Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Management company introducing parking fees

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    banjopaul
    Registered Users Posts: 931 ✭✭✭banjopaul


    laugh wrote: »
    Stick up that part of your lease in a common area, other people might not realise.

    Excellent idea. I'll wait for a reply to my email first.


  • Options
    #33
    Kings Inns or bust
    Closed Accounts Posts: 631 ✭✭✭Kings Inns or bust


    banjopaul wrote: »
    The legitimacy of the introduction of the fee is the same regardless of who was introducing it, that's all I was asking about, so I can't see what the nitpicking is actually achieving here.

    It would matter due to privity of contract and the practical issues that would create. I attempted to assist you and I attempted to clarify the situation so I could assist further. You may see that as nit picking, just as I may draw my own conclusion on what sort of fellow you are when people attempt to be helpful, especially ones with a, modest to be sure, legal background and a directorship in what's considered quite a good OMC.

    I'll leave you to it so.


  • Options
    #34
    laugh
    Registered Users Posts: 3,745 ✭✭✭laugh


    Kings Inns or bust wrote: »
    It would matter due to privity of contract and the practical issues that would create. I attempted to assist you and I attempted to clarify the situation so I could assist further. You may see that as nit picking, just as I may draw my own conclusion on what sort of fellow you are when people attempt to be helpful, especially ones with a, modest to be sure, legal background and a directorship in what's considered quite a good OMC.

    I'll leave you to it so.

    In what circumstances would the provision of a parking space with the apartment in his lease agreement be invalid and require payment of the 50 euro a month by him?


  • Options
    #35
    jd
    Registered Users Posts: 5,700 ✭✭✭jd


    banjopaul wrote: »
    Thanks! Not sure why everyone else is getting so bogged down on technicalities.
    Because it will help us to figure out what is going on.
    I'll put it another way, are all the apartments in the complex owned by the same company/person. There is nobody there that owns their own apartment?


  • Options
    #36
    banjopaul
    Registered Users Posts: 931 ✭✭✭banjopaul


    Kings Inns or bust wrote: »
    It would matter due to privity of contract and the practical issues that would create. I attempted to assist you and I attempted to clarify the situation so I could assist further. You may see that as nit picking, just as I may draw my own conclusion on what sort of fellow you are when people attempt to be helpful, especially ones with a, modest to be sure, legal background and a directorship in what's considered quite a good OMC.

    I'll leave you to it so.

    Are you sure you were a director of quite a good OMC? Just asking because of the frequent misuse of colloquial parlance in relation to this subject. You may have meant a property management company? You might have it right, which is an infrequent occurrence. In fact I suspect that it is not.

    Incidentally you misused the term 'helpful' to my mind.


    I trust that the point is now better explained?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    banjopaul
    Registered Users Posts: 931 ✭✭✭banjopaul


    jd wrote: »
    Because it will help us to figure out what is going on.
    I'll put it another way, are all the apartments in the complex owned by the same company/person. There is nobody there that owns their own apartment?

    Yep!
    laugh wrote: »
    In what circumstances would the provision of a parking space with the apartment in his lease agreement be invalid and require payment of the 50 euro a month by him?

    Thanks, exactly what I was thinking.


  • Options
    #38
    Glass fused light
    Registered Users Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭Glass fused light


    Kings Inns or bust wrote: »
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by banjopaul
    The legitimacy of the introduction of the fee is the same regardless of who was introducing it, that's all I was asking about, so I can't see what the nitpicking is actually achieving here. End quote


    If it's the OMC themselves and they've made the decision he might have some luck having a chat.

    It's not, to my knowledge, yet been tested to see if an ancillary charge in addition to the rent is considered and upwards rent review. Each case is going to turn on it's own facts. This one is fairly easy: What does the lease state about parking? That would be the main issue here.

    I agree that if the OP's contract allows that the fee as an ancillary charge it's payable. I was assuming* that the Appartment and 1 space were fundamental to the contract, therefore any charge for the space was a de facto rent increase.

    * I think we both agree that I would be wise to saddle that ass before riding:D

    OP the legitimacy of the introduction of the fee is not same regardless of who was introducing it.

    You have a contract with a landlord and both are bound by it. One of the protections the law provides is that there is now an additional term which only allows the rent increase every 2 years. As this was given to you by a change in the law 'trumps' existing terms about rent changes.

    Your landlord has a separate contract with the OMC and both are bound by it. The landlord has no protection if the contract provides that a parking fee can be charged, the landlord has to pay. It just happens that both the landlord and OMC may be the same company.

    In your case assuming that the space is fundemental not ancillary it falls under the protection of law, the charge is legitimate and the landlord pays the OMC, but the cash stays in the one bank account and the landlord can't by law pass the charge on to you.

    If the space is not covered under the law,the charge is legitimate, but now the landlord passes the charge and money moves from your account to the landlords account.

    Edit IMO


  • Options
    #39
    jd
    Registered Users Posts: 5,700 ✭✭✭jd


    Because it will help us to figure out what is going on.
    I'll put it another way, are all the apartments in the complex owned by the same company/person. There is nobody there that owns their own apartment?
    banjopaul wrote: »
    Yep!



    .

    Ok, so it seems a REIT or similar owns the whole complex and rent out apartments. There is not an OMC as such.
    It looks like anarbitrary increase in rent to me, however they term it.


  • Options
    #40
    BrokenArrows
    Registered Users Posts: 7,498 ✭✭✭BrokenArrows


    I think its pretty clear that your lease includes the apartment and a parking space in exchange for your monthly rent.

    If they want to charge 50 per month for parking thats not your problem and you are entitled to the parking space without paying it.

    Whoever the landlord is (doesn't matter if its a management company or not) will have to swallow this cost of this 50 per month.


  • Options
    #41
    Caliden
    Registered Users Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭Caliden


    These increases or additional charges for services that were free up until now seems to becoming more widespread.

    There was a thread a week ago about a management company adding a monthly refuse charge on top of management fees (where it was paid for previously).

    That was also for a large apartment building.


    Is this a new loophole management companies are using to increase rent while bypassing the 2 year rent freeze?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Baby01032012
    Registered Users Posts: 1,622 ✭✭✭Baby01032012


    Any change in relation to management fees, parking etc. are between the OMC and the unit owner, not between OMC and the tenant. If it so happens that the OMC and the landlord are the same it makes no difference, they can not pass the charge onto the tenant. Especially as the parking space was already mentioned in the lease. The tenant is contracted to pay the rent which includes the provision of a parking space.


  • Options
    #43
    Baby01032012
    Registered Users Posts: 1,622 ✭✭✭Baby01032012


    Caliden wrote: »
    These increases or additional charges for services that were free up until now seems to becoming more widespread.

    There was a thread a week ago about a management company adding a monthly refuse charge on top of management fees (where it was paid for previously).

    That was also for a large apartment building.


    Is this a new loophole management companies are using to increase rent while bypassing the 2 year rent freeze?

    OMC are generally not landlords, they are the collective unit holders. They work for the owners. Refuse charges are becoming much higher so some owners/omc are Charging for this outside the budget. Landlord as with management fees has to pick up the tab. Nothing to do with by passing my two year rule on rent review.


  • Options
    #44
    Caliden
    Registered Users Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭Caliden


    Baby01032012 wrote: »
    OMC are generally not landlords, they are the collective unit holders. They work for the owners. Refuse charges are becoming much higher so some owners/omc are Charging for this outside the budget. Landlord as with management fees has to pick up the tab. Nothing to do with by passing my two year rule on rent review.

    Passing it on as a charge mid lease could be an issue though depending on how the lease is worded.


  • Options
    #45
    Baby01032012
    Registered Users Posts: 1,622 ✭✭✭Baby01032012


    Caliden wrote: »
    Passing it on as a charge mid lease could be an issue though depending on how the lease is worded.

    My point was that they can't pass on to the tenant. Same way they can't pass on repair/ maintenance of the lifts via the management fee. This is a charge on the owner not the tenant. Landlord can of course take it into account for the next valid rent review.


  • Options
    #46
    Caliden
    Registered Users Posts: 5,982 ✭✭✭Caliden


    Baby01032012 wrote: »
    My point was that they can't pass on to the tenant. Same way they can't pass on repair/ maintenance of the lifts via the management fee. This is a charge on the owner not the tenant. Landlord can of course take it into account for the next valid rent review.

    Ah ok, my mistake.


  • Options
    #47
    Stealthfins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,141 ✭✭✭Stealthfins


    Somebody on the board decided that if everyone pays 50 Euro a month it'll be enough to cover their bad debts such as apartments in Bulgaria and some fictitious island off the coast of Kilkenny.

    The powers that be will try and take an extra tenner off every one every week.

    That's 520 per year.


  • Options
    #48
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Baby01032012 wrote: »
    My point was that they can't pass on to the tenant. Same way they can't pass on repair/ maintenance of the lifts via the management fee. This is a charge on the owner not the tenant. Landlord can of course take it into account for the next valid rent review.

    However- in this case- the waters are murkied- by virtue of the fact that the Management Company- is also the Landlord.......... I.e. they are trying to wear a second hat, and impose fees as a Management Company- rather than as a landlord- because they are one and the same.........

    Whatever way you look at it- it is an increase by the back door- and tenants should dispute it to the fullest extent possible............

    REITs in particular seem to be playing this game- and indeed, are uniquely placed to do so- whether they are allowed get away with it or not- remains to be seen.........

    Given the fact that REITs aren't even paying tax here- where regular landlords are- I would argue they deserve significant oversight over and above that of regular landlords- as they are getting away with riding roughshod over everyone- esp. the taxpayers of Ireland...........


  • Options
    #49
    Turtle_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 640 ✭✭✭Turtle_


    The_Conductor wrote: »

    Whatever way you look at it- it is an increase by the back door- and tenants should dispute it to the fullest extent possible............

    They'll probably argue that they're looking at it the other way - they're just not providing a parking service any more... They'll probably say that the tenants can avoid the extra charge by not availing of a parking space...

    Not saying they're right, just that they are likely to claim something similar.


  • Options
    #50
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Turtle_ wrote: »
    They'll probably argue that they're looking at it the other way - they're just not providing a parking service any more... They'll probably say that the tenants can avoid the extra charge by not availing of a parking space...

    Not saying they're right, just that they are likely to claim something similar.

    Good luck with that argument- the lease specifically states there is one space allocated per unit- and you can have additional spaces at a fee, if you require them...... So- it is a dimunition in a contractual agreement- to remove the space- or specify a fee for it- when they only provided for a future fee for additional spaces? If its viewed in this light- it becomes a civil matter between the tenant and the landlord.


  • Options
    #51
    ted1
    Registered Users Posts: 23,535 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    Turtle_ wrote: »
    All of which is irrelevant to the OP who is being charged €600pa for the first space.

    No he's getting one free the second space is chargeable


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Perhaps the OP could clarify that- is the first space continuing to be free- as per the lease- and is it only subsequent ones that are incurring the monthly charge- or are all spaces incurring the charge henceforth.


  • Options
    #53
    Turtle_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 640 ✭✭✭Turtle_


    Op already clarified the new charge is in relation to the first space.

    Ted, to clarify what I meant, he's now being charged €600 for the first space.


  • Options
    #54
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    The_Conductor wrote: »
    Perhaps the OP could clarify that- is the first space continuing to be free- as per the lease- and is it only subsequent ones that are incurring the monthly charge- or are all spaces incurring the charge henceforth.
    The_Conductor wrote: »
    The lease terms he has signed- allow for one space to be assigned per apartment on signing of the lease- and the charge applies to subsequent spaces. Its not clear from the OP's post- that the 50 Euro a month applies to space no. 1- and if it does- if the wording of the lease is as he states- he has legitimate grounds to dispute it (obviously not for subsequent spaces)............

    The wording is key to all of this- from what the OP has quoted- they are home and dry.



    Yeah just to confirm charge is introduced for first space which has been free for last 18 months.[/quote]


  • Options
    #55
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,455 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    The_Conductor wrote: »
    Perhaps the OP could clarify that- is the first space continuing to be free- as per the lease- and is it only subsequent ones that are incurring the monthly charge- or are all spaces incurring the charge henceforth.

    They did...
    banjopaul wrote: »
    Have sent an email disputing this now, thanks everyone.
    The_Conductor wrote: »
    The lease terms he has signed- allow for one space to be assigned per apartment on signing of the lease- and the charge applies to subsequent spaces. Its not clear from the OP's post- that the 50 Euro a month applies to space no. 1- and if it does- if the wording of the lease is as he states- he has legitimate grounds to dispute it (obviously not for subsequent spaces)................

    The wording is key to all of this- from what the OP has quoted- they are home and dry.

    Yeah just to confirm charge is introduced for first space which has been free for last 18 months.


Advertisement