Sec20 concern

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Sec20 concern

    Hi there,

    I am a leaseholder living in a block of 4 leasehold flats. The managing agent carried out maintenance work (fire safety work) earlier this year which totalled just over £1,700. Additionally, there were various call outs for repairs and 2x "Fire Alarm & Emergency Light Services" so all in all the total cost was £2,710. There was no Sec 20 consultation.

    In respect of Sec 20 consultations, I understand that this is needed for qualifying works that will cost a contributing leaseholder more than £250. With regards the £1,700 split 4 ways at £425 each, does this mean I am liable to pay the first £250?

    Many thanks

    #2
    No. Following the Daejan case, you are likely to be liable for at least your share of the cost of doing it with the cheapest competent contractor.

    https://www.lease-advice.org/article...o-freeholders/

    Comment


      #3
      The cheapest quote does not have to be the one accepted, and from quote history, the cheapest is not always the best.



      Comment


        #4
        leaseholder64,

        Thank you for that ruling.

        However, now that I've studied this ruling, given the amount involved, I'm not entirely convinced that I should pay more than £250. Following the landlord's failure to consult, he would have to bear the legal costs of seeking a dispensation from the Tribunal and in furtherance to that, cover my own costs in seeking legal advice on this matter.

        This precedent is much more relevant where the qualifying works have cost in excess of £1,000 per leaseholder in my opinion.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by ram View Post
          The cheapest quote does not have to be the one accepted, and from quote history, the cheapest is not always the best.


          Whilst the cheapest doesn't have to be taken if there is proper consultation, if the consultation is not proper, it may be difficult to prove that a cheaper quote, possibly from someone who wasn't even invited to quote, would not have been chosen if the consultation had occurred.

          Comment


            #6
            This is a debate for another topic ( cheapest quotes )
            I place orders, and I decide who is the best, as leaseholders have not delt with all the firms i deal with, and have no clue how good or bad they are.
            The best firm to do the job is chosen, not the cheapest.
            The feeolder / agent decides the winning bid. not the leaseholders, for reasons above.
            But as said, this is off topic, so I will close.

            Comment


              #7
              Arguably the fire safety work and the maintenance were quite different items of work, hence on balance, I actually dont think its worth falling out with your freeholder over £175 because if you do so they can be very unhelpful when you want something such as a consent. So best advice on this occasion : Cough up!

              Comment


                #8
                Hi there

                Essentially it's the managing agent I have the problem with. This is not an isolated case, they are incompetent and refuse to comply with the law. I am one inch from taking over the Right to Manage with a fellow leaseholder.

                It's not the £175, I can pay this 100x over without batting an eyelid - no smugness intended. It's the principle of these rogue companies that refuse to abide to the basics of law and ride roughshod over leaseholders, many of which are not aware of the law. The only way that they will learn is by hitting them in the pocket and not letting them away with it by coughing up!

                Comment

                Latest Activity

                Collapse

                Working...
                X