QLTA time limit

[paulamis]

Just a query really, the L&T act is clear that QLTAs are those lasting more than 12 months [http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/.../section/20ZA], so why do agents routinely write contracts shorter than a year (eg http://leaseholdlawyer.wordpress.com...-of-12-months/).

All very well, but this cannot have been the intention, from this definition an MA could charge whatever they like for a years management with no need to consult. Likewise all the annual contracts would be exempt from consultation.

So has the LVT/FTT ever ruled that an annual contract should have been consulted upon?

And what if the agent just skips the contract and says an arrangement is ad-hoc, has the LVT/FTT ever said an ad-hoc arrangement should be consulted as a QLTA?

[andydd]

I believe no, consulaltation isnt needed for 12 months or less contracts but an ftt could still judicate on its reasonableness.

[andydd]

There are also other routes to replace poor performing managing agents and various rics codes.

[leaseholdanswers]

Because a year IS twelve months, a QLTA is for MORE than 12 months.

Management contracts are typically for a year and "hold over" the parties agreeing that the services in the original contract carry on until either terminates as the contract stipulated, normally a quarters notice.

They can only charge their fee in agreement with the client, and that is only part of the overall service charge again which is agreed with the client. The total service charge is not their charge, its made up of the competent parts, as they are agents and managers, not a contractor or supplier.

The case to which you refer turned on the reference to a two year fee review clause, so that it was clear that the contract was intended to be for more than 12 months. There is always the potential for such a determination as you ask but one has not been made to date.

[paulamis]

If they hold over LEASE say that they are QLTAs [http://www.lease-advice.org/publicat...asp?item=20#3]. And the idea of renewing the contract every year with the same agent an no consultation looks like just evading the law, can the LVT/FTT just say it that if it quacks like a duck...

It is all bonkers anyway, the agent has a contract with the freeholder saying the leaseholders will pay X, the LH are not parties to the agreement, do not see it and are unaware of its contents, we are just magically bound by it.

How can it ever have been dreamed up that the MA can charge a figure, have that figure instantly payable and enforceable, so the LH must risk 100s/1000s in fees and time off work to fight off the unreasonable charge. And even if you win, what is to stop the FH just signing a new contract with the same agent next year.

I had one where I was charged electricity for a heater that did not exist, got the LVT to throw it out, but the MA still demanded the same figure, said it was his estimate to fit a heater, never did thankfully.

The legislation promises protection, but lays out barn doors to avoid the regulation and has no teeth anyway.

[leaseholdanswers]

you have looked at public sector, and havent read my post the lease is the binding contract, the agent is just that acting for the freeholder,as agent, organisng the freeholders affairs. if you cant grasp that think of them as free holders rep....

[paulamis]

Sorry I got the wrong link when I went back to pick up the URL, the lease site says management contracts are 'potentially' subject to QLTA [http://www.lease-advice.org/publicat...asp?item=19#5].

In this property the FH wants to extend and build new flat, but that would cause difficulties living in the existing flats, so we are being subjected to harassment until we all go along.

The regulations are so wide open this can all be done quite legally fully within the terms of the lease, ARMA and RICs.

How do I get out of it, the common parts look like a slum and the service charge is half as much as the mortgage for most so buyers run for the hills?

I can sell at a 30% loss or continue being ripped of a couple of grand a year on average or risk many thousands fighting it. Logically the long slow rip off and hope the FH goes bust seems the best way to go but it is not nice to see bullies prosper.

[leaseholdanswers]

And I have explained where the potential you identify does not arise.

The freeholder is entitled to develop the building as he sees fit, but does have an obligation to all owners for quiet enjoyment, and in lay terms not to interfere too much with the rights that he has granted you and home you have been sold.

In these cases it’s a matter of negotiation via mediation if required so that everyone gets something out of it, or he will press ahead and cause a maximum of upset for you, leaving you no choice but expensive litigation.