Court charges for flat X debt recovery charged to service charge for all flats

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

    Court charges for flat X debt recovery charged to service charge for all flats

    Hi all

    I'm pretty sure I know the answer to this one but worth checking.

    Our Lease is an old 1980s one which allows the freeholder to on-charge of legal costs to specific leaseholders ONLY in relation to or in contemplation of a S146 forfeiture action.

    However, all residents have received a 'balancing charge' which comprises of, in part, court costs spent in chasing specific leaseholders for non-payment of service / admin charges.

    I do not believe this is allowed by the terms of the lease. Is it Tribunal time?

    #2
    Check the lease to see what may be included within service charge expenditure. it often says that the cost of appointing solicitors is permitted. The freeholder is likely to argue that all costs are taken from the service charge fund and then attempts are made to recover the costs and the service charge fund is credited if and when the costs are recovered.

    If you apply to the FTT, you would need to explain that the charges were unreasonable and that was why leaseholders did not pay them and it was unreasonable of the freeholder to take legal action.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by eagle2 View Post
      Check the lease to see what may be included within service charge expenditure. it often says that the cost of appointing solicitors is permitted. The freeholder is likely to argue that all costs are taken from the service charge fund and then attempts are made to recover the costs and the service charge fund is credited if and when the costs are recovered.

      If you apply to the FTT, you would need to explain that the charges were unreasonable and that was why leaseholders did not pay them and it was unreasonable of the freeholder to take legal action.
      Nothing that I can see. Apart from the covenant to pay for any S146/S147 actions mentioned above, the only other one is a reserve fund plus this:
      1. the fees of the Lessor’s Managing Agents for the collection of the rents of the Flats in the Building and for the general management thereof.
      Would that count?

      Comment


        #4
        No..S146 costs are an admin charge payable but the defaulting leaseholder only. I dont think the paragraph you posted would allow legal costs either, it looks like they can only collect management agent fees (not legal fees), to be able to recover legal costs the lease as to make specific provision.
        Advice given is based on my experience representing myself as a leaseholder both in the County Court and at Leasehold Valuation Tribunals.

        I do not accept any liability to you in relation to the advice given.

        It is always recommended you seek further advice from a solicitor or legal expert.

        Always read your lease first, it is the legally binding contract between leaseholder and freeholder.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Benzo View Post

          Nothing that I can see. Apart from the covenant to pay for any S146/S147 actions mentioned above, the only other one is a reserve fund plus this:
          1. the fees of the Lessor’s Managing Agents for the collection of the rents of the Flats in the Building and for the general management thereof.
          Would that count?
          No that only allows the freeholder to recover the charges of the managing agent. So it looks like the freeholder is restricted to recovering costs from the individual leaseholders, as andydd says.

          Comment


            #6
            Thanks guys. I'll push back and suggest they remove the fees or I'll pay in protest and apply to Tribunal.

            Comment


              #7
              Note that there are number of people lobbying, on the forum, for the s146 option to be removed, so you should give serious consideration as to how service charge arrears can be chased.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by leaseholder64 View Post
                Note that there are number of people lobbying, on the forum, for the s146 option to be removed, so you should give serious consideration as to how service charge arrears can be chased.
                My understanding is that in a tripartite lease the Management Company should not be using the s146 route as only the freeholder can forfeit the lease.

                Therefore can't see that how the removal of the s146 option will change how service charge arrears are currently chased, especially if three parties involved.

                Comment


                  #9
                  It's generally in the interests of the freeholder that the property be managed, so I would have thought they would have wanted to use that route on behalf of the management company. The management company generally has no money of its own, so the freeholder would have to make good any arrears, if work is to be done.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    If you go to the FTT, you should argue that only the freeholder would benefit from forfeiture therefore the legal costs should be paid by the freeholder.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      If the freeholder commenced legal action against the leaseholders whilst the RTM proceedings were being considered, you could also argue that the freeholder's actions were vexatious.

                      The freeholder could argue that monies were required to carry out the day to day running of the building, so you should be prepared to supply evidence that there were sufficient funds in the bank account eg a bank statement if you have one or the last set of service charge accounts showing the bank balance.

                      You may need to explain why the leaseholders were not paying the freeholder eg breakdown of trust or specific examples of unreasonable charges.

                      Comment

                      Latest Activity

                      Collapse

                      • Reply to RTM bank account recommendation
                        by Gordon999
                        try opening a non-profit service charge account with HSBC .
                        14-07-2020, 21:00 PM
                      • RTM bank account recommendation
                        by docdavis3
                        Hi all. I am a director of a new RTM company and am looking to set up a company bank account to recieve service fees and pay for maintenance services etc. I have applied for a Tide account but am getting the sort of push back that feels like they don't want our business (it may be legitimate requirements...
                        14-07-2020, 20:34 PM
                      • Reply to Unauthorised lease variation
                        by Stacker
                        There is a duty of care the insurance broker and managing agent owes this to its client so not undertaking due diligence and doing deals with unregulated managing agents is against the FCA and Company Act 2006..breach of contract negligence and breach of fiduciary duty the managing agent is also the...
                        14-07-2020, 20:37 PM
                      • Unauthorised lease variation
                        by Stacker
                        Lease requires all leaseholders to pay lessor service charges for insurance so sneaky managing agent tried to get leaseholders to pay broker directly which is an unusual arrangement where its not landlord and tenant and insurance is not paid via service charges to lessor.Could this be classed as an...
                        13-07-2020, 23:14 PM
                      • Reply to Unauthorised lease variation
                        by Stacker
                        As we are all aware the lease is a relationship between landlord and tenant. The lease is a contract with obligations and rights on both sides to observe and perform the covenants...so no managing agent or board can go against the lease even if agreed unanimously....to go against the lease is to induce...
                        14-07-2020, 20:32 PM
                      • Reply to Unauthorised lease variation
                        by Macromia
                        How does it. breach the lease?
                        This is something that you still haven't explained (either here, or when you brought the subject up in an earlier thread)....
                        14-07-2020, 19:28 PM
                      • Reply to Unauthorised lease variation
                        by Macromia
                        How?
                        The managing agents are not selling insurance, the broker is, and you have said nothing at all to suggest that anyone is taking any sort of commission....
                        14-07-2020, 19:26 PM
                      • Reply to Unauthorised lease variation
                        by Stacker
                        I have reported it to the FCA they have confirmed its unlawful to sell insurance products or claim any commission if you are not an FCA member or authorized. The managing agents has been dropped in it...
                        14-07-2020, 19:01 PM
                      • Reply to Unauthorised lease variation
                        by Stacker
                        It breaches the lease...
                        14-07-2020, 18:58 PM
                      • Breach of lease : Neighbours barking dog
                        by Tw1982
                        Hi,

                        Thanks in advance for your time. Im a long leaseholder living in london, and have been living in the same flat for 8 years now. The building is an old victorian conversion with four flats in the building and a basement flat with a garden.

                        We have recently had new short-hold...
                        12-09-2019, 23:50 PM
                      Working...
                      X