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!
New Property Freehold Management Fees

hollie.weimeraner
Posts: 2,155 Forumite


We're thinking of moving to Lincoln (area) and although we don't particularly want a new build we don't want to discount them either. The only issue seems to be they all have management fees attached amounting to around £150 per annum with no indication of what the ongoing charges are likely to be. Speaking to the agents they all say that all new builds now incur these fees as the council refuse to carry out the maintenance that the charges are for.
Is this a collusion by the council as they're still charging council tax but not providing all the services normally associated with it?
Is this a collusion by the council as they're still charging council tax but not providing all the services normally associated with it?
0
Comments
-
It's not collusion - this is down to the councils.
It's a very common policy of councils now that they refuse to 'adopt' new development. They are very happy to take the council tax and Section 106 development payments, but they can shrug off the obligations.
Personally I think it's quite wrong, as it effectively creates a two-tier council tax market, but it's legal so they do it. They choose to spend the money they save on other things, like diversity advisors or whatever ;-)
The developers would probably prefer that their estates were adopted - the houses would be easier to sell and more valuable. There have been some instances where they have used it as an opportunity to gouge homeowners by overcharging the management organisation for the services provided, but not in all cases - some management organisations are run perfectly well. Others are handed over to residents to control.
The reason you can't get any indication of ongoing charges is that they are service fees - they charge will reflect the work that's necessary and that will vary from year to year. However, it's general to assume that they will rise significantly. A brand new estate doesn't need much maintenance, and you'll often find that the developer is indirectly subsidising things by keeping the estate in good condition while they are still on site and selling phases.1 -
Yes collusion was the wrong term they're basically abdicating some of their responsibilities. Until central government step in with legislation it will continue unfortunately.0
-
Cutting grass on private land isn't a statutory duty for local authorities, so no abdication of duties whatsoever.0
-
Council tax is (as the name suggests) merely a tax, not a charge for services (in the same way that you're not getting a tax discount because you don't have kids to educate or haven't made much use of the NHS).0
-
The majority of that money will be to pay an employee of the management company to administer the management as well
You will also be liable for all repairs etc to the roads and infrastructure
We have such and arrangement and I would actually stay way away from this type of arrangement with hindsight and in the future
It's a legalised racket imo0 -
daveyjp said:Cutting grass on private land isn't a statutory duty for local authorities, so no abdication of duties whatsoever.
The only reason many areas like green space and playgrounds etc. remain private is because the council will not take them on. In many cases they are still obligated to be public access however; one estate I lived on had to provide a park for the local population; residents had to pay to maintain it. That felt like a really good deal when the local chavs started smoking weed in there on a Friday evening.
So it's a technicality of a defence in many instances...1 -
Yes will avoid like the plague
0 -
You need to find out if the council are adopting the roads and lighting and water co adopting the sewers. Then that normally just leaves the green areas to maintain which aren't too expensive and generally don't increase too much unless it's a huge estate with loads of open spaces and landscaping. Ones to avoid are the ones where the roads and sewers aren't being adopted0
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards