Right To Manage freehold and leasehold Houses?

PennyMoney

The estate I live on comprises owner-occupied houses,most are freehold but a few are leasehold. All pay a monthly Service Charge to a property management company who, for various reasons, a lot of residents no longer have any confidence in..This has been aggravated by us having been asked for additional money to meet costs of remedial work to common areas that we feel is due to the estate having been built (in the 1980's) on landfill; e.g. the area of our allocated parking spaces now looks like the surface of the moon and several doorsteps and patios have shifted from their respective houses .Our perception is that the estate was not properly built and that the management company should pursue the cost of the remedial work from either their own insurers or the original builders or developers, before asking residents. Does anybody know if that's a possible solution?

Also we are now considering whether it is possible to either take over the company's reponsibilities or else find another Management Company to do so, but because it seems fairly unusual for a management company to manage owner -occupied houses it has proved difficult to find any definitive advice. I've read of "Right To Manage" which I understand requires the agreement of at least 50% of householders; am I right in thinking that both factors only apply to flats and not to houses? i.e. would we need 100% of residents to agree?

Given the number of properties involved etc. I realise that potentially taking over, or re-allocating, the Management of them, would not be easy but are we being unrealistic in trying to do so?

propertyman

I am afraid that the RTM rights do not extend to freehold houses, nor leasehold houses.

The management of common areas has become increasingly common and your rights such as they are in contractual performance by the manager/owner of the land under whatsoever agreement sets out their obligations.

The owner of the land may have some redress against the original developer but that due to time is severely limited and frankly a matter for them to pursue. Because you believe that they can get contributions from others does not remove your obligation to contribute in the first instance.
Your only redress is against the original owner if you were the original buyer/owner or if you can convince a court that the agreement that governs obligations and your contributions can be limited.

It's outside the scope of the forum to look at the agreement, but if one of you are being threatened with legal action you might group together and/or use one of your owners legal expenses cover on the home insurance to get advice and if possible, fight it and join the action.

PennyMoney

Thank you for your advice. I have already suggested to my neighbours that the best initial step would be to get some legal advice via home insurance; will persevere in trying to persuade them or else will do so myself!