Property Management Companies

DerryRed

I bought a house about 4 months in a courtyard development with a variety of Duplexes and Apartments. Part of the deal was that we have had to pay an annual maintenance fee of €1000.

The builders are now gone the Management company has taken over the running of the development. However it seems to me like they are not pulling their finger out. For example access gates to the underground parking remain broken for 2 weeks and their are loads of issues with parking that need to be resolved - people parking in the wrong places and most annoyingly using up visitor spots.

Now I know that after 1 year we have the right to form our own residents committee and either keep the same maintenance company or get in a new one. My questions is - who does the buck stop with if the current maintenance company are not doing their job? If we have issues with them who do we complain to. Anyone on the boards had a similar experience?

Sarsfield

Depends on your setup to some extent.

The management company is in charge. The property owners own the management company and should have elected directors from amongst it's own. The original property developer may still have directors on the board too.

The management company usually selects a managing agent (such as Wyse or KPM) to do the day-to-day running of the property. If the job is not being done, the directors of the management company should be taking the issues up with the agent.

A problem may occur if the property developers are still on the board as they may not be bothered with the hassle of changing agents.

It's important to get the property developers off the board as soon as possible as their interests aren't always compatible with the interests of the property owners (you).

Do you know who are the directors? They're ultmiately responsible. Get on to them.

MorningStar

THe property section might be the best place for this. Very common problem and I would expect to see your charges going up next year.

dahamsta

OT but do these gates /ever/ work for more than a few months at a time? The gates in my block are permanently open now because they kept going wonky, and the gates in a mate's development just had to be replaced because the old ones kept breaking. It's not rocket science like, it's just electric motors, how come these automation crowds can't get them right?

adam

Dub13

Its just crazy that there are no laws governing Property Management Companies in this country.

Its a scandal.

dahamsta

Dub13 wrote:

Its just crazy that there is no laws governing Property Management Companies in this country.

Surely there are other laws to cover what they do? If there aren't write one and give it to your TD. Seriously, that's how to get things done.

DerryRed

DerryRed wrote:

Now I know that after 1 year we have the right to form our own residents committee and either keep the same maintenance company or get in a new one. My questions is - who does the buck stop with if the current maintenance company are not doing their job? If we have issues with them who do we complain to. Anyone on the boards had a similar experience?

Management Companies are governed by their Memoradnum and Articles and by standard company law. Anyone who feels that the company is not being run properly or is negligent in its duties should use the standard channels available under the Companies Acts such as getting enough people together to call an EGM to address any issue. Your Solicitor will have a copy of the Memorandum and Articles and you should obtain this.

The members of the company, being the unit owners, are the people who control the company through the mechanism of the general meeting. However most contracts will contain a standard term that the initial developers remain on the board of directors until all the units are sold, and thereafter an AGM is held at which the developers resign and are replaced by a board elected by members who attend the meeting. Again, the requirements for all those meetings are as set down in the Companies Acts and the Articles and Memorandum of the management company. So it would also be important to establish whether the first AGM has taken place.

At a practical level of course, it is highly desirable that, after the developers resign, the people who become the directors actually reside in the apartments.

Dub13

Taken from Here

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=9&si=1497608&issue_id=13207&eid=161346


A STEALTH tax which has forced thousands of homeowners to pay hundreds of euro every year is to be ended immediately.

Some local authorities are making it a condition of planning permission that management companies be formed to administer new private housing estates.

That means annual charges of up to €500 or more to every house, while local authorities skip responsibility for the maintenance of water, lighting, sewage, footpaths and roads.

It now appears that the practice may be unlawful, a position that could result in the forced repayment of millions of euro to the homeowners concerned.

And Environment Minister Dick Roche told the Irish Independent yesterday that the practice appeared to go beyond what was envisaged by the planning acts and could be illegal.

"It angers me that this is happening, and I intend to stamp out the practice," he said.

He said a number of cases had recently come to his attention involving private housing estates.

"It appears to be the local authorities sidestepping their responsibilities," he said. "I am not prepared to see it continue. I will not tolerate this happening."

Making it a condition of planning permission, as some had done, did not appear to be supported by the law.

"It is hard to see what the legal basis for it is," said the Minister, who is awaiting a report on the issue from the Law Reform Commission.

If the practice is found to be illegal, thousands of homeowners could be entitled to have millions of euro in contributions refunded. Mr Roche said this issue would have to be addressed once the legal position was clarified.

STUNNED

He has written to local authorities and asked to see grants of planning permission where the clause stipulating the requirement for a management company applied.

Many householders when buying new semi-detached homes thought the fee was a once-off, only to be stunned to receive a new demand each year. In Brayton Park, Kilcock, the cost to houses was €411 for last year. In Callenders Mill, Celbridge, the annual charge is €520, while Tyrrelstown in West Dublin is also seeing annual charges, albeit on a lower scale. The minister is to contact the County Managers' Association to stop what Independent TD Catherine Murphy insists is an illegal practice.

MorningStar

I love that article. First off I don't see how it is a "stealth tax" where you are sent a letter of notification and your lawyer had to expalin it to you in the sale.It is not exactley a new concept or practice. A lot of houses pay and padi ground rent in a similar vain but they were vastly smaller amounts. I have heard that there are companies going around investigating ground rent terms in Ireland.
Ultimately it is your local council who is doing this so don't vote them back in

bohsboy

Management Companies and management fees have crept into almost all new developments at the moment and are doing basically what they want unchecked.

I bought a two bedroom apartment three years ago in Ongar, fee for year 1 - 400e, year 2 - 800, year 3 - 1200. It is unreal what these people are getting away with. They post up a load of rules on the walls of YOUR apartment block and tell you what you can and cannot do in YOUR home. All the time you are paying this fee. It made me wonder did I in fact actually own my place?

I had to sell my apartment as the thoughts of handing over another grand to useless feckers really pissed me off. I now have a nice front and back garden that I happily tend to for free.

Just my bit, once you hear "management fee" being touted, turn and run.

lomb

bohsboy wrote:

They post up a load of rules on the walls of YOUR apartment block and tell you what you can and cannot do in YOUR home. All the time you are paying this fee. It made me wonder did I in fact actually own my place?
.

no u did not own the place, u took a 900 year etc lease in it, therefore u were merely 'renting' it. this is described by people as taking an 'interest' in a property, u did not own the freehold of it.

lomb

DerryRed wrote:

. Anyone on the boards had a similar experience?

welcome to the land of leaseholds,EVERYONE who buys an apartment experiances what u are experiancing.

bohsboy

bohsboy wrote:

It is unreal what these people are getting away with. They post up a load of rules on the walls of YOUR apartment block and tell you what you can and cannot do in YOUR home. All the time you are paying this fee.

Um, if the management company had held its first AGM, 'these people' are actually you and the other apartment owners. You are the company, if you have a problem raise it at an AGM. If sufficient people have a problem, call an EGM.

bohsboy wrote:

It made me wonder did I in fact actually own my place?

Probably not. As noted above, most apartments are not freehold, but long leases.

bohsboy wrote:

Just my bit, once you hear "management fee" being touted, turn and run.

But there's the rub. If you want an apartment, you get a managment company. An apartment block without one is going to descend into anarchy - who is gonna paint the place, collect rubbish, pay for the lift to be fixed etc. etc.

In fact, very often serviced sites and housing schemes have management companies too, although the annual fee is typically less.

Dub13

I think most people agree they are a necessary evil in apartment blocks,its there fees people have a problem with.

What has people really wound up if they are starting to be applied to houses.Imagen owned your own house and paying a management company to run the estate...Thats what taxes are for.

Plankmonkey

I was forced to pay €900 to my management company when i bought my house. Yes house, not apartment. Since then they refunded me for the bin tax and cable TV as they decided they were not going to manage it after all. They still have about €500 of my money and I cannot see one thing that they have done to improve the estate. Street lights have been broken since i moved in, pot holes on pavements, plants dying etc. They have blocked NTL from coming into the estate because they obviously got a nice brown envelope from SKY. The only thing they do is squirt weed killer every 6 months and mow other peoples lawns (I don't have a lawn). It's infuriating! I have not gotten a bill since (2 years down the line) and they will get a very short reply if they even dare to ask for more money from me! I am a bit worried that I am legally obliged to pay them though. The way I see it is you pay for a service and I ain't getting the service. I'll squirt my own weed killer thank you very much.

Plankmonkey

Plankmonkey wrote:

They still have about €500 of my money and I cannot see one thing that they have done to improve the estate. Street lights have been broken since i moved in, pot holes on pavements, plants dying etc. They have blocked NTL from coming into the estate because they obviously got a nice brown envelope from SKY. The only thing they do is squirt weed killer every 6 months and mow other peoples lawns (I don't have a lawn). It's infuriating! I have not gotten a bill since (2 years down the line) and they will get a very short reply if they even dare to ask for more money from me! I am a bit worried that I am legally obliged to pay them though. The way I see it is you pay for a service and I ain't getting the service. I'll squirt my own weed killer thank you very much.

You're missing the biggest expense of all though. I presume they pay public liability insurance for the common areas, and presumably ESB bills for lighting along with accountants fees for making the annual company returns - thereby keeping the company in existence, enabling them to pay the public liability, and just ensuring that someone who breaks their leg on a common area won't be able to clean you out...

Oh, and if it's in your title you're obliged to pay. And believe me, paying is a lot less painful than not paying, allowing the company go bust, and then having a house with a defect on the title because the management company doesn't exist - not so easy to complete a sale of 'the house that should have had a management company but it was struck off' - although the High Court will reinstate it when all the houseowners pay up large fees for Solicitors and Barristers to do the paperwork...

bohsboy

UM.....There was never any AGM when I lived there. I was the first resident on site and was faced with a wall full of rules as I moved my stuff in. In the three years I lived there I never received any information regarding meetings, AGM's, etc.

Thank God I'm in a house now. As for Ongar? Be very wary.:(

dahamsta

bohsboy wrote:

UM.....There was never any AGM when I lived there.

€100 says there was.

I was the first resident on site and was faced with a wall full of rules as I moved my stuff in.

If there weren't, €100 says you'd be complaining even more about the washing hanging out people's windows, the bicycles scattered around the yard, the crap littering the place. People need rules or they turn into pigs.

In the three years I lived there I never received any information regarding meetings, AGM's, etc.

And you were too lazy to ask about them. Sorry, but that's your fault. Sure, your management company was probably crap, but it's up to YOU to do something about it.

That's why society is gone to sh*t in Ireland. Because people won't get up off their arses and do something about it. All they'll do is whine about everyone else.

adam

bohsboy

Well you obviously have never paid a fee to a management company or else work for one of these establishments.

As for me being too lazy and not getting up of my arse, which you so eloquently put it, my efforts to get any information from my management company from our non existent residents committee proved fruitless as we had none and never had any resident representation. There was never an AGM in three years. Any time I called up regarding fees, charges etc., I was given the "sinking fund" reason.

So, at the end of the day, due to no communication from anyone, I "got up of my arse" and sold the kip. Got a nice profit of 75k and bought a house with my "lazy" earnings.

Yeah, society is gone to ****e with posts like yours.

Plankmonkey

Deleted User wrote:

You're missing the biggest expense of all though. I presume they pay public liability insurance for the common areas, and presumably ESB bills for lighting along with accountants fees for making the annual company returns - thereby keeping the company in existence, enabling them to pay the public liability, and just ensuring that someone who breaks their leg on a common area won't be able to clean you out...

Oh, and if it's in your title you're obliged to pay. And believe me, paying is a lot less painful than not paying, allowing the company go bust, and then having a house with a defect on the title because the management company doesn't exist - not so easy to complete a sale of 'the house that should have had a management company but it was struck off' - although the High Court will reinstate it when all the houseowners pay up large fees for Solicitors and Barristers to do the paperwork...

I found the original letter from the management company. I am indeed paying for ESB to lighting, maintenance of the common area (what common area??), AGM meeting and stationery. Since when do we have to pay the ESB for public lighting? That's the councils job. As for being sued, if someone falls on the pavement whats that got to do with me? They can make a claim with the personal injuy claims (thats probably not what its called, can't think of its name!).

I don't think I'll have any problem selling the house if the management company was struck off, I'm sure it'd be the complete opposite.

What my point is if you take out what is supposed to be the councils job (I use my family home as a reference which doesn't have a management company, they don't pay for the esb or mowing the field at the top of the estate, that's the county councils job) then what exactly is the point of a management company for a house? I can understand why an apartment needs it, they don't own the building and have to pay to maintain it.

Sponge Bob

Plankmonkey wrote:

What my point is if you take out what is supposed to be the councils job (I use my family home as a reference which doesn't have a management company, they don't pay for the esb or mowing the field at the top of the estate, that's the county councils job) then what exactly is the point of a management company for a house? I can understand why an apartment needs it, they don't own the building and have to pay to maintain it.

A new housing estate goes into limbo for 5-10 years . During that time a management company is the best way to deal with the issues involved.

After 5-10 years, assuming all is well and that the estate is in good nick the Council will 'take it in charge' . Once taken in charge the council maintains footpaths and lights and mowing the grass

If it is pothole heaven they expect the developer / management company to fix it first .

HTH

dahamsta

It's private property. It has nothing to do with the council. (Until, as SB has rightly pointed out, it passes over to the council. Is it really only five years SB? I thought it was until contracts expire / ten years minimum.)

adam

Plankmonkey

Ken Shabby wrote:

It's private property. It has nothing to do with the council. (Until, as SB has rightly pointed out, it passes over to the council. Is it really only five years SB? I thought it was until contracts expire / ten years minimum.)

adam

The article posted earlier disagrees with this. It's the local authorities job to look after sewage, water, electricity, roads, pavements. In my case this leaves nothing for the manangement company to do. They don't even look after our bins or cable TV (although they still have the cheek to block NTL from coming in).

A new housing estate goes into limbo for 5-10 years . During that time a management company is the best way to deal with the issues involved.

After 5-10 years, assuming all is well and that the estate is in good nick the Council will 'take it in charge' . Once taken in charge the council maintains footpaths and lights and mowing the grass

If it is pothole heaven they expect the developer / management company to fix it first

Thats fair enough, but again whats it got to do with me. If the estate is in bad nick I agree the development company should fix it up, the same way they do a snag list for the houses. But I still fail to see why I should pay €500 for this.

MorningStar

Plankmonkey wrote:

Thats fair enough, but again whats it got to do with me. If the estate is in bad nick I agree the development company should fix it up, the same way they do a snag list for the houses. But I still fail to see why I should pay

dahamsta

It's like this Plankmonkey: If you didn't want to pay management fees, you shouldn't have moved into a development that has them. You'll find it very difficult to find one that doesn't these days, but no doubt they exist. However, as MorningStar said, you signed the contract, if you weren't aware of it, that's your own fault for not reading it properly.

Sorry, what people are saying might sound harsh, but that's the be all and end all to it.

adam

Plankmonkey

Ken Shabby wrote:

It's like this Plankmonkey: If you didn't want to pay management fees, you shouldn't have moved into a development that has them. You'll find it very difficult to find one that doesn't these days, but no doubt they exist. However, as MorningStar said, you signed the contract, if you weren't aware of it, that's your own fault for not reading it properly.

Sorry, what people are saying might sound harsh, but that's the be all and end all to it.

adam

I knew exactly what I was sigining and voiced my concerns to the solicitor. His answer was if you don't sign you don't get the house, simple as that. I don't know if you've read the artice earlier in this post from the Irish Independent but it points out that this is actually illegal and people could be entitled to their money back.

I know the harsh reality and it's not the be all and end all.

MorningStar

Plankmonkey wrote:

I knew exactly what I was sigining and voiced my concerns to the solicitor. His answer was if you don't sign you don't get the house, simple as that. I don't know if you've read the artice earlier in this post from the Irish Independent but it points out that this is actually illegal and people could be entitled to their money back.

I know the harsh reality and it's not the be all and end all.

THe point is as part of buying your house you had additional conditions. They came together it wasn't you would loose the house if you didn't sign but the house came that way plain and simple.
The article only suggests it may be illegal from a certain prospective. It will probably be prevented in the future but right now it is your problem.
The reality of what you did is the be all and end all. It is a bit like complaining about and intrest rate on credit card after you have a debt on it.

Plankmonkey

MorningStar wrote:

THe point is as part of buying your house you had additional conditions. They came together it wasn't you would loose the house if you didn't sign but the house came that way plain and simple.

Yes and I signed it. These conditions may be illegal. In no way is it the be all and end all. I certainly won't be paying anymore money, and neither will my neighbours and the management company know they have a fight on their hands already.

MorningStar wrote:

It will probably be prevented in the future but right now it is your problem.

If it is indeed deemed to be illegal I will be getting my money back. Are you saying lets let them away wirth what they've done so far and from now on we'll stop them? That's not how the law works. If its illegal, its illegal for everyone who matches the criteria, past, present and future.[/QUOTE]

MorningStar wrote:

The reality of what you did is the be all and end all. It is a bit like complaining about and intrest rate on credit card after you have a debt on it.

There's a bit of a difference in sigining up for a credit card and buying a house! If i'm not happy with my credit card I'll cancel it. I'm not going to miss out on owning my dream house because of €500 but I am going to stand my ground and fight any additional charges or yearly charges.

The "if you're not happy then don't sign it" is not a very strong argument. If its illegal then its illegal, that is the be all and end all as far as I'm concerned.

MorningStar

Plankmonkey wrote:

Yes and I signed it. These conditions may be illegal. In no way is it the be all and end all. I certainly won't be paying anymore money, and neither will my neighbours and the management company know they have a fight on their hands already.

Well that would be an extremely stupid action. THe management company are managing your property. If your property (paths,park,lights etc...) is bankrupt you are liable and can't seel your house. If somebody crashes because your street lights aren't on they can sue you as group. No solicitor would tell you not to pay. THere are appartment blocks without any insurance and if there was a fire there is no recourse.

Plankmonkey wrote:

If it is indeed deemed to be illegal I will be getting my money back. Are you saying lets let them away wirth what they've done so far and from now on we'll stop them? That's not how the law works. If its illegal, its illegal for everyone who matches the criteria, past, present and future.

The illegal acts are not the management companies but the local councils. The management company are still paying for insurance and maintenance on your behalf. The likely hood of the local council paying back this money is very remote.

Plankmonkey wrote:

There's a bit of a difference in sigining up for a credit card and buying a house! If i'm not happy with my credit card I'll cancel it. I'm not going to miss out on owning my dream house because of €500 but I am going to stand my ground and fight any additional charges or yearly charges.

The "if you're not happy then don't sign it" is not a very strong argument. If its illegal then its illegal, that is the be all and end all as far as I'm concerned.

The point is it isn't and wasn't €500 and you were told that and if you weren't your solicitor was at fault.
You are blaming the problem on the wrong people and not dealing with the correct people. Not paying the money is the absolute worst idea.

Plankmonkey

MorningStar wrote:

Not paying the money is the absolute worst idea.

I'm not liable for someone triping on the footpath that's a ridiculous statement. And If they trip in my driveway then I have my own insurance to cover that, I don't need to pay a management company to take care of it. The fecking lights don't work anyway so they certainly haven't been putting my money to good use.

How am I blaming the wrong people? Sure, its not the managements company's fault that the council won't pay for electricity etc but its the management company demanding money and its the management company that I have the problem with. If the council are supposed to be paying the esb etc then someone needs to sort them out, don't come knocking on my door looking for money and calling it a solution and my legal obligation....I don't give a monkeys what I've signed.

MorningStar

Plankmonkey wrote:

I'm not liable for someone triping on the footpath that's a ridiculous statement. And If they trip in my driveway then I have my own insurance to cover that, I don't need to pay a management company to take care of it. The fecking lights don't work anyway so they certainly haven't been putting my money to good use.

How am I blaming the wrong people? Sure, its not the managements company's fault that the council won't pay for electricity etc but its the management company demanding money and its the management company that I have the problem with. If the council are supposed to be paying the esb etc then someone needs to sort them out, don't come knocking on my door looking for money and calling it a solution and my legal obligation....I don't give a monkeys what I've signed.

I can completely understand you don't believe me but have you checked it out with a solicitor? There was a radio show all about the legal problems with people not paying the maintenace charges. You are liable according to the experts there. A broken bottle on your road and a kid cuts their hand on it you are liable as a group.
You can't sell your house if you haven't paid the outstanding debt owed to the maintainece company.
Leaglly the council may in the future have to provide this service but right now legally you as a group are liable for all expenses.
You may not think or care you are legally liable one way or the other you are, you don't get to choose