Eye watering solicitor fees to go to FTT

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

    #16
    JK0 well done for winning your cases sounds as though nothing will change I am in the dark as it is with any input or information, cant even get to see receipts...so sounds like nothing would change there then with new appointed manager apart from it will cost more.

    AndrewDod good tip thank you about checking on the other appointed managers in my area..I will do that , I have been trawling through old cases to help define the key issues for my case and using the case law to back up my points.
    Thank you for your help it is appreciated

    Also I dont understand why the directors dont want the company to earn any money? Could this be a tax avoidance scheme or just want the service charge payers to pay higher amount thro the service charges?

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by Stacker View Post
      Also I dont understand why the directors dont want the company to earn any money? Could this be a tax avoidance scheme or just want the service charge payers to pay higher amount thro the service charges?
      Not sure what you mean by that. The only way these companies are supposed to make money is through ground rents (which belong to the company), or perhaps by other means I won't mention here. How do you want them to make money?

      Comment


        #18
        AndrewDod pay the company for any alteration erquests and sublet fees

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Stacker View Post
          AndrewDod pay the company for any alteration erquests and sublet fees
          Even if they did that the money would generally be put towards company expenses (such as company postage, filings and so on) not as an offset to service charges. Company accounts and service charge accounts are separate. They can only charge that which the lease specifies.

          If Directors are acting with a conflict of interest to charge/not charge that which is in their personal interest that is a problem though (but a common type of corruption in RTM/RMC). It would not be a matter that is in the remit of FTT though (not charging, as opposed to going against the lease by charging).

          Comment


            #20
            AndrewDod yes thanks for that I have worked out that if they used the company money we would all pay more but putting company stuff through the service charges means the directors pay lower as they go by the percentages...so would this be county court breach of landlord obligations. I am confused.com as LEASE stated take this to the FTT to show as not complying with the lease.

            Comment


              #21
              You will need to describe exactly what happened. But purely company matters are entirely outside the scope of the FTT (except insofar as the impact on the leases - for example the exact charge amount stated for various freeholder actions).

              What does the lease say and what are they not complying with?

              Comment


                #22
                Can I describe what I think you mean happened:

                There are Directors (D). There are ordinary shareholders (S) and there might be people who are not shareholders at all (N).

                Someone (say S) wants to do an alteration. The lease makes it possible to charge them £X for considering the alteration, approving it, lawering it or whatever. Company accepts £X, and instead of using £X for Company purposes (or dishing it out to all shareholders), instead dump the money into the service charge bank account. They then reduce everyone's service charge (shareholders and non shareholders if they exist) by their service charge % of £X.

                I cannot see how this would be a matter for FTT. The only party(s) defrauded are S and D if there are any non shareholder lessees - but even that would be a matter of Company Law not L&T law.

                Comment


                  #23
                  AndrewDod you are better at explaining it than me however what is happening is the subletting or alteration fees are used to pay D&O insurance for benefit of the directors and NOT all the shareholders, the directors even having the cheek to get legal advice for their own benefit from the monies and they are the ones causing the issues! Crazy! They charge company fees like filing, postage, meeting fees through the service charges!

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Actually that is EXACTLY where D&O insurance should be paid from. There is doubt about whether this insurance is a service charge item and it should be funded from company income.

                    If the legal advice is to do with the company or dealing with lessees then again it is a legitimate use of this money. If it is to do with things they should pay for as lessees then it is not -- so it depends what the legal advice is about. But if the directors are the only shareholders the company income is their private income - so they could probably use it for that too (though it would be best for it not to be direct). But whatever the case this would not be a matter for the FTT.

                    Filings, postage and meeting fees should probably be charged to the company not as a service charge item.

                    None of these are going to pass the threshold for appointment of a manager though....

                    Comment


                      #25
                      JK0 I am not sure why you are saying dont go FTT when you have successfully ben there and won? Does not make sense?

                      Comment


                        #26
                        AndrewDod yes that is what the company monies should be used for but no they want the service charge monies to pay?

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by Stacker View Post
                          JK0 I am not sure why you are saying dont go FTT when you have successfully ben there and won? Does not make sense?
                          Forget our advice. WTF do we know? Crack on!
                          To save them chiming in, JPKeates, Theartfullodger, Boletus, Mindthegap, Macromia, Holy Cow & Ted.E.Bear think the opposite of me on almost every subject.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by JK0 View Post

                            Forget our advice. WTF do we know? Crack on!
                            Obviously a lot because you won your cases. Well done you...I have a good case its a 50/50 chance with any court case...I cant live with a damp flat much longer its not morally right or healthy...I could win I could lose..bring it on!

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by Stacker View Post

                              Good idea thanks for that but which chambers...did think Amanda Gourlay land and lease blogger barrister maybe?
                              Try Liz England. She has the right background. Google her, I'm not sure where she is these days.

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Jon66 Thank you for the name I shall make contact with the both of them...on another point how would the tribunal think a case is unreasonable?

                                Comment

                                Latest Activity

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X