The Mega **Management Company** thread

Paulw

athtrasna wrote: »

You have no chance!! The way fees go is you sign a legal document that you will pay them, you pay them and then you can query the budget at the next AGM. By not paying fees you have negatively impacted the financial position of your management company.

As has been said, this is totally correct. You haven't a hope of winning a case.

Why don't you put yourself forward to be a director of your management company?

If you want to talk about laws - law of contract, tenancy law, company law all apply. Read your Lease Contract, and see what it says.

Bottom line, if you don't pay your fees, then the management company is well within their rights to take you to court (and they will almost always win).

clone307

" every year some directors have to resign and every shareholder is entitled to become a director, all you have to do is be nominated and seconded by another member. you can have as many directors as the number of shareholders."

the mamagement company is run by the builder is there a set number of years the can be directors like this person say and how could i be come a director thanks you for ur help

Paulw

clone307 wrote: »

the mamagement company is run by the builder is there a set number of years the can be directors like this person say and how could i be come a director thanks you for ur help

This will depend on your management company and it's articles of association. There is no simple answer to the question since it differs from company to company.

clone307

would that be in ur lease the Articles of association thank you paulw

Paulw

No, your Lease Contract is very different from the management company Articles of Association.

You (and your solicitor) should have a copy of your Lease Contract, while the Articles of Association can be found on the CRO website (specifically associated with your management company).

A combination of these documents will give you the best guide as to what you must do and what powers you have.

o2bearebel

Many thanks to paulw, markpb and others for their useful advise here.

I've a question regards the new MUD bill which should come into force once passed in the Dail during this coming autumn. I'm secretary of a management company in west Dublin which has recently taken control from the builder/developer who have been managing since the estate was built back around 2000. We've made many improvements over the last 1-2 years and to give credit where due, KPM who are our management agents have been helpful in turning the estate around for the best also. We're fortunate that the estate is small (less than 50 apartments)

My concern is with overdue debt. We've over eur 80k owed to us by owners which has built up over the years. We're now threatening to start charging interest on these amounts as allowed for in lease contract. How is the MUD bill designed to help management companies recoup long overdue debt ? Is it designed to be more helpful to the owner or to the management company ? For example, we've two owners who each owe over eur8k each. I'd like to make an example of these folks first. Any ideas for best way to collect such overdue fees ? While the majority of owners have been paying mangement fees, some owners have refused stating lack of service. KPM have been slow to go down the legal route. At all times (even under the developer) - bins have been collected, blocks have been insured and gardens were maintained (albeit - minimal maintenance at times) - Ideas ?

Paulw

The MUD (as you call it), will simplify the route for taking people to court for outstanding debt.

Collecting debt is always a hassle. We've the same problem.

Adding interest is something we did. It did have some effect. But, yes, there are always those who don't want to pay and make reasons/excuses.

The legal route is long and complex. We haven't gone through that yet. You can use solicitors and debt collection agencies/solicitors who tend to have some good too.

There is no real quick and easy way to being in money.

o2bearebel

It would be good to hear from those who have taken the legal route. How long did it take to get a final judgement, were costs awarded to management company for persuing overdue fees, pitfalls to watch for ?
Are there specialists dealing in debt collection for management companies ?

cheers.

Jennypops

o2bearebel wrote: »

It would be good to hear from those who have taken the legal route. How long did it take to get a final judgement, were costs awarded to management company for persuing overdue fees, pitfalls to watch for ?
Are there specialists dealing in debt collection for management companies ?

cheers.

Hi,

Results from courts can always vary and it entirely depends on the individualities of each case. some are straight forward and some not so. the judge may award costs, or may not. the leases generally only stipulate that interest is payable on overdue accounts and in my opinion this should always be applied within the timelines specified in the lease, this can prompt people to take notice. there is the option of handing debtd to a debt collection agency, this has the bonus that they will only receive a percentage of what the actually collect. once the debtors know that all outstanding accounts are being taken seriously they will have to face up to paying what they owe. obviously where someone is in genuine dialogue with the mgt co then this should not be passed to a debt collector until there is just reason. ive seen the debt collection route be extremely successful and far quicker and more cost effective than simply throwing money at a solicitor to write letters etc etc without yielding results in a quick manner...all too often ends up in court with no guarantee that the judge will even award the legal costs. Debt collection limits the never ending black hole of legally chasing someone via a solicitor and gets results and cheaper!
People will always have their opinions on whats right and wrong and debt collectors may be seen as a harsh way to do it but i think people also need to wake up to the facts of how mgt co's etc work....and what role members have to play in the running of it all. A lot of people feel witholding fees is a valid form of punishment against their grievances with the agent but they dont realise that this is a vicious circle and they need to look at what the proper way of getting a successful estate running entails- and then get involved!!

30kmph

I'm utterly disillusioned with my mgmt co's ability to compel the agents to get things done. Can anyone please advise how one goes about getting elected to the board of directors of one's mgmt company? We have an AGM coming up in July.

Paulw

Attend the AGM, put yourself forward to be a director. Simple as that. Well, you will still need someone to propose you, and also someone to second the proposal.

Normally, the hard part is finding people willing to be directors.

Best of luck.

nohopengn

30kmph wrote: »

I'm utterly disillusioned with my mgmt co's ability to compel the agents to get things done. Can anyone please advise how one goes about getting elected to the board of directors of one's mgmt company? We have an AGM coming up in July.

Assuming you've paid your maintenance fees, all you have to do is get someone to nominate you, someone else to second the motion and that's it, you're on the board. If you haven't paid then you probably don't have a vote and are not entitled to join the Board.

With regard to the managing agent (MA) - it might be helpful to read through the contract that was signed between the management company (MC) and your MA. There's a very good chance that they are not living up to expectations e.g. our MA is supposed to be on-site every two weeks. Typically they turn up maybe once every 4-5 weeks. It's a small issue, but if you can prove 'breach of contract' then you have every right to get rid of them. In our case I've done a lot of digging and have had to spend a few weeks tracking done what was supposed to have been done and what actually has been done.

At this stage I can prove beyond doubt that our MA has not delivered the required service, has overcharged and that one of our board has acted outside of his remit.

Do some financial digging, change the bank mandate so that the MA is not allowed to sign cheques. Instead make sure that all directors are on the cheque mandate and that every few months the directors rotate the cheque signing procedure - at least two directors should have to sign. at every board meeting were the MA attend, ask them to bring along the bank statements.

Do some corporate governance checking, demand to see the register of members and the register of directors and secretaries interests. Every member of the company is legally entitled to these documents and under the 1963 companies act they must be given to you within 10 days of requesting same. If they don't - and this is where it gets good - if they don't you can report them to the ODCE for breach of the afore mentioned 1963 Companies Act. Note:make sure you send a registered letter.

Over the last 5 months I've had a number of dealings with the ODCE and I must say they have been great. They are definitely on your side (and they are familiar with my rogue director). They want MCs' to be run properly. Remember your MA is only a sub-contractor. That's all. They have to respond to you.

Finally in our situation one of our board is as much a problem as the MA. As far as I'm concerned the two of them 'have their respective hands in the till'.

Getting rid of him is a problem because some of the other board members have been there for so long that they are 'taken in' by him.

My situation is not yet resolved and will probably take a few more months and we may have to change the 'memo and arts' in order to keep things safe in the future. I'll keep this thread updated as things progress.

Lastly, I don't think 3 year contracts are great (unless you have a good MA) - I would be more in favour of a two year contract (and make sure there's no roll-over).


p.s. do make changes to your articles of association so that no director is allowed to remain on the board (or be associated with the board - some people step down as directors and then become the secretary of the board) for more than say 3 or 5 consecutive years.

athtrasna

Check your articles of association...according to the ODCE handbook, directors have to be nominated two days in advance of an AGM?

nohopengn

athtrasna wrote: »

Check your articles of association...according to the ODCE handbook, directors have to be nominated two days in advance of an AGM?

athtrasna is absolutely right, check the Articles of Association.

one final point re:MUD. This bill has not yet been finalised however the managing agents have been lobbying hard to have their interests kept in place...

it is worth noting that in Germany (a far more advanced society than Ireland when it comes to Apt living) the majority of complexes are self-managed.

IMHO, generally speaking that's the way we should go. At the very least it would create local jobs, save owners money and improve the upkeep of many apartment developments.

Paulw

nohopengn wrote: »

it is worth noting that in Germany (a far more advanced society than Ireland when it comes to Apt living) the majority of complexes are self-managed.

IMHO, generally speaking that's the way we should go. At the very least it would create local jobs, save owners money and improve the upkeep of many apartment developments.

Self managed is fine in theory, as long as you have people available to provide the necessary services and do the work.

It would, most likely, cut some costs, but there's no guarantee that it would create any more jobs nor improve services.

nohopengn

Paulw wrote: »

Self managed is fine in theory, as long as you have people available to provide the necessary services and do the work.

It would, most likely, cut some costs, but there's no guarantee that it would create any more jobs nor improve services.

Think about it....... by employing full-time local janitors plus someone to look after the admin that would create jobs and as these resources are directly reporting to the MCs this also improves the service.

Presently that work is being carried out by MAs that generate significant profits and in most cases deliver poor service.

Paulw

nohopengn wrote: »

Think about it....... by employing full-time local janitors plus someone to look after the admin that would create jobs and as these resources are directly reporting to the MCs this also improves the service.

Presently that work is being carried out by MAs that generate significant profits and in most cases deliver poor service.

But, the MA generally employs contractors to perform the services. No new jobs would be created. Yeah, you would have to hire extra people to do all the admin, and other services, however, this may actually increase the cost of pure admin on the MC.

Not all MAs provide poor services. It would really depend on the MA. There are actually some good MAs out there.

Jennypops

Paulw wrote: »

But, the MA generally employs contractors to perform the services. No new jobs would be created. Yeah, you would have to hire extra people to do all the admin, and other services, however, this may actually increase the cost of pure admin on the MC.

Not all MAs provide poor services. It would really depend on the MA. There are actually some good MAs out there.

It is an interesting debate though because if you break down the costs, immediately by getting rid of the agent you save what they are charging you, which is some cases is crazy...
If the MC employed the contractors directly they can manage the services a lot better and pay the appropriate level of attention to what the site needs are...whereas if your estate is just lumped in with a load of others how much attention is really being paid to whats meant to be done...I know for the past 6 weeks no-body from my mgt co has been near my area, im looking at the same litter (which i would normally pick up without even thinking but am purposely leaving it there to see how long it takes for it to be removed, and i have notified the agent of this complaint and still no action) We pay for weekly attendance to our site by a member of the mgt agent staff to pick litter etc...this is in addition to the landscaper- who has also not been seen tending to anything other than grass cutting...which leaves me wondering why the landscaping spec includes weeding, spraying etc etc and this has not been done for months. It really does baffle me why a decent job seems so impossible to do..lots of promises at agms, no follow through. The Directors are the builders who have a very cosy relationship with the agent and it makes me sick the way they sit there at the agms all high and mighty and assuring everyone that yes they did put the agents role out to tender blah blah..well theres going to be a lot more than lip service expected now.

Sorry for rant!! Back to my point re MC employing directly, I think this would be a good way to go but the only thing that would have to be looked at is liability...if the mgt co is employing people directly then they would need to protect themselves and also ensure they are compliant with the relevant laws.

Paulw

Jenny - is that not down to how your management company monitors/instructs your management agent?

For managing the suppliers directly, this takes a lot of time and effort. Not everyone would have that time (and would they then also need to be paid for their time???).

Jennypops

Paulw wrote: »

Jenny - is that not down to how your management company monitors/instructs your management agent?

For managing the suppliers directly, this takes a lot of time and effort. Not everyone would have that time (and would they then also need to be paid for their time???).

oh absolutely its down to how the agents are monitored but when the members have no real authority or input is not taken on board by the agent when they are notified of complaints...thats why things will now be addressed to the directors, it is their responsibility to act in the best interests of the company ie the development, and not just in an easy life where they hand everything over to an agent who really do need to be managed properly.

you are right in the whole time thing, especially in the large sites as there would be considerable time...i guess my thinking is that employing one person full time to manage the admin etc etc would be far better and a decent level of service ( ie when you notify them of an issue it would be tended to in an acceptable time frame, not 3 weeks to get a response to an email with a comment that the works were done...when they quite obviously werent!!) would be fairly easy to achieve...

pinkypinky

Can a management company have employees though? You'd have to register as an employer, and pay PRSI/PAYE, etc. You'd also be obliged to provide a toilet for the employee, a place for them to have breaks, etc.

Paulw

pinkypinky wrote: »

Can a management company have employees though? You'd have to register as an employer, and pay PRSI/PAYE, etc. You'd also be obliged to provide a toilet for the employee, a place for them to have breaks, etc.

Very true. It's not as simple as employing someone. There are a lot of employment, as well as health and safety issues to consider.

jd

We got rid of the managing agent, now one of the directors looks after the day-to-day stuff, but he is getting paid for it.

pawnacide

I really can't understand why management agents don't do what they're contracted to do. If they're fiddling the books it would at least be an explanation. But surely their fees are set out at the start of the year in black and white and it's of no benefit to them not to spend the money as per prepared budgets.

Is it possible that when awarding contracts management companies go with the cheapest option and the winner just cant deliver the level of service within budget ?

Jennypops

pawnacide wrote: »

I really can't understand why management agents don't do what they're contracted to do. If they're fiddling the books it would at least be an explanation. But surely their fees are set out at the start of the year in black and white and it's of no benefit to them not to spend the money as per prepared budgets.

Is it possible that when awarding contracts management companies go with the cheapest option and the winner just cant deliver the level of service within budget ?

it all depends on whats in your budget..our mgt agent has their agents fees as listed on the budget, but they also make quite a substantial amount of money from other things ie litter picking etc etc, there is a weekly charge for someone to attend site and do some basic jobs like checking the doors to the apt blocks, litter etc...now when they have to then go and change a lightbulb thats an extra charge again...as for when contracts are awarded well that all is a whole other story..like who the preferred contractor is, why are they preferred etc etc...from my own experience theres an awful lot of really underhand things going on..maybe someday there will actually be thorough and proper regulation and transparency. im sure there are plenty of excellent agents out there, just from everything i know ( and having worked for one) i know what goes on...and its not pretty.

as for why they cant do what they are contracted to do...sure why would they waste time in taking pride in their work (and yes i class the service they subcontract out as a reflection on the agent also) they get their money either way...i dont think they care really...proactive and proper management is not something ive experienced...all just fire fighting when things go wrong.

How Strange

I've seen cases where the directors of the MC have no interest whatsoever in the day to day running of the property and trust the MA to run it as they see fit. There was no control on the cost of services, no regular meetings to discuss issues such as bad debts and finances and often times the MA had the cheque book. In essence a disaster waiting to happen BUT ultimately the fault has to rest with the directors of the MC when it hits the fan. They are charged with the role of running the estate.

I've seen MC's where they are totally involved in the running of the property. They know how much each service costs, whether it's benchmarked, how much bad debt they have, what's in the bank account and they had the cheque book so the MA had to meet them regularly to get invoices paid. These MC's were well run, well funded and generally nice places to live as the MC's took an active interest in antisocial problems and would directly involve themselves.

IMO, unless two or more directors have alot of spare time on their hands it isn't feasible to cut out the middle man. There is a lot of day-to-day office things that directors couldn't participate in if they had their own full time jobs. It may be that an MA can negotiate competitive contracts based on volume of business where one MC on it's own wouldn't have the same bargaining power. Also, the MA could have relationships with specialists so they have easy access to specialised information i.e. legal, insurance, engineering. These are things that can add value to an MC.

MC's employing janitors directly is a minefield because they are becoming employers and they have to ensure they are observing all the employment and health and safety laws. There is also annual leave, sick leave, PRSI among other costs to be considered as well as PRSA considerations.

IMO, and in my experience, an organised, interested group of directors of an MC can effectively engage an MA and get value from money from them but they have to be interested and active in the running of the property so that the MA is accountable to the MC just like in a business.

If an MA is skimming the funds or making additional profits by adding % onto service costs or not taking good care of the estate then the responsibility ultimately rests with the MC and it's directors.

Jennymac

Two-bedroomed flat in The Mill, Crossguns Quay, Phibsboro Road, 1,621.07 management fees to GLOCORPS, this is up 100E from last year. For this we get a part-time concierge ( have never seen him), the common area inside hall door and in lift cleaned. Ground outside front door where people throw thier butt ends (despite the presence of a cigarette bin) swept weekely. Cost includes rubbish bins for general rubbish and a few green bins. There is underground parking and the roller door has caused untold trouble since flats were built in 1990. The 'trouble' was mainly due to vandalism.
We have had four changes of management companies and this latest one appeared with the bill last month. I have to say that over the years I have always found each management company to be courteous and helpful and any request to them was always met with a prompt response. Last year we had an outbreak of cockroaches and a man came out immediately to lay traps and bait.
We have a sinking fund of 15,000 ( for unexpected eventualities), good insurance and get our windows cleaned once a year.
I still think our fees are high and was disappointed that they went up 100 E this year despite the recession. Would rather be in my own house with my own front door and front and back garden

jd

Jenny, you are talking about the management agent. Do the owners have control of the management company?

athtrasna

Jennymac wrote: »

We have a sinking fund of 15,000 ( for unexpected eventualities)

That sounds WAY too low, especially for a development with a lift. We have no lifts, mostly own door units and have about 50k in our fund (about 20k of this will be spent on a partial repaint this summer). If the MUD bill gets passed, there will be a mandatory contribution of €200 per unit per year to the sinking fund.

A sinking fund is for expected eventualities as well as those unexpected - painting of common areas and external walls, replacement of carpets, resurfacing the roads, to name but a few.

nohopengn

Jennymac wrote: »

We have a sinking fund of 15,000 ( for unexpected eventualities), good insurance and get our windows cleaned once a year.
I still think our fees are high and was disappointed that they went up 100 E this year despite the recession. Would rather be in my own house with my own front door and front and back garden

Jennymac, that sinking fund is really low and you could find yourself asking owners to cough up money if any serious work needs to be undertaken. Our sinking fund is over €250,000. That has raised another concern as our MA is not managing that properly either (not getting best rates etc..)

Re:employment, currently we employ a full-time janitor and he is part of the MC, not the MA. There are issues regarding tax, insurance, H&S etc. however these are all relatively straight-forward to implement and deal with.

IMHO H&S has been used in far to many instances to create issues where there aren't any. Once you've got decent insurance and act responsibly, you're fine.

As has already been stated, it's mainly to do with having pro-active owners that want to get involved. I have heard of some MCs' where Board directors do not have to pay maintenance fees and this seems to work very well.

Equally in some developments that are all investor owned, things don't seem to run as well and these are the 'sweet spots' for unscrupulous MAs.

Lastly, PaulW with regard to job creation. We have an MA that employs 50 people. They manage over 100 complexes. If the MA was removed and each complex employed two full-time people(could be owners) to replace the MA, that creates 200 jobs. 200 jobs is more that the current 50 employed by the MA.