Section 20 and Right To Manage

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

    Section 20 and Right To Manage

    Morning kiddos

    I was after some general advice on the chronology of Section 20 and Right to Manage applications, and which takes precedence when.

    Some background: our managing agents have been threatening major works for the last two or three years. Their previous go at major works was pretty poor, so in late 2017 we elected to go for RTM. This appeared to light a bit of a fire under the managing agents collective bums (we have a significant amount in reserve) and they subsequently initiated major works with a section 20 in June 2018. After some fairly significant battles, including a trip to the Upper Tribunal, we've finally got our RTM, with handover due later this year.

    However I've recently received communication from the managing agents stating the following:

    1. that they'd like to proceed with major works, including those to our block
    2. that they recognise we can reject this offer but in both scenarios we'd be liable for any costs they've already invested in preparing for those major works
    3. that their major works plan will make it 'difficult' to handover the correct reserve amount in good time, and that an FTT determination may be required for this
    4. that this FTT determination will take some time and in the meantime major works should proceed

    Not to be too cynical but I think effectively they want to clear out the reserve before handover. My questions are as follows::

    1. were these major works 'reasonably' initiated? it doesn't feel like they were, since they did not send section 20 until way after RTM was initiated
    2. therefore, ARE we liable for costs incurred in preparing for major works following RTM application?
    3. is there a standard basis for determining reserve fund handover where RTM applies to only 50% of the development? My assumption is that we should get 50% of the reserve but this may be too simplistic
    4. can MA legitimately use FTT to delay matters and do we have any pushback?

    Thanks all.

    #2
    Your RTM should be demanding a handover date for the service charge by serving 1- 3 months notice ( or whatever is suitable ).

    Don't let the existing agent try to stay on.

    The existing buildings insurance should be terminated on the handover date. A new insurance policy by the RTM should be arranged to start on the handover date.

    A service charge levy after the handover date will be demanded by the RTM company or its appointed new managing agent .

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Gordon999 View Post
      Your RTM should be demanding a handover date for the service charge by serving 1- 3 months notice ( or whatever is suitable ).

      Don't let the existing agent try to stay on.

      The existing buildings insurance should be terminated on the handover date. A new insurance policy by the RTM should be arranged to start on the handover date.

      A service charge levy after the handover date will be demanded by the RTM company or its appointed new managing agent .
      Thanks Gordon. We are demanding a handover date and I think the latest they can do it will be May this year - we're not yet able to confirm as they're ignoring our chosen MA. We have no plans to keep the existing MA on.

      However we are interested in what they're allowed to do with regards Major Works. I understand that their responsibility is to maintain the block until RTM completes, that much is clear. But when they (via the associated FH) has spent the last year deliberately slowing down RTM, does that still count?

      Comment

      Latest Activity

      Collapse

      • Can Section 20 notices be avoided?
        parklands
        In the event of a major problem occurring which needs to be rectified quickly, is there any way repairs could be undertaken without the Section 20 approvals?

        Our Managing Agents have, in the past, taken over six months to process Section 20 applications and seek quotations before appointing...
        23-06-2019, 14:59 PM
      • Reply to Can Section 20 notices be avoided?
        parklands
        Thank you all for your contributions. I will copy all the information to the shareholders and call a General Meeting of the Company to discuss.
        Many thanks.
        24-06-2019, 06:54 AM
      • Flat roof or roof terrace not demised
        Frankii
        Hello,
        I've been told I should repost my problem in this section to get the best help so here goes. We live in a Victorian conversion comprising a ground floor flat with a kitchen extension into the garden and a flat which comprises the upper floors. We bought the ground floor flat in the early...
        15-04-2019, 17:46 PM
      • Reply to Flat roof or roof terrace not demised
        Frankii
        Yes, your probably right so they're gone. However I still want to thank everyone for their advice on the Landlordzone Forum as it has been invaluable and helped us through a difficult situation. With the new roof fitted at least we can get on with our lives and redecorate the kitchen diner where it...
        24-06-2019, 06:04 AM
      • Reply to Can Section 20 notices be avoided?
        eagle2
        To sum up, you should act reasonably and consult the leaseholders as far as possible, You should explain that the works are urgent and you intend to dispense with the full consultation procedure. You should seek the leaseholders views and request their agreement in writing. There is no need to apply...
        24-06-2019, 05:14 AM
      • Director discrimination possibly?
        Stacker
        A leaseholder is threatening bringing a discrimination case against company as they are the only flat who is not a Director and many directors have come and gone also a director is appointing directors as per the AOA and not holding any AGMs to endorse the appointments.There is no automatic right to...
        22-06-2019, 20:14 PM
      • Reply to Director discrimination possibly?
        eagle2
        A meeting can be called by members holding 5% of the voting rights under s303 Companies Act 2006, if the directors do not arrange a meeting under s304 CA 2006, the members can arrange a meeting themselves under s305 CA 2006.

        Before starting the process, the leaseholder should consider whether...
        24-06-2019, 04:51 AM
      • Sinking fund breach of covennat?
        Stacker
        The level of the sinking fund has never been agreed by the managing agent or the Directors at any AGM in respect of the accounting years ending December 2016 2017 2018 and 2019 as required by the Deeds of Covenant.
        THE FIFTH SCHEDULE
        10. To set aside(which setting aside shall be for...
        16-06-2019, 19:27 PM
      • Reply to Sinking fund breach of covennat?
        eagle2
        I suggest that you have a meeting of members and decide how to proceed. If some leaseholders object to being charged for past contributions, you should start to operate the sinking fund from now.
        If any leaseholder is required to contribute more than £250 the consultation process should be followed,...
        24-06-2019, 04:22 AM
      • Cash book account query
        pernes
        Some theme ago we the residents received a schedule of accounts which highlighted the balance of our individual accounts, ( a question I raised in a previous forum) it was queried that some residents who had given loans to the company were still owed money and in some cases had sold their flat and agreed...
        21-06-2019, 09:40 AM
      Working...
      X