Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'sinking'.
Found 2 results
Hi all, I'm giving myself brain ache with this so I hope someone can help me out? Long (looooooooooong!) story short, my Aunt leased a retirement bungalow in 2011 from a company called Anchor. She paid a monthly service charge which went up every year. Sadly she passed away in June 2016, but the property only sold a few months ago. When my Mum, as the co-executor with her [utterly useless] brother, got the Statement of Account from the solicitor (who has NOT acted on her behalf in any way, shape or form) we noticed they'd paid Anchor almost £8,500.00 for a "Sinking Fund". We'd never heard of one of these so have been asking the solicitor what it was for. We received a letter from Anchor, via the solicitor, stating that they take this charge when the tenant sells the property. They included a lease from 1996. Yes, you read that right, 1996! It was not signed by my Aunt. Because she didn't buy the bungalow until 15 years later. We wrote directly to Anchor asking for the correct copy of the lease, including my Aunt's signature. Well, today we got what I grudgingly refer to as a response, which is to say they just doubled-down on what they'd already sent via the solicitor. *Le sigh*. Now, from the research I've done I believe a company like Anchor can charge either a Service Charge OR a Sinking Fund, but not both. Is this right? I mean, even if a Sinking Fund was set up in addition, surely you'd pay it whilst living in the property, not after you sell it? You'd not benefit otherwise. Not that my Aunt benefited anyway; she had numerous issues with the bungalow, including an ill fitting front door, damp and consequent mould issues to name but three and Anchor never addressed these problems. She ended up paying out of her own money to get them fixed! I read this article today: https://www.leaseholdknowledge.com/cherry-trees It's interesting because this is also Anchor and in this instance the people did not pay a service charge. So it seems to me it's a one-rule-for-one situation. It's clear that, since they've already got the money thanks to the completely incompetent solicitor, they're not going to send the requested information, I mean why would they? So the next step is to get Mum's solicitor involved, but I'd like to know if I'm fighting a lost cause here. Does anyone have any experience with these funds at all? I'd appreciate any info. Thanks in advance, Fen.
Hi all I hope I'm posting in the right place / as briefly as possible - my mother bought a conservatory in 2007. The firm that installed it dissolved in 2010, but a new one emerged effectively in its place - same family, same premises, same telephone number, basically the same name etc. Towards the end of 2013 one side of the conservatory started sinking into the ground because the foundations had been incorrectly measured (this is the assessment of several parties who have inspected it). The first quote has estimated the repair at around £4k. The 10-year guarantee only covered the glass / frame (despite the pack from the firm [incorrectly] claiming that the footings were also covered). I'm assuming liability ended with the previous firm, but as I'm obviously not an expert is this the case / are there any options my mother might pursue, such as the individuals as they are the same from the original firm, or any other thoughts. Many thanks in advance...