High service charge including non communal facilities

[Deleted User]

Here are the main points:

My pal is leaseholder of a flat he bought 12 years ago.

I help him with replying to paperwork as his form of dyslexia results in chaotic spelling.

His landlord/freeholder is the Local Authority.

We have discovered he is the only leaseholder in the buildings.

Everyone else is a council tenant.

The building is in an 'H' shape.

The two outer sections of the 'H' are occupied by older people and these are designated as sheltered/supported housing.

The central bar of the 'H' (where my pal lives) is occupied by non elderly and families.

On the ground floor of the central part is a facility for elderly people which takes up the space of two flats and includes large communal lounge, kitchen, ladies and gents toilets, guest bedrooms(for visitors to stay), laundry rooms with washing machines etc, an office For Supporting People officer) and an enclosed garden.

The ground floor facilities are for the exclusive use of older people in the flats and those living in the surrounding locality, in nearby streets. etc.

There are digital locks on the doors to all the older people's facilities.

Like most leases, my pal's obliges him to contribute a proportion of the service charge and a proportion of repair/maintenance costs of the common parts.

5/6 years ago his service charges and the actual repair costs (as compared to the estimated) shot up. We asked questions and finally requested detailed breakdown of the repairs.

The breakdown revealed that my pal is paying 1/8th of the repairs etc for the ground floor facility. this includes a share of new cooker, washing machines, repairs after flooding from washing machine plumbing, it is also probable that he pays a share of lighting and heating costs and cleaning, as these are not separately itemised.

After a year of attempting to sort this out (and the under floor heating problems) we got a meeting with the local authority ALMO (Arm's Length Management Organisation who managed the housing until 1/7/10). It was a difficult meeting and we were told that my pal is paying toward the ground floor but has only been doing so since the gov capped council rent rises and local authorities started separating rent and service charges in order to raise without raising rents. But we believe it has been happening since he bought.

We have been attempting to get clarity on this for the past 4/5 years. With various officers responding and then dropping the case.

We have now got an elected councillor on board.

We want:
1. reimbursement for contributions paid in my pal's service charges toward the ground floor facility.
2. the ground floor facility (or the local authority as their landlords) to pay a backdated proportional share of service charges and evidence of this.
3. compensation in line with the local authority/ALMO compensation policy on delays etc for dealing with this.


In the past year the ALMO got a new MD and we escalated our case by contacting ombudsmen, our MP and the parliamentary sub committee concerned as well as the association of ALMOs.

We copied the new MD into all our communications.

The MD has taken up the case during the past six months.

The MD has just got back to my pal saying that he has consulted with the local authority legal team. He says that my pal's lease obliges him to make proportional contributions of 1/8th to costs for communal areas in his block.

With his letter he enclosed detailed breakdown of service/repair charges. In the list 2007/2008. He paid toward £249.50 for repairs of a washing machine bottom panel, towards £103.31 towards redecoration in ground floor facility kitchen, towards £36.73 for gents toilet, £27.55 for 'common room door handles, £55.10 to digi-lock to common room door, toward £234.42 to repair digi-lock to laundry room, toward £6.98 for repair to common room 2nd light, toward £27.55 to ease and adjust common room door, £41.33 to remove padlock from laundry area.

We think that though Mr Daniel's lease refers to 'communal parts', the ground floor facility for elderly is obviously not communal - he pays toward the repairs of the locks which exclude him from the using the equipment which he also pays for.

Does anyone think that this is about terminology - the facility is described/labelled as communal, and may have historically been so, but it not possible for the people in the block who share the costs to access the facilities. They are specifically excluded.

I am suggesting that this is an error.

Could it be put right by a Deed of Variation?

Any suggestions as my pal has no control over these costs and we have become exhausted?

Sorry for the length of explanation. Grateful for any help!

[Deleted User]

sorry-is this in the right forum or is it just too complicated, technical or long winded for anyone to be able to help?
I've looked at the other forums and can't immediately spot anything like leaseholders or legal.

DVardysShadow

cgw wrote: »

sorry-is this in the right forum or is it just too complicated, technical or long winded for anyone to be able to help?
I've looked at the other forums and can't immediately spot anything like leaseholders or legal.

It is the right forum. It may be too technical, but leave it 24 hours, because you are unlikely to get a meaningful reply over a morning and a lunch hour.

I can see your point and essentially, I believe the council are being dishonest. I am not an expert, but I would think along the lines of getting a witnessed refusal to be allowed to use the repaired washing machine and then taking the council to the small claims court for the costs of that facility already paid for. But there probably are much better ways.

Leaseholder49

Have you tried approaching the Leasehold Advisory Service? You don't mention it at all in your post.

http://www.lease-advice.org/

[Deleted User]

Thanks DVardysShadow I will leave it a while - good idea to attempt to use it the facilities!

Thanks Leaseholder49 - Leasehold Advisory Service may help.