The company that manages the block I live in circulated a new service
charge for 08/09 at the start of the financial year in which the
service charge for electricity was increased from approx £1000/year to
£5000/year for the communal supply.

I queried this as being somewhat on the high side and have finally
found out (after months of procrastination and stalling on their part)
that the reason for this is that they haven't actually bothered to
check most of the meters for 4-5 years and had just estimated them.
I've only been living here for less than a year so asked the question
as to why I should pay for their incompetence when I wasn't even
living there. Their response was approximately "tough tits mate, your
contract makes you liable". Unfortunately there's no residents
association either so there's no accountability. 

My question is - is this reasonable and/or would it fall under the
unfair terms in contracts regs?

TIA!

On 6 Oct, 18:45, Cheeky  wrote:
> The company that manages the block I live in circulated a new service
> charge for 08/09 at the start of the financial year in which the
> service charge for electricity was increased from approx £1000/year to
> £5000/year for the communal supply.
>
> I queried this as being somewhat on the high side and have finally
> found out (after months of procrastination and stalling on their part)
> that the reason for this is that they haven't actually bothered to
> check most of the meters for 4-5 years and had just estimated them.
> I've only been living here for less than a year so asked the question
> as to why I should pay for their incompetence when I wasn't even
> living there. Their response was approximately "tough tits mate, your
> contract makes you liable". Unfortunately there's no residents
> association either so there's no accountability.
>
> My question is - is this reasonable and/or would it fall under the
> unfair terms in contracts regs?
>
> TIA!

My understanding is that the liability relates to the lease, and all
leasholders (past, present and future) are jointly and severally
liable.

If you can prove some negligence on behalf of the management company
(or indeed, the utility company), then you may get a reprieve - but
arguing such a point is not likely to be within your competence, and
would itself involve tens of thousands of pounds in legal fees.

I also assume you are not solely liable for the £5000 - that this sum
is to be split between all leaseholders in the block. If the dispute
is a matter of just hundreds of pounds per leasee, I would suggest you
pay it, or make arrangements to pay it over a period of months or
years.

On Tue,  7 Oct 2008 19:40:06 퍝, Ste  wrote:


>
>My understanding is that the liability relates to the lease, and all
>leasholders (past, present and future) are jointly and severally
>liable.

That sounds familiar but considering how all the previous owner's
debts had to be cleared before my solicitors would approve the sale
I'm not quite understanding how a debt can be retrospectively applied.

>If you can prove some negligence on behalf of the management company
>(or indeed, the utility company), then you may get a reprieve - but
>arguing such a point is not likely to be within your competence, and
>would itself involve tens of thousands of pounds in legal fees.

Well... the negligence is pretty obvious IMHO but I take your point. 

>I also assume you are not solely liable for the £5000 - that this sum
>is to be split between all leaseholders in the block. If the dispute
>is a matter of just hundreds of pounds per leasee, I would suggest you
>pay it, or make arrangements to pay it over a period of months or
>years.


It's split between all the flats but, to be honest, it's part of a
wider malaise in that a lot of the flats appear to be buy-to-let with
absentee landlords who don't give a toss, transient tenants etc which
allow the management company to take the piss. They charge us more for
everything than the block across the road which they also manage and
significantly more than other management companies in the area.
Problem is... without a residents association you can't do anything
about it.

Cheeky [me@privacy.net] said:
> On Tue,  7 Oct 2008 19:40:06 퍝, Ste  wrote:
> 
> 
> >
> >My understanding is that the liability relates to the lease, and all
> >leasholders (past, present and future) are jointly and severally
> >liable.
> 
> That sounds familiar but considering how all the previous owner's
> debts had to be cleared before my solicitors would approve the sale
> I'm not quite understanding how a debt can be retrospectively applied.

This very situation is why solicitors do this - ie, if they didn't you 
would be liable for any unpaid bills. In this case, neither you or the 
seller knew about the bill so it was not dealt with as part of the 
contract when you bought - so in a nutshell, you are stuffed.

> 
> >If you can prove some negligence on behalf of the management company
> >(or indeed, the utility company), then you may get a reprieve - but
> >arguing such a point is not likely to be within your competence, and
> >would itself involve tens of thousands of pounds in legal fees.
> 
> Well... the negligence is pretty obvious IMHO but I take your point. 

Who has been negligent? The power company for not reading the meters? 
The management company for not checking that the meters were read? Or 
perhaps the leaseholders should be held accountable for not exercising 
their rights to see the bills and checking that the meters were read?
 
> >I also assume you are not solely liable for the £5000 - that this sum
> >is to be split between all leaseholders in the block. If the dispute
> >is a matter of just hundreds of pounds per leasee, I would suggest you
> >pay it, or make arrangements to pay it over a period of months or
> >years.
> 
> 
> It's split between all the flats but, to be honest, it's part of a
> wider malaise in that a lot of the flats appear to be buy-to-let with
> absentee landlords who don't give a toss, transient tenants etc which
> allow the management company to take the piss. They charge us more for
> everything than the block across the road which they also manage and
> significantly more than other management companies in the area.
> Problem is... without a residents association you can't do anything
> about it. 

Residence associations are hard work (been there) but they *are* worth 
it and I therefore suggest that you (as in you the leaseholders) set one 
up and start taking some control of your destiny instead of leaving it 
in the hands of the freeholder and managing agent.

On Tue,  7 Oct 2008 23:35:06 +0100, Yellow 
wrote:

>Cheeky [me@privacy.net] said:

>> 
>> That sounds familiar but considering how all the previous owner's
>> debts had to be cleared before my solicitors would approve the sale
>> I'm not quite understanding how a debt can be retrospectively applied.
>
>This very situation is why solicitors do this - ie, if they didn't you 
>would be liable for any unpaid bills. In this case, neither you or the 
>seller knew about the bill so it was not dealt with as part of the 
>contract when you bought - so in a nutshell, you are stuffed.

Figured as much : (

>
>> 
>> >If you can prove some negligence on behalf of the management company
>> >(or indeed, the utility company), then you may get a reprieve - but
>> >arguing such a point is not likely to be within your competence, and
>> >would itself involve tens of thousands of pounds in legal fees.
>> 
>> Well... the negligence is pretty obvious IMHO but I take your point. 
>
>Who has been negligent? The power company for not reading the meters? 
>The management company for not checking that the meters were read? Or 
>perhaps the leaseholders should be held accountable for not exercising 
>their rights to see the bills and checking that the meters were read?

I'd say the management company for not checking the meters compared to
the estimates. We pay them to pay the bills and they didn't. Not
exactly the most difficult of tasks which they've admitted in writing
that they screwed up. 
> 
>
>Residence associations are hard work (been there) but they *are* worth 
>it and I therefore suggest that you (as in you the leaseholders) set one 
>up and start taking some control of your destiny instead of leaving it 
>in the hands of the freeholder and managing agent.

Damn right. Unfortunately that'll likely mean me sorting it out (and I
barely have the time to do so) but at least I can start the ball
rolling. I've seen what a decent R.A. can do and it's a lot better
than what I've currently got.

Cheeky [me@privacy.net] said:
> On Tue,  7 Oct 2008 23:35:06 퍝, Yellow 
> wrote:
> 
> >Cheeky [me@privacy.net] said:
> 
> >> 
> >> That sounds familiar but considering how all the previous owner's
> >> debts had to be cleared before my solicitors would approve the sale
> >> I'm not quite understanding how a debt can be retrospectively applied.
> >
> >This very situation is why solicitors do this - ie, if they didn't you 
> >would be liable for any unpaid bills. In this case, neither you or the 
> >seller knew about the bill so it was not dealt with as part of the 
> >contract when you bought - so in a nutshell, you are stuffed.
> 
> Figured as much : (
> 
> >
> >> 
> >> >If you can prove some negligence on behalf of the management company
> >> >(or indeed, the utility company), then you may get a reprieve - but
> >> >arguing such a point is not likely to be within your competence, and
> >> >would itself involve tens of thousands of pounds in legal fees.
> >> 
> >> Well... the negligence is pretty obvious IMHO but I take your point. 
> >
> >Who has been negligent? The power company for not reading the meters? 
> >The management company for not checking that the meters were read? Or 
> >perhaps the leaseholders should be held accountable for not exercising 
> >their rights to see the bills and checking that the meters were read?
> 
> I'd say the management company for not checking the meters compared to
> the estimates. We pay them to pay the bills and they didn't. Not
> exactly the most difficult of tasks which they've admitted in writing
> that they screwed up. 

The point I was trying to make was that the leaseholders could actually 
have prevented this situation which puts them in the "blame" pot too. I 
appreciate that doesn't help you as a recent resident. :-)

Some advice - every year before we bought our freehold we would go and 
see all the bills and two or three of us would go. Amazing what you 
spot, like builders being paid, within a few months, to repeat the same 
job because it had failed the first time (and sometimes a second time). 
We were paying an enormous amount to rent an entry phone system on a 10 
year contract and persuaded the freeholder to agree to have it bought 
out - saved us thousands of pounds. 

We also had an issue with electricity meters - can't remember the full 
details now but it was something to do with one not being read because 
it was in a basement ex-boiler room. One of my neighbours did all the 
leg work to suss out what had happened and we got the meter removed.

Now, you might well argue this is the job of the managing agent but you 
have to remember they do not live at the block and they do not pay the 
bills.

> >Residence associations are hard work (been there) but they *are* worth 
> >it and I therefore suggest that you (as in you the leaseholders) set one 
> >up and start taking some control of your destiny instead of leaving it 
> >in the hands of the freeholder and managing agent.
> 
> Damn right. Unfortunately that'll likely mean me sorting it out (and I
> barely have the time to do so) but at least I can start the ball
> rolling. I've seen what a decent R.A. can do and it's a lot better
> than what I've currently got. 

Indeed, but why not see if you can get everyone together as you might be 
surprised. We used to hire the council owned bowling club house (a big 
hut in the park across the road) for £8.

Good luck!