My freeholder charging me too much

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

    My freeholder charging me too much

    I live in a block of containing 4 flat and my freeholder is a builder and I owned my flat but have not bought a freehold .
    One of his flat he replaced the roof and demanding for my share the above of £5000 of my share to settle his invoice of totalling over £20000. Can a small two bed room roof that expensive ?
    I thought the building insurance could have helped him if there was any roof leak .Any help will be much appreciated

    #2
    There's a process that the freeholder is meant to follow in order to secure the leaseholder's contribution.
    But, it's one of the downsides of owning a flat.
    When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
    Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

    Comment


      #3
      Your freeholder should have issued a Section 20 consultation first. If they did not then you are not liable to pay more than £250.

      Comment


        #4
        Thank you .No he did not issued a section 20 for consultation .He also no detailing the nature of the work that he carried out just it says roof repaired to his flat and my share of 4th around £5000.If I refuse full payment and then can he cause problems for me as a freeholders as own the 3 flat and I am in minority as single shareholder without owning any freehold.
        these 4 flats are single storey semidetached.The work he done as a builder is himself as he did not use any other independent roofing company to make things clearer .

        Comment


          #5
          It is not straight forward because the freeholder can seek dispensation from complying with s20. I suggest that you ask to see supporting invoices and a schedule of works carried out. The freeholder is entitled to carry out works himself as long as the cost is reasonable. You should consider whether or not the freeholder is qualified to carry out roof repairs and whether or not the works could have been carried out by an independent contractor at a lower cost. Why an insurance claim was not made is a valid point and you should enquire.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by LondonRTMCo View Post
            Your freeholder should have issued a Section 20 consultation first. If they did not then you are not liable to pay more than £250.
            No, I'm afraid not.
            There was a case a few years ago that set legal precedent that effectively removes the £250 limit. Leaseholders now need to show that the amount demanded is unreasonable.



            Originally posted by mx60 View Post
            One of his flat he replaced the roof and demanding for my share the above of £5000 of my share to settle his invoice of totalling over £20000. Can a small two bed room roof that expensive ?
            I thought the building insurance could have helped him if there was any roof leak .Any help will be much appreciated
            Your lease will tell you what you need to pay for, or pay a share of.
            Roofs need replacing from time to time, with flat roofs having shorter life expectancies than most other roof types.
            Insurance will not cover normal wear and tear so, unless the roof was relatively new would not have covered the cost.

            ​​​​​​​

            Comment


              #7
              I agree that the cost of replacing the roof would not be a valid insurance claim but repairing damage caused by a leak could be a claim and that is why you should request a copy of the invoice and the schedule of works.

              Comment


                #8
                I think that Macromia is referring to the Daejan v Benson case in 2013 and following that decision, I don't think that anyone fully understands the meaning of s20, whereas it was perfectly clear before. The freeholder is allowed to apply for dispensation and there is no apparent time limit; the FTT is allowed to grant dispensation on such terms as it considers fit. Leaseholders are not to expect a windfall and the onus switches to them to indicate what they would have done if consultation had taken place, which may not be easy when it may be years after the event. The leaseholders are required to prove financial prejudice, which is extremely harsh but the FTT is supposed to give leaseholders the benefit of any doubt.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Thanks to all .The freeholder a builder not providing me supporting invoices with work schedules specifying the nature of work such as his wages or martial cost etc that he bought for his flat roof repair to increased his rental and selling value as he is non resident owner.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by eagle2 View Post
                    I think that Macromia is referring to the Daejan v Benson case in 2013 and following that decision, I don't think that anyone fully understands the meaning of s20, whereas it was perfectly clear before. The freeholder is allowed to apply for dispensation and there is no apparent time limit; the FTT is allowed to grant dispensation on such terms as it considers fit. Leaseholders are not to expect a windfall and the onus switches to them to indicate what they would have done if consultation had taken place, which may not be easy when it may be years after the event. The leaseholders are required to prove financial prejudice, which is extremely harsh but the FTT is supposed to give leaseholders the benefit of any doubt.
                    There is another recent case that leans towards the LHs a bit more > https://nearlylegal.co.uk/2020/07/di...s-on-landlord/
                    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

                    Latest Activity

                    Collapse

                    • Resigning as RTM Director
                      by MrT2014
                      Hi,

                      After several years as a Director handling the admin for our small RTM I've had enough chasing the other two flat owners/directors who contribute very little and endlessly footdrag when stuff needs to be done. 90% of my time is spent sending reminder emails and I'm pretty much done...
                      20-06-2021, 13:28 PM
                    • Reply to Resigning as RTM Director
                      by MrT2014
                      Thanks for all your replies & input. On the one hand I don't want to resign and cut off my nose to spite my face. But 7+ plus years of trying the carrot/stick approach with the other leasholders hasn't worked. They can't grasp (or choose to ignore) that it will cost many times more to ignore issues...
                      24-06-2021, 00:24 AM
                    • Underletting clause and "informal arrangements"
                      by Hooper
                      I have engaged solicitors on this but they have been somewhat lackluster so I am seeking opinion.

                      Leaseholders have built on property not demised to them (I am the freeholder). I am currently requiring them to take down the offending structure to avoid action for breach of covenant and...
                      23-06-2021, 18:02 PM
                    • Reply to Underletting clause and "informal arrangements"
                      by Lawcruncher
                      £65 is way over the top for registration so anything exceeding it is unreasonable.

                      Almost by definition a tenancy cannot be said to be informal. A licence is not covered by the clause.

                      What is the offending structure? When was it built? Please quote the alterations clause.
                      23-06-2021, 23:25 PM
                    • How easy/difficult is it to set up a freehold management service?
                      by riva
                      I live in a share of freehold (block of 5 flats) and we are currently paying around 6k per flat for management/bills per annum. No concierge but there's a lift. It's an external management company that we outsource to. Thing is, I feel that they were coming up with rather expensive quotes and so I've...
                      17-06-2021, 09:09 AM
                    • Reply to How easy/difficult is it to set up a freehold management service?
                      by ram
                      Sounds lke you only have 2 Directors, is this correct.

                      If the block ( 5 flats ) is contracting out the management of the block, And you will be contracting out to a managing Agent , not a company then there must ba a management company with all 5 leaseholdrs having shares in that company,
                      ...
                      23-06-2021, 22:03 PM
                    • Reply to Underletting clause and "informal arrangements"
                      by ram
                      You are the freeholder, the leaseholder of the flat HAS to abide by the lease.

                      Assuming the flat is sub-let ( let, and rent being paid )
                      Either the sub-tenants are paying rent to an agent or the landlord of the flat. If to the agents, the agent has the flat owners address.
                      ...
                      23-06-2021, 21:47 PM
                    • Management Company issues and Service Charge
                      by Bokun
                      A bit of a complicated situation.

                      I co own a property. I live at the property and the other owner lives at another address. I just got a bill for unpaid service charges that have built up over 6 years as the service charge went up but the standing order that was set up stayed the same....
                      23-06-2021, 21:17 PM
                    • Reply to Management Company issues and Service Charge
                      by MrSoffit
                      That's leasehold. Yes there is an 18 month rule but I'll bet a jam sandwich the agent has a file of letters sent to you contempor (?) at the time. All date stamped and ready for court. If you can pay - pay. Pay under protest in bold type if necessary, but pay. Complain later. It will work out cheap...
                      23-06-2021, 21:46 PM
                    • Reply to Resigning as RTM Director
                      by ram
                      Selling my leasehold property ? you ask, because I told MrT2014 to sell up.
                      But I take no prisoners, don't care what I say if it's the truth ( of course in legal proceedures, one has to be delicate with ones words )

                      I find a lot of people, when advised what to do, are too scared to...
                      23-06-2021, 10:27 AM
                    Working...
                    X