Leasehold Service Charge - excessive deficit charges, what are my rights?

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

    Leasehold Service Charge - excessive deficit charges, what are my rights?

    Hi,

    I was wondering if someone could kindly give guidance to leaseholder rights on service charges.

    Basically, my managing agent has billed me for a further £1899 (on top of a service charge that is already 3000 a year with no logical explanation given for it being so expensive!) for a deficit dating back to 2012/13 year of accounts where the financial statements have "now been completed" (just short of the 18month cut off for what is deemed "given in reasonable time"!).

    The managing agent is always responsible for budgeting and application of the service charge, and payments are made every 6 months to cover the service costs. I do not therefore understand how they can justify claiming that they under charged us by 63%!

    I have searched the internet but struggle to find information on what rights a leaseholder really has to challenge the charges, beyond the following:

    You have the right to apply to the First-tier Tribunal to ask it to determine whether your lease should be varied on the grounds that it does not make satisfactory provision in respect of the calculation of a service charge payable under the lease.
    You have the right to write to your landlord to request a written summary of the costs which make up the service charges. The summary must-
    cover the last 12 month period used for making up the accounts relating to the service charge ending no later than the date of your request, where the accounts are made up for 12 month periods; or
    cover the 12 month period ending with the date of your request, where the accounts are not made up for 12 month periods.
    The summary must be given to you within 1 month of your request or 6 months of the end of the period to which the summary relates whichever is the later.
    You have the right, within 6 months of receiving a written summary of costs, to require the landlord to provide you with reasonable facilities to inspect the accounts, receipts and other documents supporting the summary and for taking copies or extracts from them.



    However i cannot find which governing bodies look into this matter or how to apply to the first tier tribunal (or what the costs are)?

    Is anyone able to advise if i have any legal grounds to challenge this?

    #2
    You need to see the accounts in question with the income and expenditure sheet.

    Comment


      #3
      Explanation of FTT process here: http://hmctsformfinder.justice.gov.u...s/t541-eng.pdf
      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


        #4
        There is no point trawling the internet just because you are cross.

        63 % is based on something, you take the budget for that year and the subtotals for individual expenses and see how they vary to actual expenditure totals in the accounts.

        You can then see that repairs were 20 % over or insurance 30 % over you can ask why.

        Only when you have that information can you act not liking paying an extra 63% is not enough, no matter how eye watering that is , sorry.
        Based on the information posted, I offer my thoughts.Any action you then take is your liability. While commending individual effort, there is no substitute for a thorough review of documents and facts by paid for professional advisers.

        Comment


          #5
          AS LHA has explained, service charges are not (or at least should not !) be plucked out of thin air, they are based on actual expenditure that the freeholder has spent on the property for your benefit.

          As mentioned, you have rights to ask for a breakdown of this, under S21 and 21 of Landlord & Tenant Act 1985, and if an application was made to the FTT, then the Fh would be forced to prove actual expenditure and even then whether costs were reasonable.

          The grounds to challange amounts are under S19 and 27 of same LTA 1985, but first have a look at the summary (assuming the FH provides one).

          It is quite feasible tyat there are increased costs but this depends on provisions of the lease and relevant law (although you point out he appears to have complied with the 18 month rule)
          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


            #6
            You can get free advice and download free guides to many leasehold subjects including making application to FTT from LEASE ( Leasehold Advisory Service ) :

            http://www.lease-advice.org/publicat...nt.asp?item=18

            Comment

            Latest Activity

            Collapse

            • Enforcement of Nuisance Clause
              by comm1985
              What can a freeholder do to a leaseholder who is subletting to a subtenant that is causing nuisance to the adjacent neighbours (anti social behaviour).

              Steps Taken so far:

              1) A police complaint against the subtenant has already been raised by the adjacent neighbours.
              ...
              15-08-2022, 10:00 AM
            • S146 manipulation
              by Granger
              Interested to get thoughts on this issue.
              Managing Agent A has ties to solicitor B. Block Company C has a flat owner D who was in arrears of, say, £1500.
              A advises C that D must be taken to court. B runs up costs of say £8000 preparing case and in anticipation of S146 follow through....
              13-08-2022, 15:25 PM
            • Reply to S146 manipulation
              by Granger
              Another option? Could the block company directors refer matters to their Indemnity Insurers and leave the insurers and rogue solicitor to fight it out rather than either the flat owner or freeholder finishing up paying inflated and unwarranted fees? If the freeholder directors were found not liable...
              15-08-2022, 10:00 AM
            • Reply to Freehold shared parking question
              by Neeeeeeeeeek10
              Thanks lawmaker. there is another planning application (which I refer to earlier) from a few years ago, I am trying to get a colour copy of that as it identifies the exact area existing flat owners with parking in the deeds are allowed to use, it's the forecourt so we know this is the area which he...
              15-08-2022, 08:36 AM
            • Freehold shared parking question
              by Neeeeeeeeeek10
              We have bought a freehold flat which is one of the few flats in the building that has parking permission in the deeds. There are only a few spaces so it isn't allocated and only the flats that have it in the deeds can park in them. The person who owns the freehold to the shared areas and I assume the...
              08-08-2022, 17:51 PM
            • Reply to S146 manipulation
              by eagle2
              The agent and the solicitor would definitely know what they were doing and have an idea of the costs involved. There are different ways of the agent being rewarded but obtaining proof is difficult. To be fair, the management company should be able to rely on advice given to it by an agent and it has...
              15-08-2022, 05:21 AM
            • Ground Rent review
              by Century
              United Scientific Holdings v Burnley Borough Council

              Does this case mean that for a residential lease failure to give notice of GR increase during the review period doesn't matter? I.e review can be at any time, even after specified review date?
              11-08-2022, 14:47 PM
            • Reply to Ground Rent review
              by sgclacy
              Bello v Ideal View [2009 EWHC 2808 QB] the landlord sought in 2007 to implement a rent review due under a lease in 1994. Following the determination of the new rent the landlord claimed the increased rent due for the entire 13-year period between 1994 and 2007. In this case the landlord was success...
              14-08-2022, 21:55 PM
            • Would water ingress be considered nuisance in accordance with the lease
              by Starlane
              The flat above one of our tenants has caused two separate water ingress issues to the flat below June and August, the issue is apparently either a faulty slow leaking stop cock or washing machine. They have asked to see a plumbers report and apparently there isnt one .The MA said no insurance claim...
              14-08-2022, 16:56 PM
            • Reply to Would water ingress be considered nuisance in accordance with the lease
              by scot22
              Lawcruncher is someone who knows better. Ignore my post.
              14-08-2022, 19:39 PM
            Working...
            X