Service Charge Demand - Managing Agent Insisting on Web Portal Service

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    UPDATE: Today I received a letter from the credit control dept of the managing agent, requesting payment and enclosing a statement (this was just a summary of the date of the interim service charge and the amount). No copies of the actual service charge demand was enclosed.

    Does this change the game, or are they still (technically/arguably) in breach of the service terms in the lease?

    Tks, yet again!
    Last edited by Holy Cow; 16-07-2021, 19:39 PM. Reason: typo


      Write back and say ( assuming you have never received the current service charge demand at your home - where you live )

      Dear Credit controler,
      Please get your department in order first.

      I have never received the interim Service charge addressed to my registered home address ( where I live ) and until such demand is presented to me, together with legal paperwork attached, I cannot pay that which I have no knowedge of.
      A balance is NOT a service charge demand.

      Go see your legal team as to what you should be sending me, to where, and in which format.

      I do not collect service charge demands from you. You send them to me. Is that clear enough ?

      i do not expect you to reply about a web portal. i expect, in the post, a service charge demand. which will also list the items to which the costs are against, together with current charge, then minus any excess monies in my account.

      I am sure even you can understand the law / recognised common format regarding layout a servive charge demand.

      It may not be your fault, but please in future check that a service charge demand has been sent to me before you harrass me for payment, and if not, send the bloody thing. Is that too much for you ?

      As it seems no one can send me a REAL, in writing service charge demand, a sample is enclosed.

      Yours faithfully

      Your worst nightmare.

      R.a.M. ( put your own name here ) pdf at


        Above is estimated service charge - copy and paste link

        the following is Actual service charge. at



          Originally posted by Section20z View Post
          HOwever they will have to send you a pre action reminder before taking court action for arrears so no doubt you will get a pdf eventually but they might already add late payment charges, and you're left with a fight.
          clearly the amounts would not be lawfully demanded but depends on your stomach for an argument...
          Guess it comes down to what sort of job they do of management and your respect for neighbours who will bear the additional expense incurred by tardy payers.
          This sums the situation up really.

          It looks like you are within your rights to refuse to accept anything other than demands that are delivered to your address, with the appropriate statements, as proper notification of your requirement to pay service charges.
          If you have not received demands that are in full accordance with the terms in your lease, and which also comply with legal requirements, no late payment charges will be payable - but that doesn't mean that the RTM company won't add late payment and legal charges, so you may well have to fight them in a court or tribunal.

          It may also be worth considering whether your lease allows legal costs to be added to service charges, and whether members of the RTM company have any obligation to pay company costs.
          If the RTM company does spend money on legal action these costs have to be paid by someone, and you may be very unpopular with your neighbours if they have to pay additional costs because of your refusal to accept use of a portal.

          I can understand that you really don't want to have to create an account for a portal, but you may find that most, potentially even all, other leaseholders prefer this.
          If I was in your situation I would be willing to sign up to the portal but would make it very clear, in writing, that I would be willing to use the portal for information, and may even make payments based on that information, but I would never consider payments to become legally due unless they were delivered to my flat in accordance with the terms of the lease. If a payment was not received after being requested via the portal I would expect a valid demand to be delivered to me before any other sort of action whatsoever was taken regarding the charges.


          Latest Activity


          • Freeholder/Agent Demanding Money for Repairs
            by SSLA91
            Hi all,

            Long time lurker of this forum and recent new member. Have always found the forum incredibly helpful so thank you! Have now got an issue with our freeholder that I could use some specific advice on (have tried searching for similar posts but to no avail).

            We have recently...
            20-10-2021, 20:28 PM
          • Reply to Freeholder/Agent Demanding Money for Repairs
            by eagle2
            It makes you wonder why any freeholder should comply with s20 at all. As you say, it can wait to see if any leaseholder challenges the costs. It does not even need to explain why it did not comply with s20, the only consideration appears to be whether or not the leaseholders suffered any financial prejudice,...
            23-10-2021, 06:34 AM
          • Section 20 notice
            by Starlane
            Hello I would welcome input on the following:
            Two roofs feed into a valley, the valley is in need of repair, this is a shared responsibility and therefore a shared cost. so how do we issue a section 20 notice when really we need the consent and agreement from two different buildings/landlords...
            22-10-2021, 19:09 PM
          • Reply to Section 20 notice
            by Starlane
            Hi Macromia thank you as always for your helpful and sensible input.. one building is saying one thing and another building the other, the usual chinese whispers so I took the bull by the horns and spoke to everyone and I am almost there apart from a Director who wants to do their own thing ( not being...
            22-10-2021, 20:57 PM
          • Reply to Share of freehold questions - confused
            by Starlane
            Agree thank you...
            22-10-2021, 20:52 PM
          • Share of freehold questions - confused
            by sixunforced
            Not sure if this is the right place for this query but anyway, I'm a first time buyer and have been searching for a property for like two years now (not continuously but on and off and obv covid halted my search for a while). I found a really nice 2 bedroom flat for under £320,000 in a block of around...
            18-11-2020, 21:19 PM
          • Reply to Section 20 notice
            by Macromia
            Assuming that the two freeholders have agreed that they will work together and share the costs, they jointly agree what needs to be communicated to the leaseholders and then each freeholder writes to the leaseholders in their building.
            22-10-2021, 20:16 PM
          • Reply to Freeholder threatening to cut water off
            by Macromia
            This is possibly by far the most important consideration, in my opinion.
            If the OP's lease doesn't allow 'improvements' to be charged to service charges, the freeholder cannot require them to contribute anything towards the costs, and would therefore be something that they would have had no choice...
            22-10-2021, 20:08 PM
          • Freeholder threatening to cut water off
            by Disraeli-LLH
            I was hoping you would be able to help. We own a ground floor flat LLH(970 yrs remaining). The freeholder owns the house and lets the flat upstairs on an AST.

            The freeholder currently undertaking works including replumbing. We have been on a shared water supply and we connect through their...
            20-10-2021, 15:35 PM
          • Reply to Freeholder/Agent Demanding Money for Repairs
            by Macromia

            Although when my freeholder applied for dispensation a while back (arguing that the proposed work had to be carried out as a matter of urgency) they were granted dispensation with the First Tier Tribunal commenting that the 2013 Supreme Court Case of Daejan versus Benson meant...
            22-10-2021, 19:51 PM