Misinformed about service charge :(

Smodlet

need_an_answer wrote: »

That's not a long time in terms of leases...the best are around 999 years from development.

Its much more common now to get 125 years from development so dependant on what sort of planning applications there may be in the future when you come to sell in 10 years time your place may not be as attractive lease wise as somewhere else

Plus there's that development land just waiting to be built on... I doubt the threat of development there will increase the value of the flat you are making such an issue about, OP.

Maybe you should reconsider the whole thing, what with Brexit looming..? Might it not be easier to buy somewhere else? Or wait until we know how the land lies? I don't think anyone, including Boris, has much of a clue at the moment. Hallowe'en should be fun this year, huh?

ilikepancakes

Comms69 wrote: »

They made a mistake. I think you are overreacting

This mistake cost real money, why is it me who should take the hit (I am advised here I should not be moaning) when it was THEM who made the mistake?

need_an_answer

Smodlet wrote: »

I am not, for one nanosecond, condoning the OP's attitude but surely any potential buyer has a right to know what the current service charge for a leasehold flat is, do they not? I understand it can change five minutes after the conversation and that this is what solicitors (not EAs) are for but they do have a right to an accurate figure at a frozen moment in time, don't they?

What about casual buyers who are looking at several flats in several different buildings? Do they not have a right to know at least within, say £10-50 what kind of charges they might be liable for? I don't really see how this is privileged information. The fact it is not confined to one individual dwelling makes it less sensitive, doesn't it?

I am honestly not trying to derail the thread; I genuinely want to understand.

I haven't had a problem ever getting the information from the managing agents.

It certainly isn't confidential as I've even seen service charges quotes in minutes of AGM meetings that are readily available online.

I guess it all comes down to how well as a buyer you research what you are buying and piecing that information together with that supplied by the vendor/EA/managing agent/solicitor

Perhaps I'm more diligent than others,or maybe been through the process too many times but buying a property is one of the biggest investments and expenses a person can make,as you rightly know too. so its worthwhile making sure you know what you're buying into. (especially where a leasehold is concerned)

need_an_answer

ilikepancakes wrote: »

This mistake cost real money, why is it me who should take the hit (I am advised here I should not be moaning) when it was THEM who made the mistake?

so what has been the estate agents response to your complaint in writing to them in connection with the incorrect information they have supplied you?

Comms69

ilikepancakes wrote: »

This mistake cost real money, why is it me who should take the hit (I am advised here I should not be moaning) when it was THEM who made the mistake?

It's quite simple really - mistakes aren't actionable in this country.

AdrianC

ilikepancakes wrote: »

This mistake cost real money, why is it me who should take the hit (I am advised here I should not be moaning) when it was THEM who made the mistake?

Did the EA make a mistake?
Or did they pass on the information they were given by the vendor?

verybigchris

I'm late to this thread, but most posters here are MASSIVELY underestimating the value of that extra £400 in perpetuity.

Think of it this way: in order to put you back in the position you where when you first made your offer (and expected to pay a charge of £2k pa), the money you'd take off the property price would need to be invested in something that will return £400 per year pretty much risk-free. If you put the money in the best instant access savings account you'd need to save £26,667, so that's how much you need to reduce your offer by.

I suppose you could lock that money away and therefore get a higher rate, but this still assumes (probably wrongly) that the service charge doesn't inflate. If it does, keeping up with the inflation would be pretty much impossible to do risk-free.

davidmcn

need_an_answer wrote: »

but why should a management company deny the information if asked for with reasonable intent?

its not confidential information.

It's confidential in the sense that it's none of your business and they're entitled to tell you to get lost. There's no "freedom of information" aspect here giving you any right to the information.

Apart from anything else, they may simply not want to spend their time dealing with enquiries from potential buyers - it's more efficient from their point of view if they wait until the current leaseholder contacts them (and pays them) for the necessary information when there's a serious buyer doing their due diligence.

need_an_answer

I'm just wondering how much of a fuss the OP would be making if he actually realised that sometimes whilst the service charge is quoted at an amount its not uncommon to be recredited at the end of the year with some money if its not all spent.

I had a recredit on one of my properties this year that equated to a month free.
I'm not the greatest fan of Firstport or E&M but on this occasion I will hold my hand up and say thank you!

The service charges are not set in stone and excess can be returned to leaseholders.

Comms69

verybigchris wrote: »

I'm late to this thread, but most posters here are MASSIVELY underestimating the value of that extra £400 in perpetuity. - it's not in perpetuity.

Think of it this way: in order to put you back in the position you where when you first made your offer (and expected to pay a charge of £2k pa), the money you'd take off the property price would need to be invested in something that will return £400 per year pretty much risk-free. If you put the money in the best instant access savings account you'd need to save £26,667, so that's how much you need to reduce your offer by.

I suppose you could lock that money away and therefore get a higher rate, but this still assumes (probably wrongly) that the service charge doesn't inflate. If it does, keeping up with the inflation would be pretty much impossible to do risk-free.

I mean that's one way to look at it.


Another might be £400 x 103 (years left on lease).


In anycase the OP needs to negotiate and not complain here