Jump to content

NewSAHD

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    619
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

NewSAHD last won the day on February 14 2011

NewSAHD had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

306 Excellent

About NewSAHD

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Yup And best avoid mentioning 'complaints', you are selling after all! You don't want to put the seller off, not if you can help it, any credit/debit due will be nominal when compared to the sale itself too Equally, you need to answer honestly when dealing with precontracts though, so probably best keep it simple, simply say something to your Solicitor to the effect that - you understand that there may be a credit due for previous Service Charges - you'd like Solicitors acting for the various parties to deal with the formalities of credits/debits, so that the expected credit is made in your favour, if at all possible - and ask that the various parties are contacted when the Year End accounts are finalised, so the credits/debits can be sorted and files then closed It 'should' be straightforward, might be worth asking the HA (politely) when do they anticipate finalising the Year End accounts too
  2. Hi, wouldn't it be quicker to - speak with the Solicitors dealing with the sale, explain the situation - ask for this to be taken in to account at time of completion by way of retentions - and once the finalised Service Charge accounts are available have the appropriate credit / debit made in favour of the soon to be ex-leaseholder... If there's a credit due in your friend's favour then the respective Solicitors acting for the vendor / purchaser can deal with this No need to get the HA involved... save for them to provide the figures in due course Sorry if I've missed something, put it down to the late hour! Cheers, NewSAHD PS andydd, hi, been awhile, hope all is well !
  3. Oops. Just seen this original post is from 2009!
  4. Human rights? Sorry, I can't really comment on the 'human rights' angle of your post - but hopefully this message will serve as a 'bump' for those who CAN offer some useful feedback... I've not been on CAG for awhile either, but hope the following DOES help you in some way Last year I did not enjoy my time signing on - three young children, two of whom had to come in to the JC with me, other claimants in the queues acting like idiots, in front of my children too (yet the staff, in the main, we're very pleasant...save one, as I recall), waiting times beyond what was reasonable, just not a great experience I had a similar experience as you with the Diary too though, but had repeatedly told the JC that the little piece of paper I was given to fill in was worthless to me... Why? Because I WAS actively seeking work, but, INSTEAD, I kept a spreadsheet documenting my job search (it helped me diarise follow ups / cross reference etc) and most times I took a printed copy of it to the JC The few occasions I forget to do bring it in the staff were generally OK, as they recognised me, but on a couple of occasions I had to jump through all sort of hoops Really painful, especially when I could see other claimants (you got to recognise the faces) just swan in, sign on, and walk out with barely a word exchanged between them and the JC staff member... I think what I mean to say is that I can understand why you might refuse to fill in a JC JobSearch Diary, but - as with my (fortunately successful) argument with the JC, I could easily show what I was doing and when through use of my own spreadsheet I'm worried for you then that you may not have the same argument against the JC to show what you're doing, if so, what are you doing to keep track of your job search? Sorry, in typing that I can see how that could be misconstrued as me having a pop, but I feel for you, and having read your post keep thinking "the best line of defense is offense" and seek to side step the issue in some way. In my case I got some grief from the JC for using my spreadsheet, but could show I was actively seeking work - are you able to do the same in some way? Copy emails, that sort of thing? Best I go, but hope that helps...
  5. Sad sam, sorry to read of your troubles Andy, hi, it's been awhile... Sad sam, I always read what andydd has to say with some interest, but here I'm sure he will agree that you and your fellow leaseholders really need to seriously consider getting a suitably experienced firm of solicitors on board as soon as you can. If you can do it collectively as all leaseholders together that could be useful, as you could also be in to the realms of : - using the LVT for your own ends, to question the reasonableness of all charges, including insurances and the like, - reviewing time constraints on accounts (namely Landlord & Tenant Act requirements, as well as Companies House) - as well as considering Right to Manage (basically removing the Agent on a "no fault" basis), - acquiring the Freehold and so on That said, continue to post anonymously here, if you wish, as there can be much that is helpful on CAG - plus, it helps others in a similar predicament, which is no bad thing For now, though, please can you confirm a) whether you are in England & Wales? (I ask as the legal framework to work within will be different elsewhere) b) how many leaseholders/flats are there in your block? c) are all leaseholders facing the same problems? you say 'we amongst others', but how widespread is the problem? d) is it a purpose built, self contained block, or does it include any commerical premises? e) you refer to the M&A, but who are the Directors of the RMC? Can you PM me the Companies House number, as all that is needed here can be obtained for a pound or two online. Do not post any information here that could identify you by the way, PM so as to stay anonymous. Trust that's OK f) what is the name of your Agent and Freeholder (again, do NOT post their details here, but please feel free to PM me if you are OK doing so. I will only use whatever you send me to assist and will not disclose the same to any third party) g) what is the name of the 'heavyweight' solicitiors (again, please PM, same as above applies here too) It's the lease that drives it all in the first place, but there can be some quite strict time constraints on accounts and paperwork hoops for Agents / Freeholders to jump through before they can legally, successfully recover unpaid Service Charges. Incidentally, is any Ground Rent (over)due too? Look forward to hearing from both you and andydd too in due course Hope that helps and bye for now
  6. Rarely come on to CAG now, but saw the post, above, and thought...er, hang on a bit CAG seems, to me, to serve a useful purpose at times, best not to knock it too much. So, with that in mind, why did you come here in the first place? Did you find CAG to be generally quite useful when you needed assistance too? Hope so The pub analogy is probably a useful one though, save that most here seem to make it clear they are NOT lawyers (unlike a pub, perhaps ) and most here certainly seemed to say 'seek proper advice' too. That said, I recall Aequitas may have a 'legal' background out in the real world though, but that's by the by My relatively limited experience of CAG, however, is that a number of the posters on CAG are rather more competant than you appear to give them credit. CAG has certainly helped me when I needed it, which is probably one of the main reasons I visit CAG when time allows Pub banter, or not, there's clearly a wealth of experience to be gleaned from forums such as CAG - and reading around the subject can do the OP no harm; they can then, perhaps, make a more informed decision too. That sounds quite a reasonable thought too Incidentally, why did you come to CAG in the first place - and what then made you visit this particular topic all this time after? And I'm curious as to whether you have any connection whatsoever in companies that operate in this field. Please accept those queries in the spirit of CAG too, which is largely anonymous anyway, but I trust you will appreciate the reason for asking At the very least, I now know that to "give a black dog for a white monkey" is, according to google, 'an old naval way of expressing a fair exchange - a quid pre quo.' And as Diggy's last words were "I am expecting a full and concise written offer, explaining how this will be made legal and safe, I'll be back then!" , well, should Diggy ever return I'd be curious as to the outcome of that too... Cheers then and bye for now
  7. Not been on CAG for a little while, but really pleased to return to hear your news! When I read that your friend was "...asked if they would like be in a forum which they want to setup for people in there circumstances to have a say and help improve services." I had to chuckle too... Especially as I also then read that your friend "noticed that the above information was contradicting all the housings information and documentation to tenants. Also the housing was quoting paragraphs from Acts but not the full paragraph as if they put the full paragraph it was there in black and white." caro is dead right, CAG certainly seems to help "Empower... people to stand up for their rights" Be interested to hear when your friend accepts that invitation too It was not right that they had to put up with what they did and neither should anyone else Does all beg quite a few other questions though, such as who had responsibility for the HA approach to repairs / publications too in the first case...? But that's a whole other can of worms and for now just pleased to hear how it all seems to have turned out for the best!
  8. Steve_M "Get someone else to view the video, preferably an awkward sod, and see if they agree with you. Don't ask a mate who'd back you up whatever! Also it may be a good idea to write down a transcript of the recording for your defence. Maybe you could post bits of the transcript here to see what others think (not me cos I'm going on holiday in a few minutes)." I recall that a taped conversation is not admissable, but a transcript of it is... First though, it may well be that you can use the contents of the same to cast a huge shadow over his intergrity as a landlord/witness If you haven't already thought to do so, of course, I'd be minded not to let him know of the recording. Instead, produce your transcript and - by way of an exchange of letters / emails - use the content of the same to confirm your clear understanding of what the two of you had agreed, without reference to the recording, of course Let him then flatly deny it, or fabricate some alternative reality, before you, later, consider raising the spectre of the recording I'd be interested to view the transcript and/or hear what several Awkward Sods have to say about it. Plus, on the bright side, you should find quite a few AS's on CAG to comment too, of which I am sometimes one
  9. Ed999, I've read your other posts with some interest, and andydd and I have swopped messages before, so (for whatever it is worth) I think he and I have the measure of each other (andy, hi, btw ) but leasehold disputes really need not be daunting for leaseholders Blondie1973 needs to go back through the lease, if not done already (posting here and elsewhere if any queries) Also, the Residential Property Tribunal Service website http://www.rpts.gov.uk/ is quite easy to search through previous determinations - and can also be used to check / research quite what an Agent may really be like too I take the general point about always (seriously) considering seeking independant legal advice, but cannot (fully) agree that only a Solicitor will win such a case. Solicitors can be good and bad in, perhaps, equal measure - so Blondie1973 will do no harm at all to do some digging of his/her own, which can include posting on CAG and so on And on further reflection - and at the very least - this message will serve as a bump...
  10. EmmaH92, hi, I'm posting this on the off chance you return to this forum... If you haven't done so already, simply contact both your Local Authority Environmental Health Officer, who should certainly be able to assist - and also your Student Union Rep who may be able to help out too The LA 'EHO' may take a short while to come back to you (some EHO's can be very busy), but if you briefly summarise the problems you are experiencing they will inspect as soon as they can - and will tend then to formally write to the Landlord on your behalf too, which should make things easier for you There are many other questions to ask (are you in England/Wales? is your Deposit protected? were you provided with an Inventory, that you accepted? has the Gas Boiler got any safety certificate? were you supplied with an electrical appliances that have a plug? and so on...) BUT for now get on to the EHO if you haven't already and post back here when you can
  11. BUT the costs STILL need to be 'reasonable' , otherwise they can be challenged in the LVT too Also, even if, on the face of it, the cost of works seems to be below the level needed for consultation, what was the TOTAL cost for the job, inclusive of all VAT, fees, disbursements and administrative costs and so on.... over the years I've seen Agents try and split bills etc, so as to try and keep the cost of works below the level needed for consultation... sometimes successfully, sometimes not So, in Blondie1973's case, what was the total, overall costs? And, back to Andy's point of "it still may if one leaseholder had to pay more than £250, this happens sometimes if not everyone pays an equal %" does every lease require every leaseholder to pay the same %?
  12. Blondie1973, a small apology, haven't really been around, but quickly read through the posts with some interest - and some concern. Few quick questions for you: a) Why were the repairs to the pool needed so soon in the life cycle of the equipment? What reasons did the Agent give - and did you have any thoughts as to whether the Agent's reasons were valid, or not? b) I'm a little concerned as to why you (and other leaseholders) are being asked to effectively make up the shortfall due to the '10-flat owner' not paying - so, who IS your Agent and who IS your Freeholder (pls PM the details as before). If there is a Freeholder then the Agent should be approaching the Freeholder in the first instance to forward fund the shortfall, get a money judgement, then recover the shortfall from the '10-flat owner' - and should NOT be asking the other leaseholders to make up the shortfall.... unless, of course, there is no separate, third-party Freeholder in the background... the money has to come from somewhere (subject to what the lease says etc) Please advise - and hope all that is clear, as typed at speed!
  13. Sorry to come in at the tail end of a thread, but there's a thought niggling away - trust OK to share and in no way do I wish to offer false hope In no particular order - is the Agent a member of any professional governing body? RICS would be useful, NAEA, ARLA, and ARMA are others to look for... - is the Agent a small independant, or part of a larger chain i.e. one with a potentially more 'useful' complaints procedure - Misrepresentation Act 1967 ? How much can you document, or prove though? - Property Misdescriptions Act 1991 does not apply to rentals, as I recall (although, personally, always acted as if it did) Personally, I'd document what I can with regards the 'misrepresentation', but use it to negotiate your way to an earlier leaving date Not sure, typed at speed, but hope this may help Good luck in whatever you do PS With regards "there are no limits on when they can start or stop work." - and only from personal experience - it really does depend on the Local Authority
  14. 'Decent' buildings insurance cover would tend to cover damage done to the fabric of the building (redecoration etc) - and should also include for 'trace and access' cover, if the source of the water leak is not obvious. From an Agent's perspective that's a useful thing to have In your scenario (the 'accidental water leak') it would just be one of those things - and relatively simple to resolve Here, though, you have a tenant who has not once, but twice, caused a problem (the second incident arguably being worse, perhaps) - and it is at this point that the tenant's liability and, to my mind, their landlord's responsibility is coming in to play The landlord of the flat may have been unaware of what was going on, but if they left plumbing for the tenant to plumb in a washing machine, did they at any point say to their tenant "please ensure you plumb the machine in properly, if you are are uncertain tell me, and I will do it myself, or get an engineer in for you - otherwise I will hold you responsible for any damage done" Also, the other tenant's should have had contents insurance, but surely they can still pursue the tenant / landlord for damage done? (answer, yes, but legally can they - which is the point of this thread?) And, if so, do you pursue a 'man of straw'? I think that's the phrase Really got to go, but will check back in later!
  15. MrShed, hi, jumping straight in, as off out the door shortly... All these years dealing first hand with water leaks (just for starters) and you're making me reconsider my position here - one that has never been argued against (successfully) out in the so called real world Slick132 says "Tenant failed to properly tighten T's w/m hose to LL's w/m connector tap - this was witnessed and established, without doubt" and, further, when the problem was identified the tenant made the problem worse - resulting in damage to two flats (which, tbh, takes some doing) The landlord is not negligent here, perhaps*, the tenant is, but I've always (successfully, again, sorry) resolved this sort of thing by directing all 'formal' dealings to the leaseholder - whilst having 'polite' chats with all concerned, to ensure the focus is still on the tenant. I accept that the 'polite' threat of legal/admin costs being added to Service Charge may help matters along, but I gather from our earlier exchanges that you may have ready access to your inhouse legal team (so to speak), so I'm interested in what you say here To my mind there may, perhaps, be at least two conversations to be had here I agree with your point "Even if (for example) the property was unoccupied and there was a burst pipe, causing damage to the property below - the owner would only be responsible IF that burst pipe had occurred due to negligence. If the owner can show things such as, heating left on, insulation in place, etc, he would NOT be liable for the damage." but that's not the issue here, to my mind. If I were the Agent I would treat the scenario above as 'one of those things', let the Insurers/contractors resolve it - and simply Service Charge the policy excess to the block as a whole. Simple - with no extra "s" in there either The difference here, perhaps, is that the Tenant has arguably been negligent / committed 'waste' - and whilst they could be the first point of contact, it simplifies matters to simply direct all dealings against the leaseholder... Hmm. I'm now beginning to doubt this. Would welcome further comments here too! EDIT - added * (although there may be some mileage in knowing if the landlord knew a washing machine was to be installed and did they leave instructions with the tenant over the same?)
×
×
  • Create New...