I own the whole building freehold but a management company exists, Who has control?

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

    #16
    thanks for your inputs
    I am currently looking into the next step to take

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by eagle2 View Post
      The Law Commission is considering whether it should be mandatory for RTMs to appoint a professional managing agent and whether RTM directors should be required to meet training requirements.
      I take it, this also applies to RCMs? Why not make directors required to reside in the building? Would this not eliminate the possibility of managing agents becoming directors of the building?

      Comment


        #18
        I have not found any proposals directly relating to RMCs presumably because the members appoint the directors. The agents will be required to comply with a code of practice and that should exclude them from becoming directors of the client company.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by TruthLedger View Post

          I take it, this also applies to RCMs? Why not make directors required to reside in the building? Would this not eliminate the possibility of managing agents becoming directors of the building?
          Unfortunately, that would often leave you with no-one capable of being a director, or with sub-tenants as directors.

          At least in outer London the remaining owner occupiers are mainly those too old and poor to move out. Based on my experience, one or two of those will have dementia and most will simply not have the skills to understand how to run a block.

          Although, for some purposes, sub-tenants are considered an acceptable alternative to leaseholders, in determining whether there is mutual control of the company, in general sub-tenants have no financial stake and there would be concern that they would be too willing to spend money.

          It actually looks to me as though there was a deliberate decision not to restrict the directors of RTMs, even though some RMC restrict them to be members of the company. Also, it seems that some RMCs allow leaseholders to nominate an external director per leaseholder. I presume the intent is that a more competent family member could be the director, as external professionals won't want to take on unpaid directorships, unless they have a conflict of interest.

          I would note that RMCs have no specific legislation, other than that which gives theme the SIC 98000 code for Companies House returns. As such, you would first have to define how to identify one, before imposing rules on them.

          RMCs are not special in terms of how directors are appointed, although some do restrict directors to be members of the company. Other directors can appoint directors, as well as the members. It would be unusual for any company to permit someone who was neither a director or member be involved in appointing directors.

          Although fully owner occupied blocks can be dysfunctional, I think ones with high levels of non-resident leaseholders tend to be worst, as they tend to be interested in their personal wealth and not the community.

          The typical reason that agents are able to hijack companies are that there are no owner occupiers both willing and able, and there are no absentee landlords willing, to become directors.

          The Law Commission report on RTMs actually points out new RTMs tend to have a lot of enthusiasm, but, in older ones, all those with enthusiasm have moved on.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by leaseholder64 View Post

            Unfortunately, that would often leave you with no-one capable of being a director, or with sub-tenants as directors.

            At least in outer London the remaining owner occupiers are mainly those too old and poor to move out. Based on my experience, one or two of those will have dementia and most will simply not have the skills to understand how to run a block.

            Although, for some purposes, sub-tenants are considered an acceptable alternative to leaseholders, in determining whether there is mutual control of the company, in general sub-tenants have no financial stake and there would be concern that they would be too willing to spend money.

            It actually looks to me as though there was a deliberate decision not to restrict the directors of RTMs, even though some RMC restrict them to be members of the company. Also, it seems that some RMCs allow leaseholders to nominate an external director per leaseholder. I presume the intent is that a more competent family member could be the director, as external professionals won't want to take on unpaid directorships, unless they have a conflict of interest.

            I would note that RMCs have no specific legislation, other than that which gives theme the SIC 98000 code for Companies House returns. As such, you would first have to define how to identify one, before imposing rules on them.

            RMCs are not special in terms of how directors are appointed, although some do restrict directors to be members of the company. Other directors can appoint directors, as well as the members. It would be unusual for any company to permit someone who was neither a director or member be involved in appointing directors.

            Although fully owner occupied blocks can be dysfunctional, I think ones with high levels of non-resident leaseholders tend to be worst, as they tend to be interested in their personal wealth and not the community.

            The typical reason that agents are able to hijack companies are that there are no owner occupiers both willing and able, and there are no absentee landlords willing, to become directors.

            The Law Commission report on RTMs actually points out new RTMs tend to have a lot of enthusiasm, but, in older ones, all those with enthusiasm have moved on.
            Thanks for the detailed insight leaseholder64. Now it clicks why the agents asked me if I was planning to reside at the property. I thought it was an odd question at the time, but after this post it makes total sense.

            Comment


              #21
              I don't think that non resident leaseholders should be excluded from being directors, ideally you would have a balance of residents and non residents. Non residents are interested in protecting their investments. In my experience, non residents tend not to volunteer on the grounds that meetings would take place at the property and would involve time and expense but that does not apply these days when meetings can be arranged without having to step from your own home.

              I think that agents should have no say in the composition of the board of directors, all too often they interfere in order to retain their position. I have seen them deliberately not invite volunteers to become directors and then appoint one of their own employees as a director, choose the weakest person to act as a director, control the board of directors by ensuring that only persons who support the agent are appointed and others who may oppose their appointment are rejected.

              Comment

              Latest Activity

              Collapse

              • Underlet registration fee
                Relentlessuk
                hi,

                My freehold management company, also known as the Devil, {Mod - name removed}, are requesting an £138 underlet registration fee from me. I realise its been discussed umpteen times but thought if I post the clause (attached) they are relying upon I might find someone with a better mind...
                02-08-2019, 19:02 PM
              • Reply to Underlet registration fee
                eagle2
                The solicitors are correct, the LVT does not have the power because it ceased to exist in June 2013.

                The FTT would also not have the jurisdiction to consider the charge because it is not a variable administration charge, you have the right to choose a fixed fee of £5 as stated by Lawcruncher...
                20-08-2019, 04:47 AM
              • HELP - lease clause
                Jake0254
                Hello

                Im due to complete on Monday which is the scariest part of this. I have a house cat. My lease is POORLY worded with a clause that says:

                " No pets may be kept in a flat and where the property is a house you must not keep any animal including livestock except a pet...
                16-08-2019, 23:15 PM
              • Reply to HELP - lease clause
                HazeltonLane
                The property agent told you you can get consent for a house cat.

                Your solicitor told you the lease says cats can be kept with consent.

                The HA told you that they would grant permission pending the information provided. Presumably they want to reserve the right to refuse if you...
                20-08-2019, 01:17 AM
              • Reply to Underlet registration fee
                leaseholder64
                The power seems to have existed since September 2004, which is before the FTT replaced the LVT (Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002, Schedule 11).
                19-08-2019, 21:27 PM
              • Reply to HELP - lease clause
                Jake0254
                Yes that’s right, he interprets it the same way as the HA do - the HA have clarified their position that it is, in their opinion, a blanket ban on pets in flats. The solicitor would therefore then argue that such a term would be considered unfair and therefore not legally binding....
                19-08-2019, 20:55 PM
              • Reply to HELP - lease clause
                Jake0254
                I have already researched that case actually - the question in that case is whether the management company was reasonable in its refusal. This is quite different to this situation, whereby a blanket ban (which the HA are implying they have) allows no potential special circumstances to be taken into...
                19-08-2019, 20:52 PM
              • Reply to Underlet registration fee
                Relentlessuk
                Well its been two weeks and they still haven't responded to my request for the freeholders solicitors details. we shall see what happens....

                they did send previously a templated response saying that "the LVT does not have power to rule that a registration fee is unreasonable"....
                19-08-2019, 19:36 PM
              • Reply to HELP - lease clause
                Macromia
                My comment regarding livestock was intended to be tongue in cheek!
                I think that you'd have to be more specific than "indoors" though - factory farmed livestock might not see anything other than the inside of a building until loaded into a cramped truck to be taken for slaughter.
                ...
                19-08-2019, 18:29 PM
              • Reply to HELP - lease clause
                AndrewDod
                I tried to post a bunch of medical links on the health effects of cats in buildings to others in the building. But seemingly if you have more than a few links your post gets killed.

                Anyway, I'm with jpkeates (and most others) on this one. Perhaps OPs solicitor will help out with the 70K...
                19-08-2019, 16:34 PM
              Working...
              X