Nice flat, run-down common areas. Avoid?

demim00nde

Thanks - those are really helpful thoughts. What I am most concerned about, though, is whether it is overdoing it to read this is an indication that more serious structural issues are not being kept track of.

MovingForwards

Regarding keeping an eye on the building itself, I do a visual inspection each month, the roof I use my phone to zoom in. When there's storms / high winds I'm checking for a couple of days afterwards to check for slipped tiles etc.

I pay attention to how my door and windows open and close as that could alert me to a possible problem with the building.

Walking through the communal areas I look at the walls and ceilings.

A couple of my neighbours do the same, so it's probably only one week a month no one checks anything.

Drains are easy enough to keep an eye on and a drain company can send cameras down as required, quite cheaply.

During one storm I saw bits falling off a different block, different style of building to mine and a little bit older.

You would have a survey before buying the property to ensure it's ok, or tell you about existing or potential issues.

Do you think structural engineers are instructed on an annual basis to check buildings out? 

demim00nde

Do you maintain common areas in your building unkempt? If so, I think I have a sample of one, so I’m on my way to getting an answer to my question.

demim00nde

eddddy said:

demim00nde said:

In both places, the leaseholders manage the building through Right to Manage, via a property management company. 

It's really down to the mindset (and the dynamics) of the people involved in the RTM. It's the same with "Shared Freehold".

Looking at these 2 options:

1. Some people prefer to spend less - and put up with scruffy common areas
2. Some people prefer smart common areas - and are happy to spend lots of money to achieve it

So it may be any of the following

• The majority of leaseholders prefer option 1
• The directors of the RTM company prefer option 1
• There's a 'bully' who prefers option 1 and they bully everyone else into accepting option 1
• Or something else (see below)

If you buy a flat, maybe you might be able to change the dynamics - you might tip the majority over to option 2, you might be able to become a director of the RTM co, you might stand up to a bully (or you might bully people into agreeing to option 2).



FWIW, here's an example of a different reason for scruffy common areas:

I know of a RTM block where 2 leaseholders have huge service charge arrears, so there isn't enough money to maintain the common parts properly.

A brutal freeholder would have taken legal action against the leaseholders, and maybe forfeited their leases (i.e. repossessed their flats) and sold them to recover the service charge arrears.

But the RTM directors don't want to do something that nasty to their neighbours, who might be in financial difficulties. So the common areas remain scruffy. (But maybe those 2 leaseholders are 'taking the mickey', and would miraculously find the money, if legal action was started. Who knows?)

Thanks very much for your reply. Would it be probable, in your view, that fans of Option 1 would also be slower to spot and anticipate larger costs associated with the building?

demim00nde

Ramouth said:

You could tidy up a bit yourself if you are able.  Obviously you can’t start recarpeting but you can clear away rubbish, RTS post for people who no longer live there, vacuum the landing outside your flat and clean scuff marks off walls with a magic eraser. It’s amazing what a difference a bit of TLC can make. It wouldn’t be fair as you would be doing all the work that everybody is benefitting from but if a tidy communal area makes you happy it may well be worth it.

Sure, but I don’t think I could create a sinking fund through sheer positive attitude.

bouicca21

Depending on what the lease says you may not be able to create a sinking fund at all.

eddddy

bouicca21 said:

Depending on what the lease says you may not be able to create a sinking fund at all.

Yes... also...

If the sinking fund is operated by a reputable management company, with professional indemnity insurance etc, maybe that's OK.


But if the sinking fund is operated by a bunch of your neighbours / leaseholders / RTM directors / amateurs - i.e. a random bunch of strangers.... How much do you know about your neighbours?

• Is one of them a convicted fraudster?
• Has one of them got a gambling addiction and huge gambling debts?
• Do they understand leases, the law, and what they should be spending the sinking fund on?
• Might they be tempted to spend sinking fund money on their 'pet projects'?

There are occasional posts here about 'amateurs' misusing service charge / sinking fund money - doing things like:
- Only refurbing the common areas near their own flat
- Using the funds to redecorate their own flat 

And one guy who thought it was OK to pay himself and some 'selected neighbours' a secret salary out of the funds for doing nothing.

user1977

OP, can you define what you mean by "pretty run-down"?

There's undoubtedly going to be a difference between a professionally-managed building with cleaners going in every week, redecoration done every few years, or whatever else the management company do to justify their fees, and somewhere managed by owners who aren't so bothered about keeping the place spick and span - but I wouldn't assume that means they won't get more important things fixed.

MovingForwards

demim00nde said:

Do you maintain common areas in your building unkempt? If so, I think I have a sample of one, so I’m on my way to getting an answer to my question.

If this is asking me, my answer is:

We sweep and dust the floors our flats are on. I had a chat with a few neighbours yesterday about getting some paint to freshen the walls / ceilings, now we are just picking colours and will be making a start at the end of this month.