We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
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.
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 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!
Shared freehold sinking fund.
Options
Comments
-
I think you have the right to join as a director if you wish, but be prepared for whoever is doing the work now to say 'go on then you can take over!'.Taking a step back, do you have any concerns over how things are being run? You say you overpaid so presumably you can just skip the next 3 months payments to bring things back in line.Regardless of that, you have the right to see all accounts, receipts etc., as a leaseholder, and the person running things now shouldn't take any of that personally, they should be doing it as a matter of course.As for the leashold advisory service..........chocolate teapots come to mind.0
-
Famo said:
I wondering who governs potential mismanagement of these arrangements ?
As I suggested before, it all depends on the basis on which you paid the money.- Did you pay it as a leaseholder to the (5 joint) freeholders?
- Or did you pay it as a joint freeholder, as part of an agreement between the 5 joint freeholders?
If it's option 1, you have legislation to protect you, and you can even take a dispute to a tribunal.
If it's option 2 and you had a clear written agreement, refer to that agreement (and you might be able to make a court claim, if somebody breaches the agreement.)
If it's option 2 and you didn't have a clear agreement - it's a bit like when 5 of you go to a restaurant and each put £50 in the kitty - and you end up arguing about who had starters, who had cocktails, how much tip to leave, how the change should be divided etc. If you don't trust the others to be fair and reasonable, don't put any money in the kitty in the first place.1 -
If no service/maintenance charged, how is the building insured? I doubt you'd get a mortgage on a flat with no insurance policy in place so when you bought there must have been one in existence, so how is the cost of this paid each year between each of the flat owners?The bigger the bargain, the better I feel.
I should mention that there's only one of me, don't confuse me with others of the same name.0 -
Famo said:The freehold comprises a Ltd company of which among the other 4 owners 2 are directors and 1 secretary.
I will need to look at the details in my lease. I do know that upon purchase the original agreed amount to contribute to the sinking fund was £60 pounds but all the owners agreed it should be £100. I do know that we've agreed works to other flats in that time and made a one off payment in addition to the standard contribution of £1200 to bolster the fund and repair the roof. Ironically one of the directors flooded my living room after having work done to their boiler over a year ago and had been very unhelpful in repairing the damage.
It looks like I need a good read of the lease to determine if I have statutory protection.
The "Sinking" fund has been in place since I purchased as the other owners have all been here in excess of 20 years or so.
Thanks for all your feedback.
when we sold the flat last year, it came to light that the way it was managed by the owners was not a good idea and it would have been better to employ an independent management company to manage it.
we didn't have a sinking fund, so money for repairs were just paid ad hoc. that was just a disaster waiting to happen as when you got major works bill, the owners would not be able to get the cash.0 -
cattie said:If no service/maintenance charged, how is the building insured? I doubt you'd get a mortgage on a flat with no insurance policy in place so when you bought there must have been one in existence, so how is the cost of this paid each year between each of the flat owners?
It's a perfectly legit arrangement. All that's missing is the accounts.0 -
Yes it sounds more like a shared maintenance arrangement, with an agreed £100 a month going into an account to pay for insurance and any works as they arise. If there isn't enough to cover a larger job you will each make up the balance.The key thing with such arrangements is to ensure that regular maintenance is still being carried out and not to let small jobs build up until you suddenly have a long and expensive list to tackle.0
-
Ah yes the sinking fund is a bit of a catch all term as that is the sole pool of money from which all works including insurance is taken from. I actually theoretically prefer this system as an ad hoc approach can catch us all out unless we are religious savers.
There has been no meeting of which I'm aware although in the last 3 months a WhatsApp group has been established. I have seen minutes from previous meetings from the conveyancing pack when I brought the flat. As I mentioned roof repairs were agreed previously and 3 months after purchase I contributed an additional £1200 to fulfil this.
I have no gripe with those who carry out works to be compensated. I even offered money for the time one of the directors took to gather the previous 5 year's statements.
I am also wondering if there is some other power dynamics taking place as who appears to be the main director is a senior police officer. And I think may find it strange to be asked to account.
I personally don't see an issue as even in work roles I've had in the past where I've had to account and probably evidence I've always followed procedure and been happy with the piece of mind that brings. This is not an issue of trust.
I also don't particularly want to be a director but do expect to see what's happened over the the year. Funnily enough there were a few queries I had but nothing too alarming from the statements I looked through. I also rectified the 3 months overpaid.
The insurance is taken out by the Secretary yearly and we are notified of the cost although I've never seen a certificate. ( Which could come into play as I still have flood damage unresolved from upstairs from nearly a year ago).
The owner beneath me seems quite distant from the other owners and has rented his flat since I've been there. Although he did inform me that any paint work carried out to the flats internally and externally were covered under the lease. I had my flat renovated 2 years ago and nobody informed me of this.
0 -
So you're essentially saying that your fellow leaseholders are "good people" and you trust them.
So you're happy to hand over £1,200 a year with no legal protection or recourse, because you trust them to spend it wisely and honestly.
That's absolutely fine. As you say, a Senior Police Officer would probably not do anything dishonourable, and would probably take steps to ensure that others around him/her don't do anything dishonourable either.
(I guess that you're also trusting the Senior Police Officer and others to make reasonable decisions about buildings insurance, building maintenance and repairs etc - which are areas they may not be experts in - but again you're free to trust them to do that.)0 -
eddddy said:
So you're essentially saying that your fellow leaseholders are "good people" and you trust them.
So you're happy to hand over £1,200 a year with no legal protection or recourse, because you trust them to spend it wisely and honestly.
That's absolutely fine. As you say, a Senior Police Officer would probably not do anything dishonourable, and would probably take steps to ensure that others around him/her don't do anything dishonourable either.
(I guess that you're also trusting the Senior Police Officer and others to make reasonable decisions about buildings insurance, building maintenance and repairs etc - which are areas they may not be experts in - but again you're free to trust them to do that.)
Being "Good" or otherwise is a red herring. Process and accountability/stroke piece of mind is paramount. Yes I might have been naive but nevertheless I am seeking clarification and welcome former contributions from MSE forum members.0 -
Being "Good" or otherwise is a red herring. Process and accountability/stroke piece of mind is paramount. Yes I might have been naive but nevertheless I am seeking clarification and welcome former contributions from MSE forum members.
No - no tongue in cheek. Just a straight talking description of your situation, based on what you've posted.
Perhaps using a bit of "shock tactics" to highlight the risks you're taking - because based on what you've said, in your current situation, there is no legal accountability or legal process (only trust).0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.6K Spending & Discounts
- 244K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards