New Leaseholder company trying to pass £20k charge to residents - UPDATE

[motorbiking]

I don't think you have properly grasped the parties obligations. You've had the lease reviewed and there does not appear to be anything 'special' giving them rights to spend as they like. You have several basic things to focus on:

1. if the service charge paid, was meant to cover maintenance and didn't then where has your money gone?
2. if the landlord wants you to pay for work then it must be in accordance with the lease and subject to external scrutiny if you choose to object.
3. Until you understand the cost of what is needed that you agree with, vs what is being demanded/estimated/planned. You won't know if you have a claim or can defend a claim or not.

You need to imagine how it will go if you fast forward 2 years and are disputing a 30k bill. Unless you know it only needed £15k, then how will you argue?

 

[^woody^]

Service charge is nothing to do with the work.

Yes it does.

You pay an annual service charge for routing cleaning and maintenance etc. Then any major works are billed to you as an additional service charge.

 

[redrabbit]

Yes it does.

You pay an annual service charge for routing cleaning and maintenance etc. Then any major works are billed to you as an additional service charge.

From the lease:
- "The service charges paid refer to day to day repairs, landscaping charges, estate manager officer and management charge"

I think there is some relevance as some of our argument is about long term neglect of the building. They deny the neglect issue which we raised in a letter to them.

Where Service Charge is not part of it though is where it is replacement of cladding, new gutters, new balconies. That is not general routine maintainance, it is not cleaning, or upkeep. It is replacement and way beyond what the service charges cover.

I will make a note of this though - thinking ahead, just in case we dispute the costs or want to go down a tribunual route.

Thanks

 

[^woody^]

We all agree that most of the work does need doing - primarily as the freeholder has neglected the building

That can be a valid point, and one which you can use to challenge the works and the cost at a leaseholder tribunal.

The argument will be two fold -

1. The landlord has failed in its duty to maintain the property in accordance with the lease, causing you detriment.
   
2. That if the landlord carried out the works when necessary your service charge would have been lower (less to do, cheaper contractor costs), and if work had been done earlier then the property would not be in such a poor state and need much more costly work

 

[^woody^]

From the lease:
- "The service charges paid refer to day to day repairs, landscaping charges, estate manager officer and management charge"

I think there is some relevance as some of our argument is about long term neglect of the building. They deny the neglect issue which we raised in a letter to them.

Where Service Charge is not part of it though is where it is replacement of cladding, new gutters, new balconies. That is not general routine maintainance, it is not cleaning, or upkeep. It is replacement and way beyond what the service charges cover.

I will make a note of this though - thinking ahead, just in case we dispute the costs or want to go down a tribunual route.

Thanks

Under any lease, it is still a service charge.

What happens is that when you get the anuual service charge bill, it's just itemised as major works or something along with the itemised cleaning and routine maintenance items.

 

[^woody^]

By law they have to do certain things, but taking quotes from residents is not one of them.

That is not fully correct.

As part of the 'section 20' consultation process which the landlord is obligated to do, you and your neighbours can nominate a contractor that you want your landlord to get a quote from. The contractor must be a bone-fide firm and suitably experienced to do the work that is proposed.

 

[redrabbit]

I don't think you have properly grasped the parties obligations. You've had the lease reviewed and there does not appear to be anything 'special' giving them rights to spend as they like. You have several basic things to focus on:

1. if the service charge paid, was meant to cover maintenance and didn't then where has your money gone?
2. if the landlord wants you to pay for work then it must be in accordance with the lease and subject to external scrutiny if you choose to object.
3. Until you understand the cost of what is needed that you agree with, vs what is being demanded/estimated/planned. You won't know if you have a claim or can defend a claim or not.

You need to imagine how it will go if you fast forward 2 years and are disputing a 30k bill. Unless you know it only needed £15k, then how will you argue?

Thanks motorbiking, some really interesting points. I will reply properly later but I think you've raised some interesting bits, particularly about knowing the work that is beign done and the costs. We have asked and asked for this about 10x now and just been ignored or fobbed off.

Under any lease, it is still a service charge.

What happens is that when you get the anuual service charge bill, it's just itemised as major works or something along with the itemised cleaning and routine maintenance items.

Thanks for your posts above. Really helpful, and I can see exactly what you mean about the service charges and neglect. We have (as a group of residents) said the same thing ourselves.

I am making extensive notes of everything that has happened in the last 18 months. I have some good points to make about their approach with the building.

 

[redrabbit]

That is not fully correct.

As part of the 'section 20' consultation process which the landlord is obligated to do, you and your neighbours can nominate a contractor that you want your landlord to get a quote from. The contractor must be a bone-fide firm and suitably experienced to do the work that is proposed.

Hi Woody,

Yea sorry we were aware of that - just my wording was poor in that post.

Prior to stage 2 of the Section 20 process they did ask for our suggestions, the difficulty at the time was not knowing myself any builders that would even be suitable, trusted, recommended, etc... I made the point to my Dad that this was not a bit of plastering, or installing a new bathroom, but it was the re-development of over 40 homes.

As a result I couldn't personally recommend or ask that they approach a certain firm.

One question I have for them is why did only 1 out of 6 firms they go to provide a quote. They say in the letter "we will be reviewing the scope in order to make it more attactive to prospective building companies". I personally think it is because their list of things for the project was far too big.

Thanks again

 

[motorbiking]

yep. what woody said.

However, such leases are usually tripartite. Management company, landowner and leaseholder. The leaseholder needs to be sure the management company is not their responsibility. That may not be the case when the property is housing association, but it needs to be checked.

Also with regard to being ignored..
read https://www.lease-advice.org/advice...ndlords-resident-management-companies-agents/

They are under a duty to have regard to your observations at any stage of the process.