£900 admin / legal charges for an unadmitted breach

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

    #16
    Originally posted by Macromia View Post
    If I remember correctly, the freeholder didn't make any contact regarding the perceived breach prior to instructing their solicitors. Is this correct?

    I would be inclined to argue that this would make at least some of the costs unreasonable (even if it were eventually determined that the costs were reasonable in part).
    If they wish to argue that the solicitors costs can be recovered until the s.146 forfeiture clause, it is surely reasonable to communicate this possible course of action to a leaseholder before instructing solicitors (at least in cases where it is likely that the leaseholders will take the required action to avoid forfeiture)
    Great point. Their MA said that in his opinion it was a breach at the start of the year, I disagreed. Then six months later I got an email from the MA and the Lawyer within a day of each other. The lawyer was the first to mention S146 proceedings. Would this count?

    Comment


      #17
      I think that your argument should be that there was no breach of the lease so there cannot be any s146 proceedings and it was incorrect of them to threaten such action.

      I am speculating, but they may reply that the MA wrote on behalf of the freeholder and notified you of a breach 6 months ago. I do not understand what they mean by “initial breach” which implies that there was another breach. It is unclear who stands to benefit from the charge of £282, the freeholder or the MA? What have they done other than the MA has written to you and is that not included under the management fee? If the solicitors have sent a standard letter to you, the charge seems to be excessive but there was no reason to instruct a solicitor.

      So, I suggest that you ask for further details.

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by eagle2 View Post
        I think that your argument should be that there was no breach of the lease so there cannot be any s146 proceedings and it was incorrect of them to threaten such action.

        I am speculating, but they may reply that the MA wrote on behalf of the freeholder and notified you of a breach 6 months ago. I do not understand what they mean by “initial breach” which implies that there was another breach. It is unclear who stands to benefit from the charge of £282, the freeholder or the MA? What have they done other than the MA has written to you and is that not included under the management fee? If the solicitors have sent a standard letter to you, the charge seems to be excessive but there was no reason to instruct a solicitor.

        So, I suggest that you ask for further details.
        Totally with you. I replied this morning saying they need to provide more information on these 'breaches', and with an exact breakdown of the work, plus the justification for charging arrears on somethign which was only invoiced last week. Once I get that clarity and assuming my assumption is correct that it's based on the dogs (because with these idiots it could be anything) I will invite them to remove the charges pending application to Tribunal. Thanks for you patience on this. It's a scary thing to volunteer yourself to go to court for the first time and I appreciate the hand holding.

        Comment


          #19
          I understand, it can be quite daunting going to a Tribunal, no matter what they say about the proceedings being informal. Others would advise you to simply apply and ask the freeholder to justify the claim but if you obtain information in advance, you can prepare what to say and you can reduce the element of surprise on the day.

          Comment

          Latest Activity

          Collapse

          Working...
          X