Should I pay? for living in a ghost estate?

Its2015

I bought a house in the boom in a private housing estate, I bought it from the plans, the area in the estate had two large grass area and a little playground for kids, which was a selling point as we planned to raise a family there. A 250 euro a year maintenance fee was including in the house every year for upkeep of the estate. A year after buying our house, the house next door was selling for half the price (and seemingly the builder was still making a profit) and it ended up that only a third of the housing estate was built.

For 7 years we lived on a building site, no street lights, foundations of houses on show, only a small grass area for my kids to play and metal barriers (that kept failing down) kept between us and the building site. The only maintenance was the piece of grass was mowed during the summer.

Intially for the first four years (Like fools) we paid the 250 maintenance and then we found out that most of the neighbours had stopped paying it two years previous because of the state of the place. We then stopped paying it, each year our little invoice would come and we basically ignored it, no follow up, no solictors letter, so I presume we had the right to refuse to pay.

Last year we decided to do renovations on our house and lifted a built in wardrobe that was part of the package when we lifted it there was no floor underneath, a carpenter who we then had to pay to put in a floor said he never saw the like.

Anyway this year our "Private housing estate" got a substantial grant from the council to finish the estate. Our beloved builder rolled up with his troops after Christmas and where no doubt paid for this work from the council, even though it was part of the contract to have it done. Then the annual maintenance bill slipped through the door and to be honest this year I was going to pay because thanks to the council and taxpayers of Ireland I now have street lights etc.

I did decide before I paid it to query a few things with our builder, first was the council still contributing to maintenance for the estate, also because there is half the grass area and no amenity for kids like on the plans, should we not pay half the price of the maintence, 125 and also because of the cost incurred to me to put a floor down that should have been there in the first place, should a further discount be put in place.

I awaited there response expecting some sort of reasonable negotiation? But no an arbrut letter arrived with no mention of my queries, just stating that payment was due for this year and the previous 3 years, meaning they wanted 1000 euro from me for living on a building site for the past 4 years and only for the council I would still be living on a building site. Can anyone advice how to respond to this people?

athtrasna

If you signed a legal contract saying you would pay then you are liable to pay. Actions against the builder are a separate issue. When you buy off plans there is no guarantee that the development will be finished in accordance with the plans. We were supposed to get a medical centre and pharmacy, 11 years on we have neither.

Chris_5339762

Pay the maintenance fee and your arrears. You are in a legally binding contract. I wish the law would come down harder on people who refuse to pay these things, they're NOT optional. They should be (somehow) taken at source like the property tax and passed onto the correct people.

Its2015

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Pay the maintenance fee and your arrears. You are in a legally binding contract. I wish the law would come down harder on people who refuse to pay these things, they're NOT optional. They should be (somehow) taken at source like the property tax and passed onto the correct people.

Are they not in a legal binding contract too then whereby they have to give the service and land that they are suppose to provide, I take it from your answer your a builder or developer, you'll find in Ireland the law is usually on the side of these, getting a bit tired of this.

athtrasna

What does your contract say? You'll probably find the developer has no obligations to you when it comes to finishing the site. Yet the fee section will be crystal clear.

davo10

If you ever plan to sell, you will need a letter from the management company confirming all maintanence fees are paid up to date, without it the purchaser's solicitor will not proceed.

It doesn't take long for those that have paid to get very pissed off with those who haven't, that's when the big push for collection of arrears comes and the solicitors letters start to arrive. I never understand people who refuse to pay maintanence fees, these are usually discussed at management company AGMs where any objections can be voiced yet the majority of people don't bother to attend. In your case op the €250 is in your contract so you knew it was due, to be honest I would be delighted if my contract stipulated that all I had to pay was €250 yearly.

Not a NSA agent

If you agreed to pay it you should be paying it, although if you dont think there is enough maintenance work to be done that requires that much then reducing it should be discussed.

Unless there was something signed that stated that the plans would be completed as shown then all you have done is learnt that the plans and what you get can be very different.

selous

I feel your pain, my place is similar, although the builder buggered off before the place was finished, the estate was finished off with money from NAMA, but 50% of the place is vacant and now degrading at a rate of knots, there was a builders insurance bond which is with the council to finish infrastructure, which is probably what finished off your estate, our sewage system doesnt work properly and as such our estate ISNT planning compliant according to the receiver which is why they cant sell any,

We have a management agent running our estate and he is doing his best, but like yours, a third of people pay the fee, at our AGM of which 10 people turned up, we asked what can he do to make them pay, he said legally NOTHING, as the common areas haven't been handed over to the management company (the residents), everyone signed contracts, i'm sure to buy them, I did, But the agent did say if all the common areas are fixed to standard (thru an estate insurance claim) he will do his best to chase the non payers to pay back fees as they have full access to all amenities.

3 duplexs have been sold in the meantime privately for cash as no mortgage company will touch them, (I paid E190k these went for between E30-50k,)
So see if the common areas are in control of the management company, if not, you may not have to pay, but could end up paying a heck of a bill down the line.

ted1

Are your bins included?

What other people paid for their house and weather the developer made a profit is completely irrelevant.

Its2015

ted1 wrote: »

Are your bins included?

What other people paid for their house and weather the developer made a profit is completely irrelevant.

No. no bins included, my lawn isn't mowed, the only thing mowed is the patch of lawn across from my house, that's all they've done, we had no lights, and where living on a building site until 5 months ago when we where lucky to get a grant from the council, which meant they didn't have to pay to finish the estate and they got paid to do the work, they also only gave us half the grass area and no play area for our kids, but we still pay the same amount of monies as if the we had the 2 grass areas and playground as intended. To be honest I just think its a win win situation for them and it annoys me.

athtrasna

Its2015 wrote: »

No. no bins included, my lawn isn't mowed, the only thing mowed is the patch of lawn across from my house, that's all they've done, we had no lights, and where living on a building site until 5 months ago when we where lucky to get a grant from the council, which meant they didn't have to pay to finish the estate and they got paid to do the work, they also only gave us half the grass area and no play area for our kids, but we still pay the same amount of monies as if the we had the 2 grass areas and playground as intended. To be honest I just think its a win win situation for them and it annoys me.

Bins wouldn't be included in a housing estate that's just houses. Your lawn is your own to tend, the management fee would be for common areas only.

It's unlikely that the council gave a grant, more likely that they released some of the developer's bond that they lodged with the council before building. This would be why the same developer carried out the works.

Again I ask what your contract specifies the management fee is and whether there is any commitment to specific common areas being developed?

And finally, playgrounds in developments are over rated. We have one and it's a nightmare. Insurance is high, parental supervision is low. And it attracts teenagers to hang out in the evenings. A good local public park is a much more valuable amenity IMO

selous

Forgot to say in my previous post, the receiver pays the full amount of fees for all the vacant units in my place,
I'm in an estate of 100 duplex over apartments, all nicely spaced out, terraced in 4's, we get grass and bins, street lights and block insurance in our fee, (even the ones that don't pay)

athtrasna

selous wrote: »

Forgot to say in my previous post, the receiver pays the full amount of fees for all the vacant units in my place,
I'm in an estate of 100 duplex over apartments, all nicely spaced out, terraced in 4's, we get grass and bins, street lights and block insurance in our fee, (even the ones that don't pay)

Apartments have a different legal standing to houses. Apartments are leasehold, houses are freehold so the role of management companies in apartment developments is very different, and fees cover different things. Not directly comparable to the OP's situation.

selous

Suppose so, our building walls are classed as common areas it seems, along with green areas, But still, the management agent cant enforce payment until they've been transferred to management company, even thought we all signed the legal document with a years fee, before we moved in that we had to pay a yearly fee,
To me it sounds like "A legal document that cant be enforced",?

foggy_lad

Its2015 wrote: »

Are they not in a legal binding contract too then whereby they have to give the service and land that they are suppose to provide, I take it from your answer your a builder or developer, you'll find in Ireland the law is usually on the side of these, getting a bit tired of this.

Who is sending out these demands for maintenance fees? is there a proper management company that you are legally obliged to pay for the upkeep of common areas or are these bills being sent out by a "residents" association for your estate?

If there is no management company for the estate(that you might have signed a contract with) just a residents association then you are not obliged to give them anything at all!

DivingDuck

Chris_5339762 wrote: »

Pay the maintenance fee and your arrears. You are in a legally binding contract. I wish the law would come down harder on people who refuse to pay these things, they're NOT optional. They should be (somehow) taken at source like the property tax and passed onto the correct people.

It infuriates me when people fall into arrears in well-maintained complexes where people are getting a service they are not paying for.

As a result, I also find it ridiculous that people should be expected to pay for a service they are not getting.

I can't speak as to the legality of the situation, but from a purely rational/moral perspective, it's completely understandable that if the purchaser agreed to pay a fee for facilities and service which have never been provided, then the fee shouldn't be provided, either.

athtrasna

DivingDuck wrote: »

I can't speak as to the legality of the situation, but from a purely rational/moral perspective, it's completely understandable that if the purchaser agreed to pay a fee for facilities and service which have never been provided, then the fee shouldn't be provided, either.

The OP has yet to confirm what the contract they signed actually said. I would be very surprised if there was any detail about provision of a playground and green spaces. These may have been in the brochure the op saw but brochures are about selling rather than delivering.

DivingDuck

athtrasna wrote: »

The OP has yet to confirm what the contract they signed actually said. I would be very surprised if there was any detail about provision of a playground and green spaces. These may have been in the brochure the op saw but brochures are about selling rather than delivering.

Again, this may not be legally enforceable, but if you bought something in a shop which had a picture on the front of the box that bore no resemblance to the product inside, you'd probably be able to return it for a refund under the Sale of Goods Act for being "not as described". Same applies if you booked a holiday where the brochure described the resort as having, for example, five swimming pools and sea views. If you got there and the pools weren't completed and the side of the building with the sea views wasn't habitable, you'd be eligible for compensation from the person who sold you the holiday.

Is it really so unreasonable for people to expect the same level of standard to apply when purchasing a home, something which costs far more than anything else you'll ever buy, and is the purchase which arguably will have the greatest impact on your life? As before, I am not stating that either of the legal situations described above do apply when someone's buying a home, but don't you really think they should?

If someone is entitled to funds back after buying a €15 toy that isn't what it should be, or buying a €150 package holiday that wasn't what it was sold as, in what world is it fair for someone to shell out maybe €150,000 for something that isn't as described, and then have to continue to make additional payments beyond that?

I understand the value of caveat emptor, but it's my belief that all vendors should make good on their promises at point of sale, including those selling properties. No developer should be allowed to create and distribute promotional materials that do not accurately reflect their intentions and responsibilities. Buyers should not have to comb the contract line by line to ensure the developer is legally bound to fulfilling the promises made by the brochure; the fact of the brochure itself should be sufficient.

If we've decided that needs to be the case for something as low-cost as a package holiday, how can it possibly not also be necessary for something as expensive as buying a house?

athtrasna

In a shop you buy a finished product, the OP bought off the plans. Development plans are aspirational, or marketing tools. There's a huge risk in buying off the plans, in this case it backfired.

moleyv

The council wouldn't have paid to have the work done. They either called in a bond or they secured SRF Special Resolution Fund money to get it finished. SRF would require the developer to put forward 50% (I think) of the money to resolve to a suitable standard. The developer can give land/property to make up the amount.

The council may do some of the work if they have the spare man power and can do it cheaper. They wouldn't be doing it for free but they do drive the process.

KwackerJack

Pay the fee, sell up and move to a house on a private site!

I would never in a million years buy an apartment or buy a house in a housing estate! The majority built in the boom where thrown up and are a disgrace!

I'm looking at a 3 bedroom house on an acre for €100,000. Granted I've to travel an hour to work but I won't be paying some cowboy for maintenance that's not being carried out and I've plenty of private space!

I'd rather pay 100k and travel and hour than pay 250k+ for a semi or a tiny apartment where the workmanship is

If you can, pay up and get out of there. You'll never win against cowboys! Only way to beat them is to stay well clear of them.

Lantus

The first possibility is that you don't have a management company (omc) yet. It may be the builder who sets fees and all money runs through his account. Typically the builder tends to use the omc structure before the lease requires it as its easier.

If you have an omc it should have a cro number. Hold agms and have its own directors. Under the mud act you should receive detailed budgets and at each agm the members approve this budget. Are you doing this? You could request minutes from all previous agms and the members register to see who owns what. If the builder still owns property then they are legally required to pat service fees on them.

Ultimately you need your omc so abandon it at your peril.

Also based on other posters there should be no reason why fees cannot be recovered prior to the transfer of common areas. Get good legal advice on this because unless there are other factors at play this is not correct.

Yes, you should verify if you actually have a management company in place. If not, you probably owe payment to the developer until the estate is completed and this may be capped at 250 per annum in the original contract you signed.
Another thing to verify if what happened the builder in the crash.. Was the company put into receivership or did it go into Nama. Is the builder now working on his own behalf or is he finishing the estate on bahalf of new owners or Nama... The demand for payment should have a company name on it.

Its2015

DivingDuck wrote: »

It infuriates me when people fall into arrears in well-maintained complexes where people are getting a service they are not paying for.

As a result, I also find it ridiculous that people should be expected to pay for a service they are not getting.

I can't speak as to the legality of the situation, but from a purely rational/moral perspective, it's completely understandable that if the purchaser agreed to pay a fee for facilities and service which have never been provided, then the fee shouldn't be provided, either.

At last the voice of reason, this is my point I was paying for a service I didnt' get, whenever my phone bill, internet, esb bill come in they are paid as I have received these services, I don't understand paying for something I haven't received. Also the builder has cost me additional cost to put a floor in my house under a wardrobe, which should have been there. I'm not sure if I made this clear from the start but the builder is the management company?

Its2015

Lantus wrote: »

The first possibility is that you don't have a management company (omc) yet. It may be the builder who sets fees and all money runs through his account. Typically the builder tends to use the omc structure before the lease requires it as its easier.

If you have an omc it should have a cro number. Hold agms and have its own directors. Under the mud act you should receive detailed budgets and at each agm the members approve this budget. Are you doing this? You could request minutes from all previous agms and the members register to see who owns what. If the builder still owns property then they are legally required to pat service fees on them.

Ultimately you need your omc so abandon it at your peril.

Also based on other posters there should be no reason why fees cannot be recovered prior to the transfer of common areas. Get good legal advice on this because unless there are other factors at play this is not correct.

Thanks for your advice, the only document I ever received is the bill, I have never been invited to an agm, never received budgets, once I asked for a breakdown of the bill and it was ignored?

selous

This is what im paying a management fee for, this is 7 years old.

The builder was the original management company director and his solicitor and had an agent run it, we did get a breakdown of fees, but they were ludicrous, powerwashing steps, never happened, E100's on stationary, room hire for agm was E1000, mowing the grass was E700 a go, (on the builders mower)

The builder went bang so too did the agent, the management company was struck off, but receiver paid all dues and got it back to life again, the estate now we find isn't planning compliant, but we bought ours before it was finished,
I have all my engineer forms all signed by a company that does not exist anymore, (and didn't pay insurance fees in case of claims)

I am paying fees of over E700 for insurance, (duplex apartment) street light, communal bins, grass cutting. yes it does annoy me, BUT,

athtrasna

Its2015 wrote: »

At last the voice of reason, this is my point I was paying for a service I didnt' get, whenever my phone bill, internet, esb bill come in they are paid as I have received these services, I don't understand paying for something I haven't received. Also the builder has cost me additional cost to put a floor in my house under a wardrobe, which should have been there. I'm not sure if I made this clear from the start but the builder is the management company?

You are paying what you are legally contracted to pay, simple as. If you're not getting what got feel you should in return then get involved. Go to the agm or force an egm. Nobody will look after your best interests better than you can

Lantus

Its2015 wrote: »

Thanks for your advice, the only document I ever received is the bill, I have never been invited to an agm, never received budgets, once I asked for a breakdown of the bill and it was ignored?

You need to determine who you are paying your money to and obtain your primary contract lease when you purchased the property.

Search the CRO for XYZ management company Ltd using your estate name as a start. Maybe find the owners of the building company and see if they are directors elsewhere.

TheDoc

OP definitely see where you are coming from.

I'd probably go down the route of having mature discussions with the company seeking payment, to raise your issues (which are valid) regarding your problem with paying for what was essentially a few years of no work being done.

While buying from plans has some caveats, there is also recourse for your end, when services are not provided. Those services should be outlined in the contract that would have been signed.

Have a mature conversation with the management company and then go down the route of solicitors if required. Might be agreeable that the backdated fees can be squashed and agree to pay going forward if services are going to be provided.

Someone cutting a small patch of grass does not warranty €250 from multiple residents.

Maybe some of the guys dropping the " you signed you pay" stuff havn't had experiences in ghost estates where management companies are involved. Start with a mature conversation with the management company, if you can hold a proffesional conversation you will get it sorted then and there.

My uncle experienced something similar and while he is a shy enough man, his wife was not and they had a productive conversation with the management company and negotiated a reduced annual fee until such time as normal services are resumed, at which point they will meet again and rediscuss terms.

the_syco

You signed the contract, so you gotta pay, but then, so did they, so they should hold out their part of the contract.

And if they say that they (they being whoever is meant to the work now) didn't sign the contract with you, query (with your solicitor) why you should pay them?