Managemeent Company Changing to Key Fobs

matt-dublin

Hi All,

have a quick question in relation to what management companies can and cannot do.

I've just been informed by my tenants that the management company won't issue them fobs until i've made payment on my arrears in fees (less than 6 months, i was going to issue a cheque for the full year today). Even when i communicated that i was going to pay in full they still stated that they wouldn't issue the fobs until repayment was made.

My Question is, do the management company have the right, or are they legally allowed to block access to an apartment?

I was under the impression that they could legally restrict access to services and some common areas but could not block access to someone's unit/home?

I have always made payments to the management company in lump sums throughout the year due to how my pay works, previously i was a director for 5/6 years and i resigned last year. This is the first time i've seen of this.

Cheers,
A

davo10

matt-dublin wrote: »

Hi All,

have a quick question in relation to what management companies can and cannot do.

I've just been informed by my tenants that the management company won't issue them fobs until i've made payment on my arrears in fees (less than 6 months, i was going to issue a cheque for the full year today). Even when i communicated that i was going to pay in full they still stated that they wouldn't issue the fobs until repayment was made.

My Question is, do the management company have the right, or are they legally allowed to block access to an apartment?

I was under the impression that they could legally restrict access to services and some common areas but could not block access to someone's unit/home?

I have always made payments to the management company in lump sums throughout the year due to how my pay works, previously i was a director for 5/6 years and i resigned last year. This is the first time i've seen of this.

Cheers,
A

Yes they can to both issues, change method of opening gates and not forward fob to you until you have paid arrears. They are not barring your entry, they are just not facilitating you until you pay what you are contracted to pay.

You can bring this up at management company/property owners meeting but if your articles of memorandum are anything like ours, people who have not paid management fees are not entitled to address the meeting nor vote on motions.

Eldarion

Heard of this happening quite a few times now. It seems like it's one of the few effective tool that the management companies can use to get people to pay their arrears.

I'm not sure how you wouldn't know this if you were a director of a management company yourself for 5 years....

Mrs OBumble

When you were a director, were your suppliers (painters, rubbish removal etc) happy if the management company only paid them every six months or so?

Seriously, the MC are not your personal overdraft provider. Pay your fees when they're due.

matt-dublin

Thanks Mrs Obumble, but in fact that wasn't a helpful post. Company in term agree to payment terms and credit arrangements.

If you had read clearly i communicated clearly with the management company previously and they were happy with this. The first i heard they weren't issuing fobs to my tenants was when my tenants rang me.

I had no communication they they weren't issuing fobs from the agents or the company. Only a letter to confirm that they were changing from keys to fobs.

The board or directors has completely changed since I resigned. The previous board (myself included) took a hard stance on outstanding debt but not in the current year. If an owner was in relatively good stranding, committed to payments and was not in debt for previous years we didn't apply any action to collect the debts.

However if there was an outstanding amount from previous years we did suspend parking passes.

We also discussed changing to a fob system for access but we decided against it as there was a lot of young couples with children who rent up there. We felt that Joe Duffy would have a field day if there was a young mother and baby locked out of their apartment in the lashings of rain.

My question is can they legally restrict access to a persons home not whether i am right or wrong in how i pay.

davo10

matt-dublin wrote: »

Thanks Mrs Obumble, but in fact that wasn't a helpful post. Company in term agree to payment terms and credit arrangements.

If you had read clearly i communicated clearly with the management company previously and they were happy with this. The first i heard they weren't issuing fobs to my tenants was when my tenants rang me.

I had no communication they they weren't issuing fobs from the agents or the company. Only a letter to confirm that they were changing from keys to fobs.

The board or directors has completely changed since I resigned. The previous board (myself included) took a hard stance on outstanding debt but not in the current year. If an owner was in relatively good stranding, committed to payments and was not in debt for previous years we didn't apply any action to collect the debts.

However if there was an outstanding amount from previous years we did suspend parking passes.

We also discussed changing to a fob system for access but we decided against it as there was a lot of young couples with children who rent up there. We felt that Joe Duffy would have a field day if there was a young mother and baby locked out of their apartment in the lashings of rain.

My question is can they legally restrict access to a persons home not whether i am right or wrong in how i pay.

They are not restricting your access, if somebody else opens the gate for your tenants, the MC are not stopping them going in. They are just not facilitating you by giving you a fob, there is a big difference.

If I read your OP correctly, you told them you would pay but haven't yet. The solution here seems to be simple, pay the fees you owe and you will get a fob.

As a former director, it seems odd that you were on the board when they "took a hard stance" on people who didn't pay, withholding parking passes ,but you are put out when a fob is withheld when you don't pay.

matt-dublin

Hi Dav,

we took a hard stance when people were excessively in debt. We always worked with owners who worked with us. We never restricted service to anyone when then committed to payments and weren't taking the piss. In fact if they had made any contact with me saying here, can you pay i would have agreed immediately. The fact is i only got a generic letter about the fobs and it wasn't until i heard from my tenants that they weren't issuing them that i got involved.

The blocks have 6 units each, so its highly likely that someone could be standing outside for hours before you are able to get access. The management company effectively are not allowing them access but not stopping them from entering.

Thanks

Wabbit Ears

This thread should never have happened. Seriously, this is a fine example of a landlord not meeting their obligations and it having ad adverse effect on the tenants daily lives. For shame.

Larbre34

Could be worse OP, the board of directors I'm on have started clamping cars of tenants where their landlord is not up to date with fees. You'd be amazed how much it motivates them.

Nobody has a war chest for legal costs to be chasing management fee debtors, it only adds more to the balance. Denial of service is the only way to go.

matt-dublin

Hi Larbre,

we actually already enforce that. my big concern is that the communication around my account being in bad standing was very poor. I was told that i have outstanding amounts on last years fees, which i don't. Apparently when i paid a lump sum last year they used it to clear some of last years fees and some of this years rather than all of last years and some of this years which has apparently put me in significant arrears despite my statement showing less than the full balance of this years fees.

I'm also concerned that legally i think that they can't prevent access to an area which is the only accessible route to a persons private abode. Whilst i understand what they're trying to achieve and why i don't believe that they have the right do.

Considering I've had no specific formal communication directly to myself prior to my tenants notifying me.

To be clear to other posters, i've no issue with paying, my issue is with how this has been handled.

faceman

Hmmm. Interesting thread. Is it in your lease agreement that they can do that in the event of non payment?

Also I'm not sure that it's ok for the management company to disclose to a third party, that you're in arrears. That might be a data protection issue but you best verify that separately.

Michael D Not Higgins

matt-dublin wrote: »

To be clear to other posters, i've no issue with paying, my issue is with how this has been handled.

Perhaps it has been handled badly by the OMC, but I don't see it as helpful to return to them about the legalities (rightly or wrongly) of denied access to the apartment. The best response you can make is a check for all the fees outstanding and a strongly worded letter explaining that you should be informed of any action before it is taken.

matt-dublin

Hi MDNH,

i have actually done this on my first correspondence, advising i would pay the arrears in full by cheque in the coming days, The response was thanks for that, but we're not issuing fobs until repayment has been made.

So if they didn't receive my cheque due to postal issue they're more than happy to stop my tenants getting into their home with a 1 year old child!

I'm completely infuriated by this whole thing.

@faceman, i don't think it is a breach TBH. I think they told my tenants you're not getting fobs, you need to contact your landlord.

I think in the leasehold there would be a covenant covering collection of fees and legal ramifications of non payment. Possibly withdrawal of services but not prevention of access to the building.

Wile E. Coyote

davo10 wrote: »

They are not restricting your access.

How can you claim that they aren't restricting access? They've changed the method of entering the OP's property and aren't giving them the ability to freely access it.


Property management companies are in place to provide services such as parking, waste disposal, lighting in communal areas etc. Access to a property you own isn't a service.

Gatling

Wonder if it the idea of denied access to tenants would withstand a legal challenge

davo10

Wile E. Coyote wrote: »

How can you claim that they aren't restricting access? They've changed the method of entering the OP's property and aren't giving them the ability to freely access it.


Property management companies are in place to provide services such as parking, waste disposal, lighting in communal areas etc. Access to a property you own isn't a service.

OP's property is the apartment/house he owns, the other areas are common areas owned jointly (assuming the development has been handed over) by all the owners and is managed by the MC subject to the articles of memorandum and the owners contract of purchase. OP can enter his property unrestricted, he can enter the common areas with the aid of a fob, but to get the fob he has to pay his management fees. Presumably at some stage it was discussed at a residents meeting, some kind of consensus must have been reached before it was introduced, the board of the MC themselves would be brave to introduce this without first discussing it at a residents meeting.

I don't know what the general experience of readers is but we have a residents meeting at least once a year, notice goes out, some attend, then those that don't attend complain about not being informed of changes to MC fees/changes to entrances etc.

I can't see why this is an issue, again matt, you said you would pay but haven't and to be honest if the MC handed out fobs to all those who say "the cheque is in the post" they are giving up the incentive that they are using to get people in arrears to pay.

You could legally challenge this and of course you could win, but the the judge is likely to ask why you don't just pay first what you owe and then get the fob. By the sounds of things, you want the fob first, pay later.

Also matt, I just reread your earlier post where you said you paid a lump sum that they used to pay part of last years arrears plus part of this years. MC meetings usually take place early in the year and lay out costs for the year ahead, fees are paid in advance. Baring that in mind and what you posted they did with that lump sum cheque, can I take it that you are in arrears for last year up until at least after the date you were supposed to pay this year's? If that's the case, can you blame them Matt for wanting to see your money first?

ted1

matt-dublin wrote: »

Hi MDNH,

i have actually done this on my first correspondence, advising i would pay the arrears in full by cheque in the coming days,

I would interrupt thst as you flogging them off. A cheque in 2014 and in a few days.?? That'll buy you an extra few days to clear.

I would ask for electronic funds transfer or cash. A promise of money especially a cheque isn't worth much. Money needs to change hands before people take you serious

murphaph

Fobs sound like a great way to ensure fees are paid actually. Anyone not paying can have their access to the bins etc. halted remotely. They are also much cheaper to replace in the case of one going missing (no need to change locks and inconvenience others, just deactivate the fob in question).

ted1

murphaph wrote: »

Anyone not paying can have their access to the bins etc. halted remotely. .

you will then have an issue with bags (Rubbish) being left outside the bin area, and could possibly have a breach of planning issue.

Victor

Wabbit Ears wrote: »

This thread should never have happened. Seriously, this is a fine example of a landlord not meeting their obligations and it having ad adverse effect on the tenants daily lives. For shame.

Constructive posts only please.

Moderator

pinkypinky

It does seem a bit heavy handed. I'm a director of a mngt co. myself and if someone owes less than the current year, and has made a commitment to pay, then we're relaxed. We get quite serious quickly if someone goes over a year.

Presumably at this stage, it's resolved, the OP said he was sending a cheque yesterday, so they should have it today.

Del2005

Wile E. Coyote wrote: »

Property management companies are in place to provide services such as parking, waste disposal, lighting in communal areas etc. Access to a property you own isn't a service.

They also have to maintain the security of the complex and security doors with locks provide this. Some places use codes but these are easily found out so a more secure method is fobs, which have the added benefit of being easily disabled when lost/stolen. Also while access to a property isn't a service the cleaning, maintenance and lighting of corridors is.

Lantus

matt-dublin wrote: »

I think in the leasehold there would be a covenant covering collection of fees and legal ramifications of non payment. Possibly withdrawal of services but not prevention of access to the building.

The contract lease does contain all this information and as a director for 5 years you would probably know most of it off by heart having recited it to unit owners yourself?

@Pinky, while there is something be said for being more relaxed in the current year this effectively means you are having to use surplus funds to get you through that year. Insurance companies and most suppliers and providers of goods and services wont operate on this approach. Unit owners need to realise that not paying ON TIME places their company in a tenuous position.

pinkypinky

Lantus wrote: »

The contract lease does contain all this information and as a director for 5 years you would probably know most of it off by heart having recited it to unit owners yourself?

@Pinky, while there is something be said for being more relaxed in the current year this effectively means you are having to use surplus funds to get you through that year. Insurance companies and most suppliers and providers of goods and services wont operate on this approach. Unit owners need to realise that not paying ON TIME places their company in a tenuous position.

Ah, Lantus, I wasn't entirely clear. I don't mean that we don't communicate with someone - they get a letter within 3 months of the bill if we haven't heard from them with a payment plan for the year (or arrears) and it goes to a solicitor's letter after another quarter. Our managing agent has a person employed solely to chase up service charges!