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

Council refusing to take over small housing estate

Options
2

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 68,526 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    The councils bond is astoundingly unlikely to still exist. Many were 'insured' and ceased even before the development finished back then.

    Anyway, the management company was the body that needed to ensure they got handed over a usable situation not the council - and that management company is the residents, as few of them as there are. This is not the same situation as an estate that was intended from day 1 to go to council maintenance.



  • Registered Users Posts: 566 ✭✭✭GNWoodd


    Go back to the original planning permission . There should be a condition requiring a bond be put in place by the developer . Find out from the Council what happened with this bond - Has to be one of two things - either the bond is still in place ( the developer paying the annual fee to the bond provider / bank ) or the bond has lapsed. If it has lapsed, then the Council has questions to answer as to why they allowed it to lapse. It should simply have been called in, if it was the case that the developer wasn’t renewing the bond .That would have resulted in the bond provider paying the full sum to the Council which should have provided them with the funds to do the work if the developer wasn’t going to do it .

    Otherwise the Council is under no obligation to take over the estate if it isn’t to their satisfaction . And why should they ? At the end of the day it is local ratepayers that provide the funds to the Council for this type of work and why should a ratepayer fund what the developer should have completed. Council could have written to the developer multiple times listing deficiencies or they may not have written at all. Makes no odds to a takeover application if work is still outstanding .

    Where was your solicitor at the time of your purchase ? It is a basic requirement in any property conveyance that “ Roads and Services “ are confirmed to be in the charge of the County Council . This certification which is provided by the County Council ( but not by the planning section ) forms part of your title deeds for ever more .



  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    The estate is finished. The road in the estate collapsed in the first year. After having it checked, there is a vital layer of the sub-base missing. The residents were not to know this when buying the houses.

    Also, why should the residents be required to pay 60k to get an estate "up to scratch" if the council didn't fulfill their side of the enforcement order? Again, I'm coming back to their letter here. Forgetting the road, they pointed out other issues with the estate.

    When we were buying the house, everyone in the estate understood that it was a private estate. That's irrelevant as we all decided we wanted the estate taken over after moving in not before. Some residents still couldn't care less either way.

    I have to ask. If it's such an issue for the council taking over an estate they have so many issues with, why didn't they make sure it was built correctly in the first place and failing that, why did they care so much at the time that everything was done in a certain way. They made the developer dig up a perfectly good road at the time to widen it and add paths. According to early residents, how it was before was perfect. The enforcement order is what caused all of the issues we are having.

    The council should at least open up a conversation with us and provide information as to why the estate is the way it is. I understand it's not the tax payers problem but the council were the ones who set out how the estate should have been built and as the layers get stripped back it's clear that it wasn't done correctly.

    Post edited by n.d.os on


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    The council didn't build the estate, the council are not going to have somebody onsite fulltime to supervise the development and they are not going to start taking core samples when a development is complete to ensure the roads have been laid properly. The council sent an enforcement order but if the developer is gone who do they force to rectify the issues?

    Unless there was an agreement between the developer and council to take the development in charge post development you are out of luck and will have to apply to be taken over by the council. As part of that process the council will perform due diligence, the management company will need to rectify any issues found prior to the council taking over.

    The bond was probably returned to the developer once the estate was connected to council services (roads, water, waste) and after the estate was handed over to the property management company.

    Your problem is with the developer, if they no longer exist the problem is now the management companies. Its not fair but that's where you stand currently.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,297 ✭✭✭walterking


    There absolutely is no "law" whatsoever that says the council "must" take over an estate.


    Also, if most of the houses were purchase in 2012/2013, all the owners are sitting on VERY SUBSTANTIAL capital appreciation.


    As am OMC had been set up prior to the purchase, it should have been known by all purchasers that this would be a private estate as each purchaser automatically became a member of the OMC when they bought the property and when the last property sold the developer is legally obliged to withdraw from the OMC as the developer no longer owns any of the units.


    You seem to want to blame everyone possible except yourselves for not getting proper checks done and not understanding what an OMC is for.


    As per a post above, the planning files will have all the information about the bond and correspondence between developer and council and if the road condition only became noticeable in 2020, the council most likely released the bond prior to this.


    In reality there are only two parties where blame lies - the purchasers (for not having sufficient sinking fund) and the developers (if they hid substandard work)


    But you as the purchasers have gained substantially



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    The estate is not hooked up to any services, except electricity. Waste treatment is done through a Willow bed at the council's request as the estate was too far from the road. Now they are claiming the estate needs to be linked to water services for them to take it over.

    This is the problem with planning laws in Ireland. The councils don't do their job correctly and residents get shafted in the long run. Bonds are in place for this exact reason so I'm not sure why everyone is disputing this. The point of a bond is to cover any failures by the developer but instead, the estate wasn't built correctly and the money has disappeared.

    There is nothing to say the council can't come in and patch the repairs like they would in any shoddy modern estate. No one expects them to come in and dig it all up but they are expecting that of us so they don't have to take over another estate.

    Why are we paying property tax if we are pumping our own water out of the ground, running our own waste treatment, paying for our own lights, and repairing our own roads? If we are cut off completely, are we not just giving money away to people who have these facilities in place? Remember we bought our houses when none of this property tax nonsense was in place.



  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    Yes, the houses are worth a lot of money compared to when we bought them but that is irrelevant.

    As purchasers we will continue to manage the estate and a management company needs to stay in place to look after waste treatment and general maintenance. There is a sinking fund in place to look after these things, just not to replace entire roads.

    It's very unusual for any private estate to hang onto roads, pathways, and lighting as part of the management company. These things are always handed over to the council and when the estate houses were sold these were in good order. Also, there was a road accessing all of the houses prior to the council enforcement order and the road functioned properly.

    It is not our responsibility to have a sinking fund in place to manage roads. Every estate in this country legally should be taken over by the council if most of the residents vote on it. You can dance around that all you want.

    Yes, this is the developer's fault, mostly, but it is up to the council to provide us with the information we need to investigate that and so far they appear to be trying to protect the developer.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Sounds like your estate will never be a candidate to be taken in charge by the council unless ye are successful in joining mains sewerage. Councils don't want the responsibility of managing small estates that's why they generally all come with OMCs.

    I think you are misunderstanding the councils role here. Any defects are the responsibility of the developer, if they had insurance it may cover repairs but if the developer intentionally cut corners it probably wont.

    What bond was collected? Generally the bond collected covers any potential costs to the council not to cover any defects in the estate. Once your estate was connected to the main road the bond was probably returned. Its no harm in checking if the bond was not returned they may return it to the OMC now if the developer is gone.



  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    The estate is connected to the developer's land, so there is a right of way through their entrance. The council took issues with how this was done also in their 2020 letter.

    Maybe our fight is with the developer but I don't see that happening. There are too many connections in the estate to this woman which frustrates me to no end.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 18,981 ✭✭✭✭Del2005



    It's very unusual for any private estate to hang onto roads, pathways, and lighting as part of the management company. These things are always handed over to the council and when the estate houses were sold these were in good order.


    It's unusual for private estates not to hang onto their roads. We recently had to redo all the speed ramps as they where collapsing. We've had to grind down the edges of our footpaths to reduce trip hazards and have just replaced all our street lights with LEDs. Estates where handed over to the councils years ago, once they met the criteria, but the system changed now where new developments are setup as Multi Unit Developments with OMCs.

    You, as in your OMC, should be chasing up the builder and developer to see if they will finish the estate to council standards if not then all the members of the OMC will have to chip in fix up your development, as with the issues you've got you're properties are nearly unsalable.



  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    I don't think it's that bad for us. These some issues with the road outside some of the properties but a patch and repair would probably sort that out if someone wanted to sell. I don't think the other snags would even bother a potential buyer if someone decided to sell.

    For the time being I'm going to look after my own interests. I'll make sure the area close to my house is okay and let others worry about their own houses.



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,981 ✭✭✭✭Del2005


    No bank will give a mortgage for any house in your estate and solicitors will tell cash buyers to run away as it's not got an functioning OMC and there's major issues with the infrastructure.

    Your interest is the whole estate not your house. You own the all the roads, footpaths, lights, willow bed etc in the estate as you are part of the OMC. The only way this is going to be resolved is when you and your fellow owners of the OMC get your heads out of the sand and fix your estate.



  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    It appears we may have to get a wrecking ball at all of the houses. I'm not sure our MD would be too happy to hear the OMC is non functioning.



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,246 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    If the estate isn't build to a sufficient standard, they the council shouldn't be expected to take it over.

    An enforcement order being issued is for the completion of works to the standard outlined in the planning documents. That doesn't mean that standard is up to the standard required for council to take it over. It was a private estate.

    This would also apply to waste waste not being up to required standards.

    This sentence shows a gross misunderstanding of the issue.

    You own a house and common areas in a private estate. The issue is 100% with the property owned by you and others.



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,246 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    The not the councils responsibility to monitor every action on site for compliance with building regs. It is the developers responsibility to have the site constructed to the required standard.

    You have a claim against the developer. But the OMC will have to make that claim. You can't just pass the ball to the council and ask them to make your problems go away.



  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    Quite a few people on here are making things up based on their own feeling about the situation. Let's stick to facts here. The council has a responsibility to take over the estate should the residents vote on it. The council have confirmed that they will take it over, with conditions. Please go back and read those posts.

    I won't be responding to any further comments where posters are berating the residents. Put yourself in our situation. We didn't know these issues were there when we bought our houses but are fully aware that the issues fall back on us now.

    Navigating this is tricky because the estate was changed after the council sent an enforcement order to the developer. Some of the houses were already built and people were living in them. The changes requested by the council caused the problems. Either the developer didn't do the job correctly, the updates did not take into consideration the roads that were already in place or both the developer and the council are to blame for this.

    The developer cannot and will not pay for the repairs and nobody can make them do this either, solicitor or no solicitor. We are trying to get to the route of how it happened and why the council will not take over the estate. If there is no way the council will shift on this then at least we can make our voices heard at the next council meeting and question the council on why the changes needed to happen in the estate in the first place.



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,403 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    I suspect you want only opinions which agree with you, or outline a resolution which is to your satisfaction. Unfortunately that is not always possible based on the reality of the situation.

    From what you have posted, it appears that you think your responsibility lies only with the property within the boundary of the home you bought. But under the MUD Act, you automatically become a member of the OMC when you purchase the unit, and therefore are responsible for the common areas/roads etc as well until it is taken in charge by the council. You keep saying the CC have a legal obligation to take the roads in charge, they have told you no such obligation exists until the estate meets the councils requirements. The fact that they sent an enforcement order does not mean they had to be on site when the work was done, the OMC/Developer had responsibility to ensure the works met the regulatory standard.

    Unfortunately you are now faced with two options, continue to stamp your feet, watch the roads deteriorate further, wait for an accident to occur and the value of your properties go down as the conditions get worse, or call an EGM, organise for all unit owners to pay towards the repair costs, bring it up to required standard and let the Council take it from there. Your choice.



  • Registered Users Posts: 114 ✭✭poker2k9


    Not even sure why OP is looking for opinions on this board, when you should be talking to a solicitor on behalf of the residents on what the council can or cannot do.



  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    Email received from the county council this afternoon. They are sending out an engineer and a staff officer next Tuesday to meet members of the management company. A local county councillor who was involved in the initial application organised this.

    The councillor emailed me separately and said that he has discussed the issue with the county council and believes that they will likely budge on it. He highlighted that the estate is in "good condition" and does not fall under the category of "unfinished." He did not mention the roads but i'm sure that will come up in our meeting.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    We've managed to organise a meeting today without a solicitor.



  • Registered Users Posts: 68,526 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Do not attempt to guess which estate the OP is writing about. walterking has received a siteban from the Admins for doing so and I expect anyone else will get the same.



  • Registered Users Posts: 25,886 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble


    The OP appears to have been willfully not listening to solicitors since the time s/he stated considering buying the house.

    I actually feel sorry for any poor solicitor who takes the job on: there's none so deaf as those who just won't hear.



  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os




  • Registered Users Posts: 16,606 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    I think the point most people have is that while you are within your rights to ask, the council are within their rights to refuse unless it's up to the standards they require. The solicitor is brought up because if you thought it was a legal right, solicitors would be involved.

    Instead what is happening is a negotiation between yourselves and the council and you getting annoyed at people telling you this.

    Getting councillors involved to browbeat the council into bailing out an estate with numerous ongoing issues is not going to sit well with some (especially as the developer involved seems to still be involved but not taking responsibility).

    My guess is you may be able to get them to take over but you will still be dissatisfied with the level of maintenance they provide as they'll do the bare minimum.



  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    I'm not getting annoyed at anyone. I'm telling everyone on here who thinks that we are a bunch of money grabbing scumbags to back off. We are perfectly within our rights to ask for our estate to be taken over. The council brought up the issues so we are equally entitled to question them.

    What kind of point are you trying to make about the Counselor? Are we not within our rights to have the estate taken over? Are you of the opinion that the council should not take over private estates? Do you live in an estate yourself? Is it run by a management company or the council? Please ask yourself all of these questions because I'm not sure what the motives are behind some of your backhanded remarks.

    Why are you making ridiculous accusations about what I want and don't want? Myself and the other residents in the estate want the roads and paths managed because they are used day in and day out by public services, residents and non residents. We will continue to run the rest of the estate like every other management company in the country if it makes you feel better that each of us will have to put our hands in our pockets a few times a year.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,606 ✭✭✭✭astrofool


    I live in a well run private estate now of which I am a member, my previous estate was ran by the council, but not sure how that's relevant.

    You're getting very combative and I'm unsure what you're trying to achieve anymore as most people won't be supportive of your position with the information you have given out so far (that your beef is with the still involved developer who made a mess of the road rather than the council).

    As said, you may succeed in getting the council to take it over, I doubt you will be happy with the maintenance they end up providing given the issues already in the estate (poor state of roads, no mains sewerage, residents who won't take action against the developer who caused the problems).

    Just to highlight the absurdity, as you'll likely be in full defensive mode now and empathy is out the window, you complained about neighbours changing street lighting which is completely within the purview of the OMC to pay for and arrange.



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,644 ✭✭✭Wildly Boaring


    Hi OP. Ive read the whole thread and you keep repeating that " The council must take in charge an estate once its voted by residents"

    This is not correct I'm afraid and you should get advice on same.

    Until the residents understand the legalities it is unlikely to be solved.



  • Registered Users Posts: 778 ✭✭✭n.d.os


    The CC noted this paragraph in their report and confirmed that it is relevant to our application. The technicalities lie elsewhere in the application.

    "The Council is required to take the estate in charge under S180 of the Planning & Development Act as amended. S180 (2) of the Act requires that where the development has not been completed to the satisfaction of the planning authority and enforcement proceedings have not been commenced by the planning authority within 4 years of the expiration of the planning permission for the development that the Council shall take in charge the development if requested by the majority of the residents."

    If it's wrong, I'm sure we will find out on Tuesday. Some aspects of the above have changed since our application.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 566 ✭✭✭GNWoodd


    Did you find out if a bond was required to be put in place by the developer and what happened to it ?

    Is it still in place or was it called in ?



Advertisement