Issues with housing association

zjoliveira

I am the leaseholder (and director) of a 120 apartment-development, comprised of 4 blocks. There is a management company which runs the whole development but Block D, which is solely social housing, is run by Optivo, a Housing Association. The leasehold is a three-way document between the leaseholder, Optivo and the Management Company.

For years on end, we have had huge issues with Optivo. Their tenants display anti-social behaviour (loud music, barbecues on balconies, smoking, etc. and Optivo do not fix doors, clean rubbish, pay the dues in service charge, etc. This means that ordinary leaseholders from the other three blocks (completely independent from Optivo) run out of budget to run the development partway through the year, have their car and house insurances invalidated, have to live with neighbours who can do anything with no consequences, etc. We have no money to take Optivo to court (as we would need their money for that first...!). They do not reply to our emails and their Ombudsman says they cannot help because we do not have Optivo directly as our landlord. We also got the council involved last year but that did not help either.

We feel helpless because this has been going on for years and has resulted in people selling their flats because they cannot cope with this situation any longer. What can we do to hold them accountable?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks.

eddddy

zjoliveira said:

The leasehold is a three-way document between the leaseholder, Optivo and the Management Company.

They do not reply to our emails and their Ombudsman says they cannot help because we do not have Optivo directly as our landlord. 

The details are a bit confusing. You refer to a 3 party lease - presumably the 3 parties are:

1. Lessee / Tenant  / Leaseholder is You
2. Lessor / Landlord / Freeholder is Optivo
3. The Management company

If so, Optivo would be your landlord, but they wouldn't be responsible for managing the property. The management company would manage the property.

And it seems like your complaints are about the way the property is managed - so you complaints should be with the management company (not Optivo).

Or have I misunderstood?

TripleH

I read that Optivo are a leaseholder as well (albeit that they have leasehold on an entire block)?

What does the lease say about unpaid fees and action against non-payers?

Can you simply get separate block insurance so leave Optivo's uninsured / for them to sort out?

You would have to give plenty of notice...

zjoliveira

TripleH said:

I read that Optivo are a leaseholder as well (albeit that they have leasehold on an entire block)?

What does the lease say about unpaid fees and action against non-payers?

Can you simply get separate block insurance so leave Optivo's uninsured / for them to sort out?

You would have to give plenty of notice...

They are a leaseholder for Block D properties but also named in the lease as having the management rights for an entire block!

We tried to do so and have not been allowed to do it....

zjoliveira

eddddy said:

zjoliveira said:

The leasehold is a three-way document between the leaseholder, Optivo and the Management Company.

They do not reply to our emails and their Ombudsman says they cannot help because we do not have Optivo directly as our landlord. 

The details are a bit confusing. You refer to a 3 party lease - presumably the 3 parties are:

1. Lessee / Tenant  / Leaseholder is You
2. Lessor / Landlord / Freeholder is Optivo
3. The Management company

If so, Optivo would be your landlord, but they wouldn't be responsible for managing the property. The management company would manage the property.

And it seems like your complaints are about the way the property is managed - so you complaints should be with the management company (not Optivo).

Or have I misunderstood?

Sorry, you are right - apologies. The lease is between lessee, lessor (freeholder is HomeGround) and the management company (with the caveat that Optivo is solely responsible for Block D management with the management company overseeing it the development as a whole). Optivo acts as a management company for Block D only. The complaints do need to be addressed to Optivo (it looks us many months to ascertain that). But what do we do when they don't listen to us and get away from being held accountable on a technicality, as the Ombudsman is stating?

HampshireH

Why wouldn't you go to the freeholder if the leaseholder is in breach?

Ultimately the freeholder should be ensuring things like insurance is in places if they aren't providing it themselves.

The set up seems a little odd that you you say Option act as a managing company for Block D and have managing rights but the managing agent has overall responsibility.

Do they actually have a formal managing company set up for this block or do you mean that as leaseholders they are simply responsible for their block as per the lease. If that's the case then the managing agent needs to enforce the legalities if indeed they do also have an over arching responsibility for that block and that includes collection of service charges.

If the managing agent is failing to do that you could complain to freeholder about the managing agent. Would be sensible to exhaust their complaints process first.

Presumably the external areas are defined and you all have different contractors for your own areas for maintenance?

I don't understand why your funds would be spent paying for their property when it's nothing to do with your block. That sounds like money is being mismanaged 

eddddy

HampshireH said:

Why wouldn't you go to the freeholder if the leaseholder is in breach?

Ultimately the freeholder should be ensuring things like insurance is in places if they aren't providing it themselves.

@HamptonH - It's all a bit confusing, but it sounds like Optivo are "wearing 3 hats" here  (I've seen a similar set up with other housing associations)...


1) Optivo A are the leaseholders of a headlease

That is a lease between Homeground (the lessor / freeholder) and Optivo A (the lessee)


2) Optivo A are the lessor of a tri-partite sub-lease

That is a lease between Optivo A (the lessor), the OP (the lessee) and Optivo B (the management company)


3) Optivo B are the management company of a tri-partite sub-lease

That is a lease between Optivo A (the lessor), the OP (the lessee) and Optivo B (the management company)




The OP's complaint is with a breach of lease by "hat 3".  That's nothing to do with the freeholder.


(And FWIW, Homeground tend not to own freeholds - they tend to manage them on behalf of freeholders. So I wonder if there is further confusion anyway.)

 

zjoliveira

eddddy said:

HampshireH said:

Why wouldn't you go to the freeholder if the leaseholder is in breach?

Ultimately the freeholder should be ensuring things like insurance is in places if they aren't providing it themselves.

@HamptonH - It's all a bit confusing, but it sounds like Optivo are "wearing 3 hats" here  (I've seen a similar set up with other housing associations)...


1) Optivo A are the leaseholders of a headlease

That is a lease between Homeground (the lessor / freeholder) and Optivo A (the lessee)


2) Optivo A are the lessor of a tri-partite sub-lease

That is a lease between Optivo A (the lessor), the OP (the lessee) and Optivo B (the management company)


3) Optivo B are the management company of a tri-partite sub-lease

That is a lease between Optivo A (the lessor), the OP (the lessee) and Optivo B (the management company)




The OP's complaint is with a breach of lease by "hat 3".  That's nothing to do with the freeholder.


(And FWIW, Homeground tend not to own freeholds - they tend to manage them on behalf of freeholders. So I wonder if there is further confusion anyway.)

 

You are quite right in all of this. We are aware that Homeground manages the freehold on behalf of someone but I stated that for ease. Optivo is indeed wearing multiple hats.

I am not sure the Freeholder is the person to go to.
Optivo is collecting their due from service charge but they are not passing that money on to KFH, the management agents for the entire development. As such, and as an example, the gardening should come out of everyone's pot. However, if Optivo does not pay for the 1/3th of the properties they manage (even though the actual tenants are paying Optivo), then the whole development suffers as a result.

Also, please note that the complaints go beyond payment of service charge. Anti-social behaviour and other issues like rodents, invalidation of insurance, etc and a consequence of their mismanagement and neglect.

Optivo won't reply to my complaints. The Ombudsman says they cannot support because I am not their direct leaseholder. The managing agents, acting on my behalf as directors, can't support because we have no money to take Optivo to court. Who do I go to and what can I do (besides selling my apartment and running far away from this mess)?

eddddy

zjoliveira said:

...we have no money to take Optivo to court. 

Do you specifically mean court - or do you mean a tribunal?

• If Optivo are not doing things which the lease says they should - then you might want to go to court to get a court order that 'forces' them to do those things. And as you say, that would be expensive.

But depending on the precise details of what has happened, another angle might be to take them to a tribunal, to claim that some of your service charges are unreasonable...

For example (using made up numbers),

• if they are saying that gardening costs £5000 per year, and your service charge includes your share of that which is £100...

• ... if £5000 isn't spent on gardening costs (for any reason), it's not reasonable for you to be charged £100.

• Or if the gardeners are only spending 30 mins a week doing gardening, it's not reasonable to be paying them £5000 per year for that.

But as you can imagine, you'd have to do lot of investigation to establish that.

But in simple terms, at a tribunal, you can get money back if you've been charged for something that isn't being done - but you can't use a tribunal to force them to do stuff that they're not doing.


In general, there are other things that most leaseholders can do about bad building management (like create a "Right To Manage" company, or get a Building Manager appointed by a tribunal) - but you can't do those things if your landlord is a housing association.