We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Hello Forumites! In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non-MoneySaving matters are not permitted per the Forum rules. While we understand that mentioning house prices may sometimes be relevant to a user's specific MoneySaving situation, we ask that you please avoid veering into broad, general debates about the market, the economy and politics, as these can unfortunately lead to abusive or hateful behaviour. Threads that are found to have derailed into wider discussions may be removed. Users who repeatedly disregard this may have their Forum account banned. Please also avoid posting personally identifiable information, including links to your own online property listing which may reveal your address. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
greedy management company
Comments
-
There's 6 flats in our block in total .............I have to say I'd have to think carefully about buying into a block where there's a management company appointed with little recourse.
The questions/suggestions I would then add to Dell12 are
1 Sinking Fund and SC monies must be held in trust for the leaseholders so that they are seperate from the monies of whoever owns the freehold be it residents or their company.
There is also a duty to invest it, pathetic though interest rates are. S42 LTA 1987 and Powers of Trustees Act 1961
This is so if you were sued, the money would be ringfenced as not being your asset but the flat owners's.
2 Common areas must be subject to
a common parts health and safety risk assessment
b fire risk assessment
HSE has model templates.http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/casestudies/pdf/flats.pdf ( it assumes the agent does this*, and where there is none, the freeholder is the * person in control?.
Failure to do are criminal penalties on which the indemnity insurance will only cover your legal costs.
3 Building Insurance on what basis is the declared value given to insurers? It is nowt to do with the value of the flats but rebuilding them on a total loss basis, plus inflation, and alternative accomadationStop! Think. Read the small print. Trust nothing and assume that it is your responsibility. That way it rarely goes wrong.
Actively hunting down the person who invented the imaginary tenure, "share freehold"; if you can show me one I will produce my daughter's unicorn0 -
propertyman wrote: »The questions/suggestions I would then add to Dell12 are
1 Sinking Fund and SC monies must be held in trust for the leaseholders so that they are seperate from the monies of whoever owns the freehold be it residents or their company.
There is also a duty to invest it, pathetic though interest rates are. S42 LTA 1987 and Powers of Trustees Act 1961
This is so if you were sued, the money would be ringfenced as not being your asset but the flat owners's.
2 Common areas must be subject to
a common parts health and safety risk assessment
b fire risk assessment
HSE has model templates.http://www.hse.gov.uk/risk/casestudies/pdf/flats.pdf ( it assumes the agent does this*, and where there is none, the freeholder is the * person in control?.
Failure to do are criminal penalties on which the indemnity insurance will only cover your legal costs.
3 Building Insurance on what basis is the declared value given to insurers? It is nowt to do with the value of the flats but rebuilding them on a total loss basis, plus inflation, and alternative accomadation
You do NOT need to invest the sinking fund into a trust - ask a solicitor, and they will tell you.
Also, I never said a lease is of no significance - of course it is - everyone knows that. You seem hellbent on trying to confuse when there's no need. YOU may find it confusing and difficult to understand a lease or/and run a company of freeholders who are also leaseholders - but most people find it simple : hence why thousands of people have leaseholds and share of freeholds via a company
It's easy and straightforward, but obviously you find it all very confusing.
There's also a massive difference between running a small block of 6 flats compared to an estate of 600 flats!0 -
propertyman wrote: »yes you do and no as
1 they ask me
2 dealt with this issue since the requirement was introduced in 1988 several times at the LVT, LT and High Court
For the avoidance of doubt of other readers
LTA 1985 s 18 Meaning of “service charge” and “relevant costs”. E+W
(1)In the following provisions of this Act “service charge” means an amount payable by a tenant of a dwelling as part of or in addition to the rent—
(a)which is payable, directly or indirectly, for services, repairs, maintenance improvements or insurance or the landlord’s costs of management, and
(b)the whole or part of which varies or may vary according to the relevant costs.
This has been considered on several occasions as inc Reserve and or Sinking funds
I'd link the guiding precedent(above) but you seem to prefer your opinion over information, which in turn is no more complicated than that on a cereal packet.
The only exception as in Morshead which doubtless you haven't looked as its "confused" is where the Articles make a specific provision(and they are still at risk of being treated as SC) or there is express trust in place.
The perception of confusion is based on your lack of (wilfull) understanding the latter I have addressed for no other reason than to help and the former will just condemn you in due course to an expensive lesson(s).
Based on your responses you think it is of no importance if you disregard service charges as not being due, but it is more complex than you want to believe.
The only real difference is volume, not complexity. the laws apply equally to either example. Enjoy your prison time when there is accident and you don't have an RA or if it burns down and the insurers says " no FRA, no payout" as the policies do.
You're a blinkered idiot, but that great I have made a lot of money out of idiots and their mistakes.
You are completely wrong. You're not a solicitor, but my solicitor is one - and he said a sink fund does NOT need to go into a Trust, certainly not for such a small place as ours.
You're welcome to your opinions, but best you keep them to yourself. And if you have made a lot of money out of idiots, then that makes you a really horrid person. But, with all your money I suggest you go on an English Grammar course (your grammar and spelling is atrocious), and also go on Freehold Company Law course - because you get so many things wrong!
No wonder MSE refused to put your long-winded flat buying post up as a sticky, despite you almost begging them to. Are you trying to get a job? lol Have a look on the Up Your Income forum if so
0 -
Fraise still annoying people on mse forums I see, get a life0
-
nickyg2000 wrote: »Fraise still annoying people on mse forums I see, get a life
My word, you really have issues don't you?
Why are you stalking me on here? I find it weird. I offered you HELP and advice, and you were hellbent on trying to cause an argument - so much so you even waited a week before trying to goad a response out of me when I never bothered to reply to you. So it's YOU who needs to get a life. I just tried to help you, that was all! And it wasn't just me who realises you're vying for an argument, the poster Taff saw though you too, including nearly everyone else. Take a look!
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4756387
Especially read posts 39 and 79.
You're obviously following me about on here...so I'm reporting you.0 -
Fraise, yawn. Your points are wrong.
Your arguments are futile and moreover year 3 on the scale of tryng to wind up someone on the internet.
I'll say it again I hope you don't find out the hard way.Stop! Think. Read the small print. Trust nothing and assume that it is your responsibility. That way it rarely goes wrong.
Actively hunting down the person who invented the imaginary tenure, "share freehold"; if you can show me one I will produce my daughter's unicorn0 -
You are completely wrong.
Like I said PM your solicitors details and I will write to them.
The law on this is linked above there is no "size exemption".
I make more than enough money with two practices so that I can give back when the time and inclination arises.Stop! Think. Read the small print. Trust nothing and assume that it is your responsibility. That way it rarely goes wrong.
Actively hunting down the person who invented the imaginary tenure, "share freehold"; if you can show me one I will produce my daughter's unicorn0 -
propertyman wrote: »Like I said PM your solicitors details and I will write to them.
The law on this is linked above there is no "size exemption".
I make more than enough money with two practices so that I can give back when the time and inclination arises.
Why would my conveyancing solicitor, who has had over 25 years experience running his own law firm and employing other solicitors, want to write to you - an unqualified person on an Internet forum - for advice?0 -
Fraise your arrogance and inability to listen to other people is mind blowing.
The information you gave me was for the most part was wrong. You also called me suspicious and negative. Then in your next sentence accuse me of making up fictitious posts, sorry who's suspicious ??
I posted on here to find people who had been in the same situation as me. Then use the information gained from them to get a balanced view along with other research.
You expect me to drop everything and act on your word alone. Anyway no time for this. Just makes me wonder how many people you have put off using this forum by your argumentative, childish posts0 -
Everyone eles. Again Not true !! Two people out of about 12. You finished that post by annoying Norman Castle.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.2K Spending & Discounts
- 246.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.4K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards