Splitting Block Management and Service Charge

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Splitting Block Management and Service Charge

    I live in a block of six flats that is part of a bigger block of two other blocks of six. The management have decided that they are splitting the management of each block and managing separately and the service charge claimed for each block will be used to manage that individual block.

    The reason being is that some in a block pay and others don't - this is because many see the management as poor to say the least - if you are in a block where all are paying the charge your block would be looked after and decorated etc - that's what they say but hasn't happened since this change took effect three or more years ago.

    Is this allowed ? I find it hard to swallow if many do pay the charge they still suffer because others don't pay.

    They need funds to carry out maintenance so people need to pay.


      Can't see that they can just do that. The flats have contracts, part of which is that they share costs with ABCDEF not with ABC. You can't just "decide" to change those contracts.

      If people are not paying then they must get taken to court. If that does not happen then you must apply to have the building managed by the courts (FTT Appointment of a manager - but choose that manager with great care as many are crooks).


        Unless the leases have been varied the apportionments are set, any change wouldn't be enforceable of challenged. If there are non payers they need to be dealt with accordingly via a solicitor ideally.
        <a href="http://www.manchesterpropertygroup.co.uk/" target="_blank">Manchester letting agents</a>


          Originally posted by jrsteeve View Post
          Unless the leases have been varied the apportionments are set, any change wouldn't be enforceable of challenged.
          Whether or not the RMC can choose to manage each block separately, instead of dividing the costs between both blocks, may depend on what the leases say - and potentially on how long the change has already gone unchallenged.

          If, for example, the leases all say that "a reasonable proportion" is to be paid, and aren't specific about how costs should be split between the two blocks, it might be possible to argue that the new way of dividing service charges is reasonable and in accordance with the terms of the lease.
          If changing the way the blocks are managed can be argued to not breach the leases, I would think that consideration would have to be given to whether an 'estoppel' would apply - either to prevent the RMC from changing to managing the blocks separately, or (if the change happened long enough ago, without being challenged by leaseholders) if the leaseholders would be considered to have accepted the change.
          I would expect that any leaseholders who are not paying could not be considered to have accepted the change.

          Originally posted by jrsteeve View Post
          If there are non payers they need to be dealt with accordingly via a solicitor ideally.
          Agreed - although the RMC should chase payment themselves before engaging a solicitor (especially if the leases don't allow solicitors costs to be charged to the individual leaseholders who are in default.

          Non payment may be an indication that the leaseholders have objections to the way that the RMC is operating - and if the leases clearly state that the two blocks should be managed as one, with all costs shared, demanding service charges for the blocks separately may mean that the demands aren't actually payable.


          Latest Activity


          • Reply to Building works & S20 process
            by Gordon999
            The S20 consultation with leaseholders is required for any planned works which exceed £250 cost per flat.

            If any planned works are quoted below £1000, you could place the order on the supplier with lowest quote. .

            If the freeholder is self- managing the building maintenance,...
            28-05-2022, 09:56 AM
          • Building works & S20 process
            by RichA
            Hi. I have a freehold after selling a leasehold flat in a block of 4 flats. We don't currently have a managing agent, so these duties currently fall to me (I am holding off appointing a managing agent whilst the leaseholders consider whether they want to RTM).

            The block needs some maintenance...
            21-05-2022, 17:20 PM
          • Share of feehold/shared service charges?
            by Stu1020
            Hi there,

            I'm new to the forum and looking for advice on a sticky freehold situation.

            I own a two-bed flat in a converted building with two one-beds. The lease states that a fair proportion is payable towards the service charge. However, there has been a running agreement of...
            20-05-2022, 11:39 AM
          • Reply to Share of feehold/shared service charges?
            by sgclacy
            You appear to have bought into the flat knowing at the time your share is 38% and having owned the flat feel that this is unjust.

            Did you raise any concerns questions at the time of purchase that in a three flat split you would be paying more than 33.33% . Could it be argued that the unfairness...
            28-05-2022, 09:04 AM
          • Reply to Share of feehold/shared service charges?
            by eagle2
            The cost of extending a lease is not a service charge expense so there is no reason to allocate it on the 38/31/31 basis, your offer to split those costs equally seems to be reasonable. It is up to the freeholder to decide what is fair and reasonable for the service charges and it is up to the other...
            28-05-2022, 05:29 AM
          • Reply to Old managing agents accounts
            by eagle2
            Unless the handover took place at the end of the financial year, it is the RTM's responsibility to produce the annual accounts. You could try making a formal complaint against the agent to supply copies of all supporting documents, it should belong to a redress scheme. The difficulty is that the agent...
            28-05-2022, 05:05 AM
          • Old managing agents accounts
            by jazzythumper
            Since obtaining the RTM and changing the managing agent, we have never been given full accounts / receipts for the previous year(s). We believe that as the old freeholder and leaser holder of one of the flats were represented by the same solicitor that prior to the sale of the freehold, we were subsidising...
            20-05-2022, 11:21 AM
          • Freehold confusion
            by davetg
            30 years ago I bought a flat from a friend. The freehold at the time was registered to my friend and the lady who owned the other flat. I understood at the time that I would replace the friend on the freehold but this never happened. This was not a problem until now as when work on the structure of...
            24-05-2022, 14:29 PM
          • Reply to Freehold confusion
            by CStevens

            The property should be registered so the land registry should hold a copy of the leases. You would need to look at the leases to see who is responsible for what but normally in a maisonette situation the freeholder would insure and maintain the structure, foundation and roof with...
            27-05-2022, 21:58 PM
          • Reply to Freehold confusion
            by CStevens
            Yeah i guess i would agree with that but, as you say, the value is only to the leaseholders and a freehold subject to 999 years is not worth a great deal of money to anyone other than the occupants and in fact, if the leases are drafted correctly, they should require the leaseholders to become members...
            27-05-2022, 21:52 PM