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 will remove all services to the apartment rented by us

Options
12357

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    athtrasna
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,420 ✭✭✭✭athtrasna


    jd wrote: »
    :o
    Apartments are held under a long leasehold. Leaseholds have been forfeited in other jurisdictions because of non-payment of service charges.

    I was told of at least one development here where that was in the contract with the management company. Thought it was in ours too but I checked and it's not.


  • Options
    #123
    mgcf81
    Registered Users Posts: 16 ✭mgcf81


    jd wrote: »
    :o
    Apartments are held under a long leasehold. Leaseholds have been forfeited in other jurisdictions because of non-payment of service charges.

    Ah ok I am the exception to the rule ...


  • Options
    #124
    jd
    Registered Users Posts: 5,683 ✭✭✭jd


    mgcf81 wrote: »
    Ah ok I am the exception to the rule ...
    Are you sure? My lease is a 900 year long one (or was 10 years ago). What kind of title do you have to your apartment?


  • Options
    #125
    tinkerbell
    Registered Users Posts: 6,423 ✭✭✭tinkerbell


    mgcf81 wrote: »
    Ah ok I am the exception to the rule ...

    You're not an exception as there is no way that you have a freehold lease to the land if you own an apartment. You do not own the land (ie have freehold) as you share said land with other apartment owners who are below / above you. You would have a leasehold which is at least a few hundred years.


  • Options
    #126
    Bepolite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,737 ✭✭✭Bepolite


    tinkerbell wrote: »
    You're not an exception as there is no way that you have a freehold lease to the land if you own an apartment. You do not own the land (ie have freehold) as you share said land with other apartment owners who are below / above you. You would have a leasehold which is at least a few hundred years.

    While I'm 99.9% sure the poster is mistaken about their title. Flying freeholds can and do exist in Ireland.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Grandpa Hassan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭Grandpa Hassan


    Bepolite wrote: »
    While I'm 99.9% sure the poster is mistaken about their title. Flying freeholds can and do exist in Ireland.

    They do, but an apertment wouldn't be one. A flying freehold is part of a freehold which overhangs someone else's freehold. You can't have an entire property that is a flying freehold. An apartment with be a long leasehold


  • Options
    #128
    Bepolite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,737 ✭✭✭Bepolite


    Grandpa Hassan wrote: »
    They do, but an apertment wouldn't be one. A flying freehold is part of a freehold which overhangs someone else's freehold. You can't have an entire property that is a flying freehold. An apartment with be a long leasehold

    Why not? Perfectly possible to have a freehold ground floor, with freeholds above it.

    There was actually one sold there around a year ago on the quays in Dublin. In Scotland a system very similar to freehold operates for all apartments.


  • Options
    #129
    Grandpa Hassan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭Grandpa Hassan


    Bepolite wrote: »
    Why not? Perfectly possible to have a freehold ground floor, with freeholds above it.

    There was actually one sold there around a year ago on the quays in Dublin. In Scotland a system very similar to freehold operates for all apartments.

    That isn't a flying freehold, which is only a portion of a freehold which overhangs another freehold, and are common enough without any real problems associated with them. My old man has one room is his house which is a flying freehold. What you are talking about apparently is a freehold flat, which I wasn't aware existed. A quick google shows they are a bit of a nightmare and very hard to get a mortgage against


  • Options
    #130
    Bepolite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,737 ✭✭✭Bepolite


    Grandpa Hassan wrote: »
    That isn't a flying freehold, which is only a portion of a freehold which overhangs another freehold, and are common enough without any real problems associated with them. My old man has one room is his house which is a flying freehold. What you are talking about apparently is a freehold flat, which I wasn't aware existed. A quick google shows they are a bit of a nightmare and very hard to get a mortgage against

    No a flying freehold is exactly what owning an apartment in fee simple would be. If I own land I can sell a cube of the airspace - without a easement of support its, of course, worthless.

    Anyway this digression into property law aside, it's very, very unlikely a modern apartment complex in Ireland is not going to be leasehold.


  • Options
    #131
    Turkish1
    Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Turkish1


    anncoates wrote: »
    You don't run up an unpaid tab in a shop or refuse to pay your phone bills and still use the service.

    Similar to clamping, Irish people love 'rights' without the burden of attached personal responsibility.

    Not you OP. I'm sympathetic to your situation, just not your landlord.

    The MC IS the residents. Every owner is part of the company and - presuming the estate is finished and handed over - they elect directors to run the estate, usually via a management agency.

    It's a bad situation for the OP but at the end of the day, his landlord is refusing to pay fees when contractually obliged to do so and when their unit is still using services that other owners are paying for.

    It's a bit weird to solely pin this on the management company and let the landlord take the piss, and even more weirdly, to think that taking legal action against the MC and potentially complicating life every owner and tenant on the estate even to the extent of bankrupting the company or having contractors refuse to service the estate.

    I personally wouldn't agree with cutting off utilities but I wish people could grasp how these places work: it's a company owned by the resident owners (and ran by directors elected by them) that needs fees to pay for basic services that people use every day and it can go bankrupt.

    Your landlord is taking the piss out of you and all the other residents in the development that stump up for their bins. street lights, internal lighting, landscaping, block insurance, parking permit, painting and on and on.

    Does this post not sum up exactly what management fees are for? The management company does not provide electricity/gas to the apartments, the electric and gas companies do.

    By all means the man co have the right to withdraw bin service, internal lighting, landscaping etc but I believe they will find this very difficult to target an individual this way. Because of this they are trying to target the utilities of an individual who has a contact with a service provider already and is (as far as we are aware) up to date with their fees and payments due.

    Bully boy tactics from the management company and as others have mentioned, you should be contacting the management company and threatening legal action/joe duffy/papers etc. I would be willing to bet a large wedge that they will back down fairly lively on the utilities front.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Cyrus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,706 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    Turkish1 wrote: »
    Does this post not sum up exactly what management fees are for? The management company does not provide electricity/gas to the apartments, the electric and gas companies do.

    By all means the man co have the right to withdraw bin service, internal lighting, landscaping etc but I believe they will find this very difficult to target an individual this way. Because of this they are trying to target the utilities of an individual who has a contact with a service provider already and is (as far as we are aware) up to date with their fees and payments due.

    Bully boy tactics from the management company and as others have mentioned, you should be contacting the management company and threatening legal action/joe duffy/papers etc. I would be willing to bet a large wedge that they will back down fairly lively on the utilities front.

    FFS are people not reading the thread, whatever utilities that go through infrastructure owned by the management co can and will be turned off.

    It isn't bully boy tactics, its the last resort to force a non paying debtor to pay up

    Talk to Joe indeed


  • Options
    #133
    Turkish1
    Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Turkish1


    Cyrus wrote: »
    FFS are people not reading the thread, whatever utilities that go through infrastructure owned by the management co can and will be turned off.

    It isn't bully boy tactics, its the last resort to force a non paying debtor to pay up

    Talk to Joe indeed

    What infrastructure that the management company owns does the electricity supply and gas supply flow through? I have excluded water as people have stated there are water tanks in some/most apt blocks.


  • Options
    #134
    Cyrus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,706 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    Turkish1 wrote: »
    What infrastructure that the management company owns does the electricity supply and gas supply flow through? I have excluded water as people have stated there are water tanks in some/most apt blocks.

    who knows, but as ive said previously turning the water off will make an apartment uninhabitable pretty quickly so the gas/electricity is a moot point anyway.

    we voted on the same thing in our complex, to switch off the water, it was carried by a unanimous vote.


  • Options
    #135
    quietsailor
    Registered Users Posts: 1,428 ✭✭✭quietsailor


    Cyrus wrote: »
    who knows, but as ive said previously turning the water off will make an apartment uninhabitable pretty quickly so the gas/electricity is a moot point anyway.

    we voted on the same thing in our complex, to switch off the water, it was carried by a unanimous vote.

    The electricity will probably come into at a central point - called a central distribution board or something like it - and then depending on the number of apartments per floor, number of floors, number of blocks in the complex there can be levels of sub-distribution board.

    If you had 500 apartments over 10 floors and spread across 4 blocks within one complex the ESB aren't going to run 500 individual wires, they'll run one or two big wires and then the electricity gets divided out


  • Options
    #136
    athtrasna
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,420 ✭✭✭✭athtrasna


    Cyrus wrote: »
    FFS are people not reading the thread, whatever utilities that go through infrastructure owned by the management co can and will be turned off.

    It isn't bully boy tactics, its the last resort to force a non paying debtor to pay up

    Talk to Joe indeed

    Precisely. The landlord is the bad guy... And the OP has gone very quiet...


  • Options
    #137
    Turkish1
    Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Turkish1


    Cyrus wrote: »
    who knows, but as ive said previously turning the water off will make an apartment uninhabitable pretty quickly so the gas/electricity is a moot point anyway.

    we voted on the same thing in our complex, to switch off the water, it was carried by a unanimous vote.

    Just because your man co voted on something unamiously does not make it legal.

    The below link refers to a "landlord" cutting off supply of Water/Gas/Electricity which is illegal. Under what circumstances would the management company be legally entitled to cut off these utilities?

    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/if_your_landlord_wants_you_to_leave.html


    Also cutting off the water supply is 100% illegal and is the reason that even Irish Water will not have this power for unpaid bills .

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/irish-water-will-not-get-the-power-to-disconnect-supplies-29803446.html

    So instead of you constantly going on the offensive telling people how incorrect they are, how about you provide some actual proof that a management company has the right to cut off utilities?


  • Options
    #138
    Grandpa Hassan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,945 ✭✭✭Grandpa Hassan


    Turkish1 wrote: »
    Just because your man co voted on something unamiously does not make it legal.

    The below link refers to a "landlord" cutting off supply of Water/Gas/Electricity which is illegal. Under what circumstances would the management company be legally entitled to cut off these utilities?

    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/if_your_landlord_wants_you_to_leave.html


    Also cutting off the water supply is 100% illegal and is the reason that even Irish Water will not have this power for unpaid bills .

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/irish-water-will-not-get-the-power-to-disconnect-supplies-29803446.html

    So instead of you constantly going on the offensive telling people how incorrect they are, how about you provide some actual proof that a management company has the right to cut off utilities?

    But this is not a landlord tenant relationship. This is the manager of the units turning off the supply to a unit, the owner of which has not paid the service charge which covers the cost of the ongoing provision of the services.

    There is no relationship between the tenant and the management company. The action is against the unit, and therefore it wouldn't be relevant whether it is empty, occupied by the owner, or occupied by anyone other than the owner


  • Options
    #139
    Cyrus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,706 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    Turkish1 wrote: »
    Just because your man co voted on something unamiously does not make it legal.

    The below link refers to a "landlord" cutting off supply of Water/Gas/Electricity which is illegal. Under what circumstances would the management company be legally entitled to cut off these utilities?

    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/housing/renting_a_home/if_your_landlord_wants_you_to_leave.html


    Also cutting off the water supply is 100% illegal and is the reason that even Irish Water will not have this power for unpaid bills .

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/irish-water-will-not-get-the-power-to-disconnect-supplies-29803446.html

    So instead of you constantly going on the offensive telling people how incorrect they are, how about you provide some actual proof that a management company has the right to cut off utilities?

    Ok, our management company brought a barrister who is an expert in the area to the meeting, who upon reading the documentation relating to the development advised what was legal and what wasnt,

    Guess what, withdrawing services that someone isnt paying for is fine. One of those services in our development is the supply of water from the tanks to each unit.

    Also, a management company isnt a land lord, so i have no idea what point you are trying to make. Again, the government deciding that one of its own agencies cant cut off water supply has nothing to do with a management company withdrawing the service it provides in transporting said supply to individual units.


  • Options
    #140
    Grolschevik
    Registered Users Posts: 3,472 ✭✭✭Grolschevik


    Grandpa Hassan wrote: »
    But this is not a landlord tenant relationship. This is the manager of the units turning off the supply to a unit, the owner of which has not paid the service charge which covers the cost of the ongoing provision of the services.

    There is no relationship between the tenant and the management company. The action is against the unit, and therefore it wouldn't be relevant whether it is empty, occupied by the owner, or occupied by anyone other than the owner

    But could it be true to say that there is an analagous lessor/lessee relationship between the management company and the delinquent owner?

    EDIT: It appears there was legal opinion on this. Still, a court's judgment would be better, as a barrister's opinion is opinion only and can't be classified as legal advice in these circumstances as barristers are disallowed from being directly engaged by clients.
    Ok, our management company brought a barrister who is an expert in the area to the meeting, who upon reading the documentation relating to the development advised what was legal and what wasnt,

    Guess what, withdrawing services that someone isnt paying for is fine. One of those services in our development is the supply of water from the tanks to each unit.

    Also, a management company isnt a land lord, so i have no idea what point you are trying to make. Again, the government deciding that one of its own agencies cant cut off water supply has nothing to do with a management company withdrawing the service it provides in transporting said supply to individual units.


  • Options
    #141
    riffmongous
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 12,629 Mod ✭✭✭✭riffmongous


    If the management company were able to cut off the water, could the OP withhold their rent from the landlord then?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Turkish1
    Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Turkish1


    Grandpa Hassan wrote: »
    But this is not a landlord tenant relationship. This is the manager of the units turning off the supply to a unit, the owner of which has not paid the service charge which covers the cost of the ongoing provision of the services.

    There is no relationship between the tenant and the management company. The action is against the unit, and therefore it wouldn't be relevant whether it is empty, occupied by the owner, or occupied by anyone other than the owner

    The management fee does not cover the provision of electricity/gas (as I said I am not sure about water due to water tanks etc). By all means they are entitled to withdraw the use of the parking, communal areas, refuse, street lighting etc but not electricity/gas


  • Options
    #143
    Cyrus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,706 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    Grolschevik wrote: »
    But could it be true to say that there is an analagous lessor/lessee relationship between the management company and the delinquent owner?

    EDIT: It appears there was legal opinion on this. Still, a court's judgment would be better, as a barrister's opinion is opinion only and can't be classified as legal advice in these circumstances as barristers are disallowed from being directly engaged by clients.

    one would assume that the barrister was instructed by the clients solicitors who had been chasing the debt up to that point


  • Options
    #144
    Grolschevik
    Registered Users Posts: 3,472 ✭✭✭Grolschevik


    Cyrus wrote: »
    one would assume that the barrister was instructed by the clients solicitors who had been chasing the debt up to that point

    I'd have thought any solicitor would've been able for that without going to the added expense of instructing counsel, but you never know!


  • Options
    #145
    Turkish1
    Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Turkish1


    Cyrus wrote: »
    Ok, our management company brought a barrister who is an expert in the area to the meeting, who upon reading the documentation relating to the development advised what was legal and what wasnt,

    Guess what, withdrawing services that someone isnt paying for is fine. One of those services in our development is the supply of water from the tanks to each unit.

    Also, a management company isnt a land lord, so i have no idea what point you are trying to make. Again, the government deciding that one of its own agencies cant cut off water supply has nothing to do with a management company withdrawing the service it provides in transporting said supply to individual units.

    I suppose the point I am making in relation to the landlord is that the owner of a house is going to own the same "Infrastructure" as a management company is for an apartment block (water tanks etc) and it is not legal for them to disconnect utilities.

    I would agree that withdrawing services that someone is not paying for is fine e.g. common area lighting, refuse etc etc as you mentioned in a previous post.

    The unit is paying for the provision of electricity and gas through their contracts with their suppliers.

    As I said I am unsure on the water and haven't got the time to look now but I am almost positive that cutting off the supply of water to a property is illegal. Quite possibly on basic human rights grounds.


  • Options
    #146
    Cyrus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,706 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    Turkish1 wrote: »
    As I said I am unsure on the water and haven't got the time to look now but I am almost positive that cutting off the supply of water to a property is illegal. Quite possibly on basic human rights grounds.

    its not, you mightn't like it, but its perfectly legal


  • Options
    #147
    Turkish1
    Registered Users Posts: 273 ✭✭Turkish1


    Cyrus wrote: »
    its not, you mightn't like it, but its perfectly legal

    Would be shocked by that, must look into that when I have time.


  • Options
    #148
    Lemming
    Registered Users Posts: 14,148 ✭✭✭✭Lemming


    I can't fathom how people are trying to argue that whilst it's not legal to cut off residential water supply one way, it's somehow legal the other way. It's either illegal in the eyes of the law, or it is not. You cannot sign away basic rights. Same goes for tampering with ESB power supply; only they have the ability to do so. I would not like to be beholden to the management co. that is foolish enough to risk having such a case brought against them in a court of law.

    Whilst I believe the management co. have a legitimate grievance, their behaviour has been questionable at best, deeply incompetent more like. And their strategy of punishing the tenant is foolish in the extreme. They dont' want to deal with the tenant, and apparenty don't want to deal with the leaseholder, yet they're perfectly happy to harass & accuss the tenant demanding they contact the lease-holder for the management company.


  • Options
    #149
    Bepolite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,737 ✭✭✭Bepolite


    Grolschevik wrote: »
    I'd have thought any solicitor would've been able for that without going to the added expense of instructing counsel, but you never know!

    Sounds like someone's (ill-advised) mate on a nixer of sorts. I find it a tad bizarre that a barrister was trotted out to a management co. meeting.


  • Options
    #150
    Cyrus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,706 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    Lemming wrote: »
    I can't fathom how people are trying to argue that whilst it's not legal to cut off residential water supply one way, it's somehow legal the other way. It's either illegal in the eyes of the law, or it is not. You cannot sign away basic rights. Same goes for tampering with ESB power supply; only they have the ability to do so. I would not like to be beholden to the management co. that is foolish enough to risk having such a case brought against them in a court of law.

    Whilst I believe the management co. have a legitimate grievance, their behaviour has been questionable at best, deeply incompetent more like. And their strategy of punishing the tenant is foolish in the extreme. They dont' want to deal with the tenant, and apparenty don't want to deal with the leaseholder, yet they're perfectly happy to harass & accuss the tenant demanding they contact the lease-holder for the management

    The management company can't deal with the tenant, the tenant is wholly inconsequential to them.

    The management fee pays for a number of shared services one being the transport of water from a communal tank to a unit. No fee no service, how is that so difficult to understand .


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    Cyrus
    Registered Users Posts: 19,706 ✭✭✭✭Cyrus


    Bepolite wrote: »
    Sounds like someone's (ill-advised) mate on a nixer of sorts. I find it a tad bizarre that a barrister was trotted out to a management co. meeting.

    I can guarantee you it wasn't, the development in question was built 15 years ago and is the best maintained and most professionally managed complex I have come across.

    They have exhausted every other avenue of recovering management fees owed and this was the last resort, the barrister was brought in to explain the law applicable and the options available.


Advertisement