Residents Committee Vs Owners Committee

PIMPHO

Hi,

Just wondering there is a difference between a RC and an OC? Can non-owners become members of a RC? Also is it possible to limit the amount of people that want to join a RC? I assumed that a RC was supposed to be for owners only? Would there be any use/point in setting up an OC to discuss and deal with the management agent, budget, finances and the day to day running of the development, basically all issues that non owners would not have a say in?

Thanks

mikemac

If you are a tenant the landlord is part of the committee and can attend any meeting. They probably won't though

So they can nominate you to go instead.
This can work out well sometimes as the tenant is there, sees the issues and would no more about things like security or problems.

But owners won't want tenants there usually. And some owners look down at tenants! :mad:

I've never heard of just an owners committee. In most estates there are a fair amount of tenants. So the residents committee serves this

What I think you should do is setup a residents committee and let everybody attend and gives their points. But when it comes to voting and budgets let the owners vote on this.

doctor evil

You don't have to be a owner to join a RC, the only requirement is that you live in the area.

RC tend to be crying out for people to get involved.

PIMPHO

doctor evil wrote: »

You don't have to be a owner to join a RC, the only requirement is that you live in the area.

RC tend to be crying out for people to get involved.

Should the people that pay the annual management fee not have a bigger say in the RC than tenants?

Victor

A Residents Committee is for residents.

A Owners Committee is for owners.

Ste.phen

PIMPHO wrote: »

Should the people that pay the annual management fee not have a bigger say in the RC than tenants?

Do the renters' landlords not pay also?

PIMPHO

Ste.phen wrote: »

Do the renters' landlords not pay also?

Yes they do but tenants don't have vested interest in the development. Tenants have no say and cannot vote in AGMs etc. Should only be owners on the RC and if tenants/non owners have any issues they can contact the RC or their landlord.

How Strange

PIMPHO wrote: »

Hi,

Just wondering there is a difference between a RC and an OC?

Do you mean a management company?

Can non-owners become members of a RC? Also is it possible to limit the amount of people that want to join a RC? I assumed that a RC was supposed to be for owners only?

An RC is a voluntary committee which is not a legal entity, it cannot enforce any rules etc i.e. force owners pay €x for grass cutting. They are basically a group of residents who've come together in an organised fashion with the development/complex of residence as the common demoninator.

Sometimes, groups of residence form a RC and think that they can challenge the MC on how it is running a development. This isn't the case. Only owners can be members of the MC and an RC has no power to influence an MC. They can speak to MC about issues but that's all.

Would there be any use/point in setting up an OC to discuss and deal with the management agent, budget, finances and the day to day running of the development, basically all issues that non owners would not have a say in?

A MC is already established. By law a management company has to be formed as soon as the first sod is turned in a development. It is registered with the CRO, has legal obligations i.e. file annual accounts and legal rights i.e. to enforce owners to pay management fees and pursue them through court if necessary. This is illustrative and their legal obligations and rights are numerous.

There is a large Management Company thread here which you should read through to inform yourself on what they do. It explains everything.

bangersandmash

PIMPHO wrote: »

Yes they do but tenants don't have vested interest in the development.

In theory that's true. But if they live in the development then effectively they do have a vested interest in it, especially if they plan to live there for any significant length of time.

In contrast I've seen cases where landlords couldn't care less if a development goes to rack and ruin once the rent appears in their account every month. Even for most reasonable landlords, the nuances of day-to-day life in a development will not be their concern.

Honestly the attitude towards renting in this country has a long way to go.

How Strange

bangersandmash wrote: »

In theory that's true. But if they live in the development then effectively they do have a vested interest in it, especially if they plan to live there for any significant length of time.

In contrast I've seen cases where landlords couldn't care less if a development goes to rack and ruin once the rent appears in their account every month. Even for most reasonable landlords, the nuances of day-to-day life in a development will not be their concern.

Honestly the attitude towards renting in this country has a long way to go.

I agree. If you rent in this country you are a 2nd class citizen.

I did property management for a while and remember dealing with a man, in his 40's with a young son, he was renting a two bed apartment and had to leave because of anti-social behaviour. Most apartments were rented and landlords didn't give a sh1t who they let to and it wasn't in the best part of town so I suppose the more desirable renters didn't want to live there. He had to leave after living there for years. I really felt sorry for him because he had a family and his son was in school in the area but there's little protection for someone like him. He basically didn't have a voice but the sh1tty landlords did.