Freeholder won't provide invoices

pt1981

Evening all

I have a leasehold flat in a block of 5, and I'm responsible for 20% of the maintenance costs. It's the only leasehold flat in the block, the rest belong to the freeholder.

The bill comes in arrears and there have always been issues with missing invoices to back up the demands. Originally, there were a few (crucial) missing, now the freeholder refuses to provide any. I'm not being told about the work that is to be conducted either, and forget about proper consultation. 

As I can't see the invoices, I can't build my case but I have a suspicion I'm regularly being overcharged and asked to pay for work in his flats. We're talking about £200-400 a year, which is 20-40% of the total requested.

Have looked at section 22 and so on but not sure how useful this would be in my case. Looks like the actual protection it offers is limited in practice. I'm finding the whole situation frustrating. 

Has anyone been in a similar situation? Any practical advice on how I could make them come up with the invoices? Is it worth trying to stand my ground? 

anselld

You should only be charged for work done to the building or communal areas as defined in the lease, not for work done "in his flats".
Receipts and detailed accounts should be available on request.
Any jobs which result in a charge of more than £250 per flat should have section 20 consultation and if not properly consulted they are not chargeable.

However, the only way really to enforce all these matters is to take them to the First Tier Tribunal for a determination.

penners324

Don't pay the demands until the information is provided?

Reginald74

penners324 said:

Don't pay the demands until the information is provided?

Not sure that is good advice.

eddddy

pt1981 said:

Any practical advice on how I could make them come up with the invoices? 

 
Take a look at this advice from LEASE: https://www.lease-advice.org/advice-guide/service-charges-other-issues/

• Section 4.3 describes your rights to have a summary of the service charge accounts

• Section 4.4 describes your rights to inspect documents (e.g. invoices, bills, receipts etc)

• Section 4.5 describes the penalties for the freeholder if they refuse either of the above

• Section 4.6 mentions section 20 consultations - where you're required to contribute more than £250 for work

The law doesn't specifically require freeholders to obtain invoices for all work done, but the law requires service charges to be "reasonable".

If you were to challenge the service charges at a tribunal is not being "reasonable", it might strengthen your case if the freeholder is unable to provide invoices.

But in general, if you think a service charge is not "reasonable", the standard advice is that you should tell the freeholder that you think it's not reasonable, you are paying under protest, and you intend to challenge it at a tribunal. Maybe the freeholder will reduce it, but either way you should still pay it by the due date - making clear that you are doing so under protest.

london21

If they have nothing to hide they should be transparent. 

If they do not not provide it not sure you can refuse payment.

Could it be that the invoices are not yet available. They sometimes charge estimates and then adjust to actual. 

pt1981

anselld said:

You should only be charged for work done to the building or communal areas as defined in the lease, not for work done "in his flats".
Receipts and detailed accounts should be available on request.
Any jobs which result in a charge of more than £250 per flat should have section 20 consultation and if not properly consulted they are not chargeable.

However, the only way really to enforce all these matters is to take them to the First Tier Tribunal for a determination.

Without the invoices, I can't tell if the money, e.g. on electrical work was required or in the common areas but in the past I've seen his private work included in the service charges. 

He refuses to provide any invoices, claiming work was done for cash to save me the extra cost (not accurate) or that he's too old to run around things like that

No consultation, no communication whatsoever.

As you say, there seems to be not much apart from the FTT that can be done and it's not a va liable option given the amounts in question. 

pt1981

eddddy said:

pt1981 said:

Any practical advice on how I could make them come up with the invoices? 

 
Take a look at this advice from LEASE:

• Section 4.3 describes your rights to have a summary of the service charge accounts

• Section 4.4 describes your rights to inspect documents (e.g. invoices, bills, receipts etc)

• Section 4.5 describes the penalties for the freeholder if they refuse either of the above

• Section 4.6 mentions section 20 consultations - where you're required to contribute more than £250 for work

The law doesn't specifically require freeholders to obtain invoices for all work done, but the law requires service charges to be "reasonable".

If you were to challenge the service charges at a tribunal is not being "reasonable", it might strengthen your case if the freeholder is unable to provide invoices.

But in general, if you think a service charge is not "reasonable", the standard advice is that you should tell the freeholder that you think it's not reasonable, you are paying under protest, and you intend to challenge it at a tribunal. Maybe the freeholder will reduce it, but either way you should still pay it by the due date - making clear that you are doing so under protest.

Yeap, aware of the legislation but it seems toothless. The tribunal route seems to be of little use given the amounts 

pt1981

Reginald74 said:

penners324 said:

Don't pay the demands until the information is provided?

Not sure that is good advice.

Technically I could atm as the request to pay came literally scribbled by hand on a piece of paper without any info who it's from, etc. 

pt1981

london21 said:

If they have nothing to hide they should be transparent. 

If they do not not provide it not sure you can refuse payment.

Could it be that the invoices are not yet available. They sometimes charge estimates and then adjust to actual. 

No transparency or communication whatsoever. Definitely hiding something under the pretence of saving costs and hassle. The invoices I have seen in the past were issued pretty promptly. 

eddddy

pt1981 said:

Yeap, aware of the legislation but it seems toothless. The tribunal route seems to be of little use given the amounts 

Why?

It costs £100 to make an application. If you win, the freeholder usually has to repay your £100, and is told they cannot claim their legal costs back via the service charge.

You submit a statement as evidence, perhaps along the lines of...

The freeholder says they spent £500 on a roof repair
The freeholder has supplied no evidence that a roof repair was required
The freeholder has supplied no evidence that a roof repair was carried out satisfactorily
The freeholder is unable to specify the precise date that the roof repair was carried out
The freeholder is unable to provide a schedule or work, quote or invoice or any evidence that a payment was made
The freeholder is unable to provide any other type of document relating to the roof repair
The freeholder is unable to provide the name and address of the contractor who carried out the roof repair
The freeholder is unable to provide any evidence that the contractor was competent in performing roof repairs
The freeholder is unable to provide a statement from the contractor confirming that they carried out the repair
I do not recall seeing any scaffolding, ladders, or contractors working on the roof of the building

... or whatever.

Assuming your case is as strong as that, I think it's pretty obvious what a judge would decide 'on the balance of probabilities'.


Even if your case is weaker than that - the judge only needs to decide that your evidence is 'probably' true. (It's not like a criminal case, where you have to prove things 'beyond reasonable doubt')



But if the freeholder really is getting good quality repairs done cheaply by paying cash in hand - this will probably scupper that approach. And future repairs might work out more expensive.