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
Estate management revisiting 2012 charges
mikepoole
Posts: 95 Forumite
We live in a house covered by Countrywide Estate Management (for our sins!)
We received a letter today saying that they have revisited the accounts for 1/1/2012 to 31/12/2012 and have decided we owe an additional £115
Are companies allowed to revisit accounts? I assumed accounts had to be submitted by a certain point?
Also, what about the properties where the people living there in 2012 no longer live there? Their covering letter states 'It is the responsibility of your solicitor and that of the previous owner to come to an agreement regarding the apportionment of the service charges. Any unpaid service charges on the account are your responsibility once the lease is legally transferred to you. We cannot demand arrears from or chase the previous lessee' - surely no-one is going to pay the extra for a time they did not reside in the property?
We are currently selling our house and this is also a concern that we will end up having to leave thousands behind to cover for the buyer should Countrywide decide to audit their other years
This cannot be legal surely?
We received a letter today saying that they have revisited the accounts for 1/1/2012 to 31/12/2012 and have decided we owe an additional £115
Are companies allowed to revisit accounts? I assumed accounts had to be submitted by a certain point?
Also, what about the properties where the people living there in 2012 no longer live there? Their covering letter states 'It is the responsibility of your solicitor and that of the previous owner to come to an agreement regarding the apportionment of the service charges. Any unpaid service charges on the account are your responsibility once the lease is legally transferred to you. We cannot demand arrears from or chase the previous lessee' - surely no-one is going to pay the extra for a time they did not reside in the property?
We are currently selling our house and this is also a concern that we will end up having to leave thousands behind to cover for the buyer should Countrywide decide to audit their other years
This cannot be legal surely?
0
Comments
-
Does this relate to ground rent or services charges? If it's the latter, I think they have to request money within 18 months.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/70/section/20B"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance" - Confucius0 -
The 18 month timespan quoted in that webpage might come in useful as something to quote as a precedent to that Management Company.
I was reading OP's post though and interpreting it on the basis of him being a home-owner in standard freehold property - I may be wrong...
It would clearly be useful if there is a law he can quote against them and tell them they are breaking it.
Admits, in his position, I would be treating it as a try-on. I would assume that they have done this to everyone else in that set of properties and would get away with it with some - but wouldn't want to deal with anyone fighting back and threatening bad publicity.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards