How can I force a landlord to comply with a First Tier Tribunal decision?

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

    How can I force a landlord to comply with a First Tier Tribunal decision?

    Hi there,

    I and other long leaseholders recently won a substantial amount from our landlord in an application to the FTT regarding service charges, insurance and other expenses.
    Since then, the landlord has made no attempt to comply with the decision and has been ignoring our requests.

    I'm under the impression that the Tribunal has not enforcement powers.

    If that is the case, then would we have to apply to a County Court?
    Is there another avenue we could pursue?

    Thank you


    #2
    Yes County Court.

    Comment


      #3
      If the overpaid amount is below £15K, each leaseholder can try claiming refund of overpaid sum ( + 8% interest ) using the online small. claims court.

      The leaseholders probably need to set up RTM company to replace the managing company appointed by the freeholder.

      Comment


        #4
        There is no mention of a managing company appointed by the freeholder in the OP. Such companies tend to be leaseholder owned when the lease does provide them.

        Leaseholder owned companies are, in practice, impossible to enforce against, as they have no money of their own, so before creating an RTM consider what will happen when the original enthusiasm dies off and it becomes impossible to find competent directors for the company.

        Comment


          #5
          leaseholder64 older64;n1089062]There is no mention of a managing company appointed by the freeholder in the OP. Such companies tend to be leaseholder owned when the lease does provide them.

          Leaseholder owned companies are, in practice, impossible to enforce against, as they have no money of their own, so before creating an RTM consider what will happen when the original enthusiasm dies off and it becomes impossible to find competent directors for the company.[/QUOTE]

          Thank you everyone for your replies.
          We are in fact considering purchasing the freehold.

          @ leaseholder64 you raise a very good point regarding appetite to be a director.
          The risk is that nobody wants to be a director, or even if there is appetite initially, as leaseholders sell and are progressively replaced with others, the new ones will not want to be directors.

          The proposal would be that the articles of association of the company would ensure that to be a shareholder you also have to be a director.
          This should (in theory) ensure that everyone shares in the risk/reward.

          Comment


            #6
            The Directors ( leaseholders ) of the RTM company should appoint an external ( honest ) management company for managing their service charge account and spending of their service charge money. Under the leasehold system, the freehold owns the building and the leaseholders are long term rental tenants of the leasehold flat.

            All leases are drafted in favour of the Lessor and gives the Lessor ( freeholder ) the right to demand the service charge money from the Lessee's (leaseholder's ) pocket for maintenance of the building ( which is owned by the Lessor ) for 99 years or 125 years or whatever term.

            The leasehold system is unfair for the leaseholders which is the reason why the leaseholders in your block should collectively stand together and consider buying the freehold.

            Comment


              #7
              Although you don't need an RTM if you buy out the freehold, if you do have an RTM, you don't get the ability to change the articles.

              If everyone is a director, the real directors will be those that bother to turn up at the directors' meetings, so the real directors will still be a subset.

              Also, the majority of the directors will not actually be capable of being a director as they will know nothing about any of the basics of company law, leasehold law, health and safety law, and nothing about maintaining buildings, and never have read the lease.

              Longer term, you will likely end up with either a figure head director, and the managing agent having the real power, or a clique, that puts their own interests above those of leaseholders and residents, as a whole.

              Comment


                #8
                It's a small block so we're looking at 10 leaseholders purchasing the freehold.
                I agree that some will naturally be less familiar with acting as a director, but the alternative is probably worse.

                If, say, only 3 leaseholders are interested in being directors, then they take all the risk (as directors) and do all the work, and the remaining 7 get a "free" ride.

                If they don't turn up at the meetings (and by the way, for such a small block less regular meetings are probably required), then decision will be made by the quorum of those present.

                But the important bit is that since they are still directors, they cannot absolve themselves completely of responsibility, i.e. it's a rather strong incentive to get somewhat involved.

                That's why the suggestion is that everyone is a equally involved, i.e. one share, one vote, one directorship.
                And this would be in the articles of the company that owns the freehold.

                Comment


                  #9
                  I think you will find that even the directors who turn up will fail to understand the responsibilities of being a director!

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by cliff0rd View Post
                    But the important bit is that since they are still directors, they cannot absolve themselves completely of responsibility, i.e. it's a rather strong incentive to get somewhat involved.
                    That's why the suggestion is that everyone is a equally involved, i.e. one share, one vote, one directorship.
                    And this would be in the articles of the company that owns the freehold.
                    There is actually a serious downside to your suggestion. When there is a minority lessee situation (say 10 flats where one lessee owns six, or there is a similar power block) the minority lessees will have very little (indeed no power), but have to take responsibility. It is far better for them to remain outside, where they can sue the Directors if there is serious misconduct/fraud etc (it is hard enough for minority lessees to act to correct problems within a lessee owned company -- but being a Director makes that harder still).

                    Nobody can force anyone to be a Company Director in any case - so the best you can do is entitle them to so be. In addition some persons are specifically not-allowed to be Directors -- so making this a stipulation for lessees is a difficulty. Non Directors would still be able to vote on matters as usual.

                    I suggest you word your articles to a) Set no upper limit on the number of directors b) entitle anyone who is a lessee to be a director should they so wish (they can resign at any time).

                    Comment


                      #11
                      You also cannot do as you suggest in #8 and stipulate that someone loses their shareholding if they refuse to be a Director. The shareholding and the Directorship arise from totally different sources. Of course you can say that only shareholders can be Directors.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Directors have to formally consent to being directors and some people may simply not be legally able to be directors (not just those banned from holding company office).

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Dear Gordon 999

                          What is the basis for the +8% interest please.
                          Thank you.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            https://www.gov.uk/make-court-claim-...t-the-interest

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Thank you leaseholder 64. This applies to unpaid service charges as well, does it?

                              In this event would the freeholder need to raise an administration demand for the interest in advance of the court application (or perhaps afterwards once the court reached a decision)?

                              Thank you.

                              Comment

                              Latest Activity

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X