Has a management company any real power?

tuisginideach

If a tenant/landlord decides to ignore the management company's 'regulations' i.e. 'no commercial vehicles' or 'no pets' or 'no washing hanging on your balcony' or 'no satellite dish', what can the management company really do apart from going to the bother and cost of eventually getting a solicitor's letter and maybe going to court?

athtrasna

tuisginideach wrote: »

If a tenant/landlord decides to ignore the management company's 'regulations' i.e. 'no commercial vehicles' or 'no pets' or 'no washing hanging on your balcony' or 'no satellite dish', what can the management company really do apart from going to the bother and cost of eventually getting a solicitor's letter and maybe going to court?

Commercial vehicles can be clamped, satellite dishes and washing can be removed, common areas (including balconies - the "owner has sole access but does not own them) are management company properties. Pets are more complicated but a solicitor's letter for breach of contract is not complicated or expensive to issue.

VincePP

It has to be reasonable too, so no commercial vehicles would not exclude small vans, but is designed to prevent large vans and trucks causing issue.

Pets - its about noise control, so if a dog is causing issue, they can get you to remove it. But if its quiet and not causing problems, then they can be lenient.

Satellite dishes would have to be attached to the wall and management company is responsible and effectively "owns" the wall space, so they can simply take it down without any notification.

athtrasna

VincePP wrote: »

It has to be reasonable too, so no commercial vehicles would not exclude small vans, but is designed to prevent large vans and trucks causing issue.

Pets - its about noise control, so if a dog is causing issue, they can get you to remove it. But if its quiet and not causing problems, then they can be lenient.

Both of these are dependent on the leases signed. A properly running management company will not selectively implement lease conditions, they are charged with protecting the interests of the entire development.

tuisginideach

athtrasna wrote: »

washing can be removed.

- difficult if it's a 3rd floor balcony...

athtrasna

tuisginideach wrote: »

- difficult if it's a 3rd floor balcony...

Ladder /cherry picker/ scaffolding

tuisginideach

athtrasna wrote: »

Ladder /cherry picker/ scaffolding

Exactly - expensive!

4ensic15

tuisginideach wrote: »

- difficult if it's a 3rd floor balcony...

Go onto the balcony of the unit above or next door with a long handled grabber.
Pretty easy flick it all off.

tuisginideach

4ensic15 wrote: »

Go onto the balcony of the unit above or next door with a long handled grabber.
Pretty easy flick it all off.

:):):)

godtabh

Our management company has the right (under the lease) for rectifying breaks of the lease i.e. the owner is charged for the hire of a cherry picker/disposal of satellite dish. Gets added to their management fees. All legal. Yet to see any one get out of it. Short term they may ignore it but long term it catches up with them

Eric Cartman

tuisginideach wrote: »

If a tenant/landlord decides to ignore the management company's 'regulations' i.e. 'no commercial vehicles' or 'no pets' or 'no washing hanging on your balcony' or 'no satellite dish', what can the management company really do apart from going to the bother and cost of eventually getting a solicitor's letter and maybe going to court?

if you can't keep within the very simple and fair rules, do not live in that complex.

pets and satellite dishes especially. Nobody is a special snowflake above the rules. they are very clear black and white guidelines so everyone can live happily.

Muahahaha

Satellite dishes ruled a human right in EU court
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2023359/Having-satellite-dish-human-right-says-European-court.html

athtrasna

Muahahaha wrote: »

Satellite dishes ruled a human right in EU court
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2023359/Having-satellite-dish-human-right-says-European-court.html

We are not going down this route again. People who choose to live in developments where dishes are banned are abdicating those rights. They are free to live elsewhere.

This has been discussed to death on this forum and does not need to be rehashed on yet another thread.

Mod

tuisginideach

godtabh wrote: »

Our management company has the right (under the lease) for rectifying breaks of the lease i.e. the owner is charged for the hire of a cherry picker/disposal of satellite dish. Gets added to their management fees. All legal. Yet to see any one get out of it. Short term they may ignore it but long term it catches up with them

Excellent way of dealing with problems.

johnnyskeleton

tuisginideach wrote: »

If a tenant/landlord decides to ignore the management company's 'regulations' i.e. 'no commercial vehicles' or 'no pets' or 'no washing hanging on your balcony' or 'no satellite dish', what can the management company really do apart from going to the bother and cost of eventually getting a solicitor's letter and maybe going to court?

Never really understood the no washing rule.

I mean no barbecues makes sense - you dont want to breath your neighbours dinner fumes all the time.

No pets - dogs can cause noise and cats can damage property so makes sense.

No satellite dishes - possibly an eyesore, possibly cause damage to the walls when installed/risk of falling off etc. Possibly because there is an exclusive deal arranged between management company and sky etc.

I can see the logic of all of these rules as being mecessary when you live in close proximity to other dwellings. But dont understand the washing thing. I mean its better to air your clothes outside than inside and if everyone needs to do this (and almost everyone does), why is there a rule against it? It may not look the best but its fairly essential to daily life.

In any event, surely court proceedings are pretty serious? You could forfeit your lease and/or pay the costs of proceedings which could be substantial.

tuisginideach

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Never really understood the no washing rule.
But dont understand the washing thing. I mean its better to air your clothes outside than inside and if everyone needs to do this (and almost everyone does), why is there a rule against it? It may not look the best but its fairly essential to daily life.

In any event, surely court proceedings are pretty serious? You could forfeit your lease and/or pay the costs of proceedings which could be substantial.

I am on the 'side' of the management company - I am not a bold tenant. I am looking at what we can do.

Re washing - personally i think it looks awful - wish there was a way of drying clothes outdoors other than on balconies .

Gatling

Surely if drying clothes indoors is a known health hazard using balconies shouldn't be an issue .
Add the fact it also leads to black mould growing .
Be interested to see if it would withstand a legal challenge

my friend

tuisginideach wrote: »

Exactly - expensive!

And billed to the person who broke the rule!

tuisginideach

Gatling wrote: »

Surely if drying clothes indoors is a known health hazard using balconies shouldn't be an issue .
Add the fact it also leads to black mould growing .
Be interested to see if it would withstand a legal challenge

Get a washer-dryer.

Mike3549

my friend wrote: »

And billed to the person who broke the rule!

of course this must be in the contract.