£11k Service charges on leasehold flat.

chilihead

Hi Carine.

Revised Section 20 was sent on 30th September. Within this, the PM company specified the name and type of roofing material that they were planning on using. I contacted a flat-roofing specialist (friend of a friend) who gave me detailed specs on a number of coverings suitable for the block I am in. I wrote to the PM asking why they chose the covering they had over others - asked about insulation/cost/guarantees/pooling etc but never received a response back. In the letter, I also recommended my friend-of-friends roofing company. The letter was sent recorded delivery, and was signed at their office before the end of the consultation period.

Revised estimates were received on 24th December. Lovely Xmas present. The works have been completely revised - They are now proposing new water mains, repair works to the fire escape, and a cheap roof covering - all points I queried in my observations which as yet have not been acknowledged by the PM. My friend-of-friends roofing company was mentioned in the Statement of Estimates - but only as "No tender submitted"

In the Statement of Estimates, it actually states in Point 4 "No written observations received".

So, I've written the PM company a letter today (27th Dec) asking for a response to my observations. This will be posted by recorded delivery tomorrow. I've also written a separate letter asking for copies of the breakdown of the estimates as both my partner and myself work full-time out of town and can't take the time of work to inspect them in the PM's office.

The cheapest quote this time around is in the region of £155k, plus PM fees and CS fees - so in the region of about £6k per flat. Less than the previous notice, but with different works.

The Freeholder has sold his three flats at auction and the Freehold will be up for public auction in February. "Deserting a sinking ship" springs to mind.

So, that's where we are at the moment.

propertyman

if your nomination and questions about choice of specification was made within the period of the notice of intention, and you have proof of that, then there is a strong argument that the landlord and agent have failed to consult properly or adequately.

I would suggest that your letter is addressed to the directors or partners of the agent, and likewise to the landlord at their registered address and the address under the section 47 notice on any recent invoice.

As to inspection you have no right to ask for copies to be sent (unlike the old procedure where they could be posted on site)

What are you seeking to achieve?

chilihead

Thanks PropertyMan - yes, I have a photocopy of the signature from the PM's office that confirms that my nomination and questions were received well within the period of the notice of intention.

So, any pointers on where I go from here? This consultation period ends 24th Jan. I just tracked the letter I posted on the 28th to the PM company and it's still in transit - but this letter was simply asking them why my queries were not answered. I'll get a copy sent to the landlord as soon as possible.

Regarding the inspection of the quotes - I simply don't trust the PM company, and they are asking for a heck of a lot of money.

On the first Notice of Intent, we went to their office (along with several neighbours) and were refused access to the invoices- the director said they were confidential. If this happens again, how can I prove they refused access? After the refusal, I wrote a formal complaint to the PM and started their complaint process - but they just denied all knowledge!

propertyman

On your letter in transit, I would send it again, as any Royal Mail backlog gets cleared after the current days work is done. its only a £1 odd.

There are no invoices* relevant to a notice of intention, it is merely that a notice of what they intend to do.

As to the works which are proposed your current letter following up the original one is to state that you made a nomination and an observation, neither of which were acted on or acknowledged.

The new estimates and subsequent notice of estimates which should contain a summary of the observations ( which not only failed to address both, went so far as to say that there were neither) have not been obtained or served correctly in accordance with section 20 of teh landlropd and tenant act 1985.

What you do next is to decide whether the estimates obtained and system procured, and the failure to recognise your observations and nomination is sufficient for the LVT to believe that you have been prejudiced by failing to consult properly.

It is an uphill struggle for a landlord to show that they have by failing to acknowledge or react and state categorically that none were received.....

if your roofer nominee or a qualified advisor can show shortcomings, combined with the admin failure, could make a convincing case at the LVT. If they have not started works then they might simply start over, so it depends if your nominee or alternative solutions will make sensible savings from which you will benefit. The recetn Daejan case indicated that not objecting does not preculde or prejuduce a future challenge- their may be some merit and considerable risk in allowing them to proceed and challenge it after ward.

chilihead

UPDATE. I've not received any acknowledgement to any of the recorded delivery letters I have sent to the property management company.

Today, I received a Sec 47/48 Ground Rent and Service Charge notice of £7,250.

As mentioned in a previous post, my observations sent to the property management concerning the proposed roof covering have not been acknowledged, and the observations were received by the property management company before the end of the notice of intention.

I've left a message at the College of Law :http://www.college-of-law.co.uk/About-th
e-College/Legal-advice/ , Still waiting for a response.

I've just had a long conversation with a consultant at the Leasehold Advisory Service (0207 383 9800) who suggested I look into LVT decisions regarding non-acknowledgement of observations (http://www.lease-advice.org/lvtdecisions/ - I see Daejan there), and also write again to the property management company, the Freeholder and RICS.

The consultation period ends on 24th Jan - is there anything else I can do?

propertyman

chilihead wrote: »

Today, I received a Sec 47/48 Ground Rent and Service Charge notice of £7,250.

The consultation period ends on 24th Jan - is there anything else I can do?

Did this bill contain the section 166 notice with the ground rent and the summary of rights? If not then the first is not a valid invoice and the second allows you to withhold it.

Yes look at the costs and spec that has been proposed and the building and make observations on these as suggested, while reserving your position on the failure to respond or acknowledge your earlier nominations in the NOI stage.

chilihead

propertyman wrote: »

Did this bill contain the section 166 notice with the ground rent and the summary of rights? If not then the first is not a valid invoice and the second allows you to withhold it.

No Section 166 notice was included - but a copy of Section 21B of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 and Section 153 of the Commonhold Leasehold Reform Act 2002 was included.

Also included was a service charge estimates for the period up to 24 Dec 2012.

propertyman

That's hysterical the ground rent is not due!

With the copy , if I read it strictly a copy of section 21b as amended by S153 only states that regulations will be made!

It needs to contain the information here http://www.lease-advice.org/publications/documents/document.asp?item=13

and after Tingdene must be clearly headed ‘Service Charges – Summary of tenants’ rights and obligations' or you can withold it.

chilihead

propertyman wrote: »

‘Service Charges – Summary of tenants’ rights and obligations' or you can withold it.

It is headed with the above (Underneath the Section 21B header) , and contains all the points 1-12 as per your link.

steve3639

I have bought the lease on my property in feb 2012, I am a first time buyer. I recently found out that I have -£15000 on my service charge account with my freeholder mainly due to major works. I was completely unaware of this, This information was not brought to my attention when purchasing the property as it would have changed the value of the property in my eyes and would not have purchased it in the first place had I have known!
I need some help and advice, I really feel that things have not been made clear enough. As a buyer of the property I would assume that the freeholder should hold some responsibility in ensuring full awareness of this to someone before purchasing the lease, but obviously the majority of the responsibility would fall with my solicitor.......
I was supplied with a pre assignment pack showing details of some major works, this is what is written:
''In addition to the above, statutory consultation has taken place for the following works which have not yet been billed. (in bold writing) SOLICITORS ARE ADVISED TO RETAIN APPROPRIATE FUNDS TO COVER THE COST OF THESE WORKS''
but being a first time buyer I was at the mercy of my solicitors advice, and at no time did they discuss this with me verbally, however did discuss on many occasions the outstanding balance of £1800 which was eventually paid for by the seller, however missing this part about major works. I presumed that this work had possibly been paid for or was the overall cost which would then be split down to individual costs - however this £14000 due was the individual cost.

What do I do?
please help me and advise where possible.
best regards,
Steve brown