McCarthy and Stone over 55 sheltered accommodation

walshy21

Just wondering if there are any members who have an apartment up for sale and obviously we cannot have viewers but are still being charged the full rate of the service charge and ground rent even though the apartment is empty. My mum had to go into a care home after Christmas and now we can’t have viewings and paying for an empty apartment. Just wondering how ethical this is given the age of the residents? 

Browntoa

If it's in the contract then it's fair 

You obviously accepted those terms when the property was purchased and your solicitor offered advice

davidmcn

Service charge and ground rent never has anything to do with whether or not a property is occupied.

oldbikebloke

walshy21 said:

Just wondering if there are any members who have an apartment up for sale and obviously we cannot have viewers but are still being charged the full rate of the service charge and ground rent even though the apartment is empty. My mum had to go into a care home after Christmas and now we can’t have viewings and paying for an empty apartment. Just wondering how ethical this is given the age of the residents? 

that is the norm for such accommodation. You won't have to search far on here for threads reporting charges after death until the date of final sale. As above, that is the nature of the contract, the properties may be nice to live in and offer a suitable lifestyle for the age range, but they come at a big ongoing cost 

greatcrested

There are agents still advertising properties. I believe most/(all) are not doing viewings but offer 360 degree walk through videos etc. Not sure how they get the recordings - ring a few!

Does the lease permit letting (to over 55s obviously)? that may be another option.

My understanding has always ben that these properties are always in demand esp if there is on-site support.

hazyjo

greatcrested said:

My understanding has always ben that these properties are always in demand esp if there is on-site support.

I was under the impression they were generally hard to sell and often took a hit on price.

eddddy

walshy21 said:

Just wondering how ethical this is given the age of the residents? 

It's probably the fairest way to do it. The service charge is the flat owner's share of the costs of running the building.

So, for example, if there are 10 flats in the block, a flat owner might pay 10% of the insurance, communal electricity charges, maintenance charges etc.

• If your mother's flat is empty, it's not really fair to increase everyone else's bill to 11.1% (or 1/9th) of the costs.
• Or if a second flat becomes empty, increase everyone else's bill to 12.5% (or 1/8th) of the costs.

(You might have been complaining even more whilst your mother was living there, if her service charge bill kept going up unexpectedly whenever somebody else moved out of their flat.)

walshy21

I am not questioning the calculation of the charge and asking them to increase other residents to accommodate, I am not complaining  - I was just raising the issue of it being morally right to do this? McCarthy and Stone are a large organisation who really should be looking at the ethics of what they are doing not just the £ signs and profit! It is pure and simple greed! I was wondering if anyone else was in a similar situation?

davidmcn

walshy21 said:

I am not questioning the calculation of the charge and asking them to increase other residents to accommodate, I am not complaining  - I was just raising the issue of it being morally right to do this? McCarthy and Stone are a large organisation who really should be looking at the ethics of what they are doing not just the £ signs and profit! It is pure and simple greed!

Would it be morally right for your mother not to abide by her side of the contract she signed up to? Did McCarthy & Stone ever suggest they wouldn't charge while the property was unoccupied?

luvchocolate

Many threads about selling a McCarthy and Stone. 

eddddy

walshy21 said:

I am not questioning the calculation of the charge and asking them to increase other residents to accommodate, I am not complaining  - I was just raising the issue of it being morally right to do this? McCarthy and Stone are a large organisation who really should be looking at the ethics of what they are doing not just the £ signs and profit! It is pure and simple greed! I was wondering if anyone else was in a similar situation?

Morally right compared to what?

Money doesn't magically appear to pay for insurance, building repairs etc. If you don't think it's morally right for your mother to pay her share of those bills, who do you think should pay her share instead?

Assuming you own a house, if you leave the house empty, do you think somebody else should pay for the insurance, and any repairs needed to the house? If so, who would that "somebody else" be?