Service Charges Dispute - Legal Action By Freeholder

SeanCo

I have been in dispute regarding my service charges on a leasehold flat for some 3 years now. Both Lease and a solicitor agree with my position and a virtually identical case with the same freeholder was taken to the First Tier Tribunal and won.


I have provided the freeholder with a proper legal disposition outlining everything through the managing agents and have just been met with complete intransigence. Even the managing agents have admitted informally that I am in the right, but they state incorrectly, as they are ignoring the ARMA code of practice in my instance, that they are bound to act as instructed by the freeholder.


I am now in receipt of what appears to be a standard threatening letter from Property Debt Collection Ltd (PDC) which states that I have 7 days to pay the full amount in question, plus their alleged costs of £150 for a single letter otherwise they will contact my mortgage provider and commence county court proceedings.


Ultimately I am not worried about proceedings as I have a highly winnable case and have actually now put the freeholder (through the managing agents) under notice myself that unless they make constructive efforts to resolve matters by the end of January, I will take matters to the First Tier Tribunal.


I'm not sure if it applies in this instance, but PDC give the impression of totally ignoring the OFT debt collection guidelines in that they are ignoring a properly substantiated dispute, adding an arbitrary collection charge and threatening to inform a third party?


Any other advice on a strategy for dealing with these matters going would be gratefully appreciated.




PS - The lesson has already been learned, I will never buy another leasehold property as long as I live. The legal framework is still stuck in the feudal era and allows leaseholders to be treated as cash cows.

ampersand

I can't advise you further SeanCo, but know someone will do shortly.

I'll be watching your progress and wish you well - unnecessary in that you have a sound case but it is tiresome, stressful, cost-incurring [time/ postage/ RD/ stationery/ 'phone].
A question:why have you allowed freeholder, albeit via m/a, more than another month? Isn't 14 days the only requirement?

G_M

I'm no expert in this area, but you seem tobe taking the right action.

Reply to their letter withyour counter-threat.

If, after 7 days, they commence legal action as per their threat, you enter your defence and any counter-claim, and then have your day in court.

If not, you wait till end Jan and go to Tribunal.

edit: or as ampersand says, sooner.

SeanCo

ampersand wrote: »

I can't advise you further SeanCo, but know someone will do shortly.

I'll be watching your progress and wish you well - unnecessary in that you have a sound case but it is tiresome, stressful, cost-incurring [time/ postage/ RD/ stationery/ 'phone].
A question:why have you allowed freeholder, albeit via m/a, more than another month? Isn't 14 days the only requirement?

Thanks. The reason for the delay is that there is another leaseholder in the same situation, but they are out of the country for another couple of weeks. We intend to present a joint case as obviously the cost and effort is shared and it will be more convincing at the tribunal.

moromir

Just a point of interest -

Do you pay Service Charge to the Freeholder via its Managing Agent or is there a Management Company/Residents Association (which may have its own Managing Agent) entirely seperate from the Freeholder?

I ask as its usual to pay Ground Rent to the Freeholder and Service Charge to the Management Company/Residents Association.

SeanCo

moromir wrote: »

Just a point of interest -

Do you pay Service Charge to the Freeholder via its Managing Agent or is there a Management Company/Residents Association (which may have its own Managing Agent) entirely seperate from the Freeholder?

I ask as its usual to pay Ground Rent to the Freeholder and Service Charge to the Management Company/Residents Association.

Ground rent is paid to the freeholder and service charges to the managing agent appointed by the freeholder. The dispute relates to money not credited to my account by the previous managing agents, also appointed by the freeholder.

cattie

moromir wrote: »

Just a point of interest -

Do you pay Service Charge to the Freeholder via its Managing Agent or is there a Management Company/Residents Association (which may have its own Managing Agent) entirely seperate from the Freeholder?

I ask as its usual to pay Ground Rent to the Freeholder and Service Charge to the Management Company/Residents Association.

Have never known things to work this way in any of the flats I've owned over the years. Always both the ground rent & service/maintenance charge has been invoiced by the managing agents & paid directly to them.

spacey2012

By the End of January you will have a CCJ.
I would treat the legal threat as a deadlock and take it straight to the tribunal.
They are calling you out .
If you have anything resembling a plan, it might be a good idea to accelerate it now you have a deadlock letter.

SeanCo

spacey2012 wrote: »

By the End of January you will have a CCJ.
I would treat the legal threat as a deadlock and take it straight to the tribunal.
They are calling you out .
If you have anything resembling a plan, it might be a good idea to accelerate it now you have a deadlock letter.

The County Court Judge would refer it to the First Tier Tribunal anyway providing any semblance of a defence was presented and the outcome would be effectively the same. This process would also take several months.


My main aim to and make sure I remain in the driving seat, whilst avoiding any potential banana skins. I'm also hugely annoyed at how this has been dealt with as I have acted reasonably throughout and if fire has to be fought with fire I would much rather be in the position to do that effectively.

silvercar

Be aware that one tactic used is for them to notify the lender that the lease is at risk. The lender then pays the amount owed and adds it to your mortgage along with charges. In your mortgage t&c there will be some clause allowing the lender to do this in order to protect your interest!

SeanCo

silvercar wrote: »

Be aware that one tactic used is for them to notify the lender that the lease is at risk. The lender then pays the amount owed and adds it to your mortgage along with charges. In your mortgage t&c there will be some clause allowing the lender to do this in order to protect your interest!

I'm aware of that one already. I think that it's probably the main method these sharks (PDC) use to get settlement regardless of whether its properly due or not. I will be writing to my lender setting out the facts.