has written to Meadfleet, and to Redrow, on numerous occasions, to the extent that she's even engaged a solicitor. And the solicitor has said to her, 'There's very little we can do.' This is of course outrageous, but unlike owners of leasehold properties, freehold owners do not have the same statutory rights to challenge the decisions of the residential management company, and the property estates management company who act on their behalf. This is not good enough. [ Interruption.] Yes.
Welsh: Diolch, Lywydd. Mae'n anrhydedd gallu cynnig deddf yn y Senedd hon a fydd o fudd i fy etholwyr yng Nghaerffili, ac rwy'n credu, a byddaf yn dadlau, y bydd o fudd i bobl Cymru yn gyffredinol. Mae'r ddadl hon a'r ddeddf arfaethedig yn dilyn dwy ddadl a gynhaliwyd eisoes yn y Siambr hon - un ar eiddo lesddaliadol a'r hawliau cyfyngedig y mae lesddeiliaid yn eu hwynebu, a'r llall ar sefyllfa druenus ffyrdd ac ystadau nad ydynt wedi cael eu mabwysiadu sy'n cael eu heffeithio gan y rheini. Dyma ddarn coll y jig-so heddiw: hawliau rhydd-ddeiliaid sy'n berchen ar eiddo ar ystadau a reolir a'r rôl mewn perthynas â hawliau cwmnïau rheoli eiddo a chwmnïau rheoli ystadau sy'n aml yn caethiwo preswylwyr mewn contractau rheoli eiddo. Mae'n farchnad hynod annheg nad yw wedi cael ei rheoleiddio. Mae'n broblem ar hyd a lled y DU. Mae gennyf gopi o The Guardian yma - wel, copi wedi'i brintio; copi modern - lle mae'n dweud, Perchnogion tai sy'n cael eu caethiwo gan lesddaliad sy'n eu blingo - y ffynhonnell arian newydd ar gyfer datblygwyr. Maent yn berchen ar y rhydd-ddaliad ond cânt eu gorfodi i dalu ffioedd rheoli ystadau cynyddol yn aml heb unrhyw atebolrwydd. Mae'r erthygl honno'n cynnwys dwy enghraifft o ystadau yn Cumbria lle nad oes unrhyw rwymedigaeth ar gwmnïau rheoli ystadau i gadw costau'n isel na darparu tystiolaeth bod y gwasanaethau y maent yn codi tâl amdanynt yn cael eu cyflawni. Mae hyn yn gwbl warthus ac nid yw'n cael ei reoleiddio. Hefyd yng Nghaint, o bapur newydd ar-lein KentOnline: Perchnogion tai yng Nghaint yn dioddef taliadau tai ychwanegol. Mae'n digwydd yno hefyd, gyda 122,000 o bobl yn y sir honno wedi'u caethiwo mewn contractau dadleuol. Dylem roi clod i Kelly Tolhurst, Aelod Seneddol Rochester, sydd wedi codi hyn mewn dadl Neuadd Westminster yn San Steffan. Ond mae'n digwydd yng Nghymru yn ogystal. Rwyf wedi cael gwaith achos o Gwm Calon yn Ystrad Mynach, lle mae trigolion wedi cael eu caethiwo mewn contractau fel hyn, ac mae Aelodau ar draws y Siambr hon, o fy mhlaid i a phleidiau eraill, hefyd wedi crybwyll eu bod wedi dod ar draws etholwyr sydd wedi wynebu yn union yr un problemau - a gallaf weld Aelodau ar draws y Siambr yn nodio. Mae gan Gwm Calon gwmni rheoli ystadau o'r enw Meadfleet, ac mae hwnnw'n asiant rheoli i gwmni o'r enw Cwm Calon Management Company One Ltd. Maent yn gorfforedig ac wedi'u rhestru yn Nhŷ'r Cwmnïau fel cwmni rheoli preswylwyr. Fel arfer, caiff cwmnïau rheoli preswylwyr eu sefydlu - yn ddiweddar, yn y cyfnod modern - ar ystadau preifat er mwyn iddynt fod yn berchen ar y mannau cymunol, gyda phob rhydd-ddeiliad, pob deiliad tŷ sy'n rhydd-ddeiliad, yn dod yn aelod o'r cwmni hwnnw ac yn cael cyfle i fod yn gyfarwyddwr ar y cwmni hwnnw. Fodd bynnag, sefydlwyd Cwm Calon Management Company One Ltd. ym mis Ebrill 2005, dros flwyddyn cyn i'r eiddo cyntaf ar yr ystâd gael ei brynu hyd yn oed, yn ôl cofnodion y dreth gyngor. Ni chafodd neb gyfle i fod yn gyfarwyddwr neu'n aelod o'r cwmni pan gafodd ei sefydlu. Ar ben hynny, mae'r dogfennau corfforaethol yn dangos mai gweithwyr Redrow yw'r rhan fwyaf o gyfarwyddwyr y cwmni, a hyd nes y cwblhawyd yr eiddo diwethaf ym mis Mai 2015, roedd gan y gweithwyr Redrow hyn fwyafrif rheoli parod o ran pleidleisiau yng nghyfarfod cyffredinol blynyddol y cwmni rheoli preswylwyr, ac felly gallent ddiystyru rhydd-ddeiliaid unigol yn llwyr pe baent yn dymuno gwneud hynny. Sut y gall hwnnw fod yn gwmni rheoli preswylwyr, gyda Redrow, y datblygwr, yn brif gyfranddaliwr - yn wir, yn unig gyfranddaliwr y cwmni rheoli preswylwyr? Mae yna wrthdaro buddiannau amlwg, oherwydd y cwmni rheoli preswylwyr oedd yn gyfrifol am benodi'r cwmni rheoli ystadau, Meadfleet, sy'n gyfrifol am reoli'r ystâd, ac felly mae o dan fys bawd Redrow. Yr hyn a welwch yw achos clir iawn o wrthdaro buddiannau. Mae preswylwyr yn cyfeirio at Meadfleet fel 'Meadfleece', o ystyried y ffaith eu bod yn talu'r ffioedd hyn ac yn cael fawr o ddim yn ôl amdano. Mae talu ffi fisol i gwmni rheoli eiddo ac ystadau yn arfer cyffredin gydag eiddo lesddaliadol, lle y gelwir y ffi fisol yn rhent tir, ac erbyn hyn mae gan lesddeiliaid hawliau statudol, gan gynnwys hawl i fynd i dribiwnlys, i apelio yn erbyn yr hyn y maent yn ei ystyried yn safonau gwasanaeth gwael. Nid oes gan rydd-ddeiliaid hawl o'r fath. Felly, heddiw rwy'n cyflwyno achos Janine Jones, sydd wedi cynrychioli llawer o drigolion mewn perthynas â gwaith gwael ac eilradd, a gwaith na chafodd ei wneud o gwbl mewn llawer o achosion yn wir, ac mae hi wedi anfon nifer o negeseuon e-bost at Meadfleet. Mewn un achos - rwyf wedi crybwyll hyn o'r blaen yn y Siambr - anfonodd rheolwr gyfarwyddwr Meadfleet e-bost yn ôl yn dweud wrthi, gyda phob parch, am chwilio am rywbeth gwell i'w wneud. Er bod Redrow wedi ymddiheuro am hynny, dangosai nad oedd ots o gwbl ganddynt mewn gwirionedd, ac nid oes unrhyw reoliadau i'w rhwystro rhag cymryd yr arian a gwneud cyn lleied o waith â phosibl. Dyna oedd yn digwydd ar yr ystâd hon. Mae Janine Jones wedi ysgrifennu at Meadfleet, ac at Redrow, ar sawl achlysur, i'r graddau ei bod wedi ymgysylltu â chyfreithiwr hyd yn oed. Ac mae'r cyfreithiwr wedi dweud wrthi, 'Nid oes fawr ddim y gallwn ei wneud.' Mae hyn yn warthus wrth gwrs, ond yn wahanol i berchnogion eiddo lesddaliadol, nid oes gan berchnogion rhydd-ddaliadol yr un hawliau statudol i herio penderfyniadau'r cwmni rheoli preswylwyr, a'r cwmni rheoli ystadau eiddo sy'n gweithredu ar eu rhan. Nid yw hyn yn ddigon da. [ Torri ar draws.] Iawn.